• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Euthanasia

kayle said:
you wrote -- the decision was wrong. I asked: by whom -- you wrote: by me. nevermind, not essential.
Click to expand...
Who else made the decision besides the girl and her caregivers? :boggled:

I took you to mean you were asking who said the girl's decision was wrong, I did. Obviously I didn't make the decision to allow the death so how could I possibly be referring to my decision?


Now that that's cleared up...

These are straw men:
so someone just should have told her: suffer some more years and you will feel better and forget everything?
Click to expand...
Stop making this chicken farm with clucking about how happy she could have become.
Click to expand...

No one said those things. Some of us said there was a good chance she could get better.
 
p0lka said:
I was questioning your statement below

If people who survive suicide attempts are almost always glad they did, then why do mental health professions tend to see 1 suicide attempt as a potential warning sign for a second attempt?
If people are 'almost always' glad they survived, wouldn't it follow that they would be unlikely to try it again?
Click to expand...
Because 10% might try again, and, because people don't just instantly heal after a failed attempt.

You study these things with the goal of helping suicidal people.
 
lionking said:
Am I missing something here? Of course suicides happen, but this case is about state sanctioned and supported suicide. I support euthanasia laws, but with a heap of conditions, one of which is that the person seeking euthanasia has a terminal disease with a short lifespan.

Of course this girl was suffering like many people do. This is tragic. But for the state to endorse and support her death in these circumstances is wrong. This, thankfully, would never happen where I live.
Click to expand...

And if any good comes out of this, maybe the Netherlands will consider re-writing their law.
 
wasapi said:
I worked for a rape crisis center for a few years. Heard horrific details of childhood rape survivors. I believe there was more then that tormenting her. However, I have lived in that pit of depression myself. And survived. This never should have happened.
Click to expand...

And you have some insight not all of us have. :hug6

(not the rape :o)
 
kayle said:
so a person raped three times in childhood will be considered mentally unstable and incapable of deciding to kill themselves? whereas a non-raped person can because they are mentally stable etc? :D
Click to expand...
This is a straw man as well. No one is making this argument. Not even close.
 
lionking said:
Am I missing something here? Of course suicides happen, but this case is about state sanctioned and supported suicide. I support euthanasia laws, but with a heap of conditions, one of which is that the person seeking euthanasia has a terminal disease with a short lifespan.
Click to expand...

Why? Why is it any of your business?
 
theprestige said:
"not euthanized her"
Click to expand...


I see no evidence that that would have changed the outcome, except to increase the likelihood of her suffering more in the process.

Perhaps the assessment that those involved in euthanizing her should not have done so is based on distress caused to themselves, or to some third party. I don't think there's any way to assess that, though, and it doesn't fill in that blank. Is there something they should have done to help her?
 
I know this probably won't be a popular opinion, but I believe in individual autonomy and freedom. In most cases, a person's life is their own, not anyone else's. Hence, it is the right of the individual to end their own life.

Is it possible that one day she might have been happy to be alive, if she had just "powered through" the pain she was in, and endured it for long enough? Sure, it's possible. But still, a person's life is their own.

The exceptions I see are, for example, a parent who is a legal guardian should not abandon their child by taking their own life. But that does not apply in this case. She had no children, and thus no parental responsibilities to fulfill.
 
I'm so sorry I read this topic. :(

I am solidly against legal euthanasia because of exactly these kinds of circumstances and decisions.

This was wrong on sooo many levels.
 
Coincidentally, the most recent of a succession of GP's I've seen in the last eight months (local practice overwhelmed, ongoing staffing crisis) was a very pleasant Dutch locum and we discussed ... the issue of assisted suicide. But this in the context of ending what amounts to gratuitous physical torture of terminal patients, my opinion being that if they wish to end unbearable pain with a suitable dose of diamorphine they should be able to do so, and that I don't understand the view of people who wouldn't countenance it under any circumstances. He was in agreement and said "well, things are changing".

But that's as far as I thought the discussion had gone, in Holland or anywhere else - ending of what would otherwise be physical torture. This story is chilling and almost beyond belief.
 
Puppycow said:
I know this probably won't be a popular opinion, but I believe in individual autonomy and freedom. In most cases, a person's life is their own, not anyone else's. Hence, it is the right of the individual to end their own life.

Is it possible that one day she might have been happy to be alive, if she had just "powered through" the pain she was in, and endured it for long enough? Sure, it's possible. But still, a person's life is their own.

The exceptions I see are, for example, a parent who is a legal guardian should not abandon their child by taking their own life. But that does not apply in this case. She had no children, and thus no parental responsibilities to fulfill.
Click to expand...

She's not an adult. She IS the child. That's the sticky point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom