Yes, I believe it should be an option. I think it is completely arrogant to tell a person their life is worth living, even if it means you have to live it with insurmountable pain or not be able to take care of yourself. I seriously don't see how anyone could possibly be against it.
am I the only one that thinks it should be illegal? at least i would only legalize it for when it would be impossible to recover.
Why do you think it should be illegal, Savas_P? I'm sure you're not the only one; it's a pretty controversial topic at the moment.
I just think that life is worth too much to want to die and that it is selfish for the families around who will miss the person. people should have hope and perseverance to live until the end, also I could never assist someone to euthanize themselves.
it would be hard to tell if they genuinely were ready to die, there is always hope.
I just think that life is worth too much to want to die and that it is selfish for the families around who will miss the person. people should have hope and perseverance to live until the end, also I could never assist someone to euthanize themselves.Is your opinion the same if that person is experiencing a terminal illness that creates a long and painful dying process? Or if the person has lost all control of their body and thus has lost all independence, etc.?
it would be hard to tell if they genuinely were ready to die, there is always hope.
Is your opinion the same if that person is experiencing a terminal illness that creates a long and painful dying process? Or if the person has lost all control of their body and thus has lost all independence, etc.?
Do you think families wanting the person to stick around ever becomes selfish? As in, when the person could have a death on their own terms and end their suffering, does a family wanting that person to stick around because they'll miss them ever become selfish on behalf of the family?
My personal view on this is that there a number of views on this issue, many of which are grounded in personal moral and spiritual beliefs. A government’s role is not to adjudicate on what is morally permissible or not, and to that end—assuming that euthanasia can be done in a safe way—it should be legalised.
If you personally don’t agree with euthanasia, don’t do it. Simple.
IF a government legalises, doesn't that technically mean that the government is adjudicating on what is morally permissible?
Laws do somewhat represent society values. Polygamy isn't legalised as people deem that it shouldn't be.
No - they're adjudicating on what is legally permissible.Yes and no =)
Yes and no =)
Sometimes governments enact laws due to societal pressure. For example equal rights for women in some aspects, rights for aboriginals, domestic violence laws and the Racial discrimination act (just to name a few).
Do you think legal rights for women are only morally acceptable due to their legality?Not at all.
I'm struggling to make the connection here. Legality is not the same as morality, despite any potential correlation between the two.
I come from a POV that's seen first hand about in re to Euthanasia.But if it was legalised, can't the person just choose whether or not they wanted it? :)
I was a Lifeline volunteer and I helped people in pain and mental anguish. Some had depression,some had terminal illness.
Sometimes I recognize voices and people who said they "wanted to die", ended up thanking me for saving their life. I'll spare you the grizzly details, but I have heard of horrible, horrible stories, some too horrific to detail here.
For this , I am not a supporter of Euthanasia.
Believe me, I understand the argument of pain, but sometimes when the path seems at it's end, some people do end up finding light =)
But if it was legalised, can't the person just choose whether or not they wanted it? :)They can, but sometimes that is "misguided" as they believe that they cannot be helped or saved, when they can.
They can, but sometimes that is "misguided" as they believe that they cannot be helped or saved, when they can.Even in the case of terminal illness, where a cure and recovery is pretty much impossible? :)
If they wanted death and got it, life for them would be ended just there.
Even in the case of terminal illness, where a cure and recovery is pretty much impossible? :)It's hard to say for me really.
It's hard to say for me really.Yeah but like, I fail to see how lupus is a relevant example. It's not a terminal illness, and can be treated/managed.
I've heard about people kind of find solace in terminal illness and live life to their potential.
One striking story for me, is about a lady who shall not be named, who wanted to become a doctor. They were suffering from lupus and if you are familiar (lupus is a life threatening illness that is incurable). Lupus flares up every now and then.
They ended up becoming a doctor and are now helping people in and out of the hospital.
Part of me kind of wants to see positives in the potential for people and to helping people fulfill their dreams.
Not at all.
legal rights for women are always morally acceptable, but legal rights for women were enacted due to the movements in the 1900s (after much lobbying). Thus the gender equality laws for women are representative of social values in society (and what society deems morally right).
Legality is not the same as morality, but morality for something can determine legality in regards to an issue (in the present or the future)?
The problem is no laws being proposed offer protections for those who actually want to live; nor doctors who for good reasons object to such a practice.
Euthanasia is problematic, society should not dictate or value people simply based on "productivity".
Worth looking at some of the statistics in the Netherlands and Belgium.
https://www.ieb-eib.org/en/document/report-2016-euthanasia-in-netherlands-488.html
I think having the presumption that death is better than pain, I think is kind of superficial.
I can see the argument for self-autonomy, but again, it is not the place for the government to place an obligation on doctors to perform such wish.
With regards to terminal illness, I can see why people would think such, but is that really worth staking a life on?
On the one hand we are trying to prevent suicide amongst young people, and then encouraging our society to eliminate those that are too burdensome, or because their suffering is too much? (Think also same argument used to abort babies with down syndrome, because of the "suffering" they will experience). This really is a depressing and degrading view of humanity. Suffering is part of the human experience, I think because the implications are harmful for our society in general outweigh the individual 'benefits'.
Euthanasia is problematic, society should not dictate or value people simply based on "productivity".
Worth looking at some of the statistics in the Netherlands and Belgium.
https://www.ieb-eib.org/en/document/report-2016-euthanasia-in-netherlands-488.html