Page 4 of 4

Re: Euthanasia for Unbearable Mental Illnesses

Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2017 3:13 pm
by RickD
Nessa wrote:
PaulSacramento wrote:
Nessa wrote:This is suppose to be in relation to unbearable mental illness...

I think that was addressed quite early that if a patient is terminal, that is one thing BUT if the patient is NOT terminal that euthanasia is wrong.

It is a very emotional situation of course, but what is "unbearable"?
The pain?
The humiliation?
For whom?

Yes that was some peoples take on it but by no means is the final say or necessarily the truth

I'm kinda with Nessa on this one. What's "terminal" anyways? What if two doctors differ on if the patient is terminal?

Edit: say we go with this definition:
terminal condition
A condition caused by injury, disease or illness from which, to a reasonable degree of medical probability, a patient cannot recover, and in which
(1) The patient’s death is imminent, or
(2) The patient is in a persistent vegetative state

I'm not happy with euthanasia being acceptable with this definition.

Wouldn't we be playing God?

Re: Euthanasia for Unbearable Mental Illnesses

Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2017 4:33 am
by PaulSacramento
I have never seen the definition of terminal before to be honest.
Terminal always meant that death (from the disease or injuries) was unavoidable and inevitable.
There is NO cure and NO treatment and the patient will die, unless they are kept alive by artificial means.

Re: Euthanasia for Unbearable Mental Illnesses

Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2017 6:44 am
by melanie
Terminal means having an illness that is incurable and no adequate treatment will stop the unfortunate outcome. Most often cancers and advanced heart disease.
Those in the medical field are there to save lives, a prognosis of terminal is not subjective to the doctor. To tell someone they are going to die is the worst case scenario for everyone involved. It is not a term that is used frivolously.
The duty of care changes from saving life to alleviating the suffering of a person in that situation. Its not unkind or playing God to ease suffering.

Re: Euthanasia for Unbearable Mental Illnesses

Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2017 7:56 am
by RickD
Terminal isn't always terminal. And it is subjective to the doctor. If terminal were objective, nobody with a terminal disease/illness would survive. Euthanasia performed on "terminal" patients, is playing God.
https://www.google.com/amp/dailysignal.com/2015/05/18/assisted-suicide-how-one-woman-chose-to-die-then-survived/amp/

Re: Euthanasia for Unbearable Mental Illnesses

Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2017 10:03 am
by Philip
Euthanasia performed on "terminal" patients, is playing God.


I get where Rick is coming from - I mean, so many just want to do what is expedient/convenient, and then that takes the place of the ethics of it. But if a person is on a respirator, unconscious, and the only thing keeping that person alive is the respirator, there's no brain activity, there's no reasonable hope that they will live without the machine - is unplugging that respirator"playing God?" Is another way of looking at it?: A person's essential, natural, God-given functions and ability to live and breath no longer exist - so, is it playing God trying to keep them alive artificially, by enabling their vital functions artificially, via machinery?

Re: Euthanasia for Unbearable Mental Illnesses

Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2017 10:15 am
by RickD
Philip wrote:
Euthanasia performed on "terminal" patients, is playing God.


I get where Rick is coming from - I mean, so many just want to do what is expedient/convenient, and then that takes the place of the ethics of it. But if a person is on a respirator, unconscious, and the only thing keeping that person alive is the respirator, there's no brain activity, there's no reasonable hope that they will live without the machine - is unplugging that respirator"playing God?" Is another way of looking at it?: A person's essential, natural, God-given functions and ability to live and breath no longer exist - so, is it playing God trying to keep them alive artificially, by enabling their vital functions artificially, via machinery?

That was precisely the situation my mom was in.

Thankfully, my sister and I didn't have to labor over a decision as to what to do. My mom already made her wishes crystal clear.

I don't think that pulling the plug on someone who is being kept alive only by a machine would be considered euthanasia in most instances.

Not entirely sure about short term medically induced comas, however.

Re: Euthanasia for Unbearable Mental Illnesses

Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2017 4:57 am
by Mallz
Philip wrote:...is unplugging that respirator"playing God?"...


People played God by putting them on advanced life support. Now direct interventions will be made to take that life support away. And then interventions will be introduced that has the multi-factorial action of decreasing pain and speeding up the dying process. If there are people involved giving interventions, it's assisted suicide. Whether you want to call it Euthanasia or murder or killing obviously depends on the situation, but guess what? It's all assisted suicide!!! :shakehead:

No interventions = no assisted suicide. If someone is passing and doesn't need any help (beyond activities of daily living) then there are not a part of this conversation.

Re: Euthanasia for Unbearable Mental Illnesses

Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2017 10:36 am
by Philip