One of the starkest cases of someone arguing in favor of physician assisted suicide was that of this young kid, maybe 20, who was in a car accident and suffered a spinal cord injury at about the highest possible survivable section of the spinal cord. So he was totally paralyzed from the neck down. He had joined a disability forum to advocate for PAS. And he wanted to die. He was suffering and found absolutely no joy or purpose in existing. But since he was so disabled, he was unable to commit suicide on his own. And because of current laws, he was unable to (legally) acquire the necessary assistance. I felt a lot of sympathy for the guy, even if I personally thought it was the wrong decision. But I also thought it was not my place to say what was right and what was wrong in this circumstance. Other than believing he should have had the option available.
Agree with all of this.
The steps we’ve taken so far are just baby steps towards being a civilized country. But like the ongoing stalemate over Roe vs. Wade, we’ve got to proceed slowly enough that we don’t wake the sleeping giant of Medieval Christian Outrage.
@usedtobe: We had that happen near here a couple months ago. Woman with advancing Alzheimer’s confined to a care facility asks her husband of 50 years to end her ever-increasing insanity-like misery. After considerable discussion over weeks he takes her out back of the facility, shoots her, then calls the police and is arrested while sitting crying next to the body. I don’t know whether he’ll be prosecuted. But he ought to get a medal for bravery instead.
Being willing to trade 100% of the happiness of his remaining decade or three on Earth to save her a few months of mostly obliviousness is love indeed.
Yes, we are trying to maybe move toward a compassionate country.
Kinda like “Medicinal Marijuana” - a step, a small step.
Better than nothing, so to speak.
Of course, as one restrained under CA 5150 TWICE as a “Suicide Risk” (I almost asked one of the shrinks for the barbiturates also provided for by CA law) I am rather skeptical of the actual implementation of the “kinder, gentler” rules.
I know better than to use a Catholic hospital…
CA now has one both one of the most aggressive “Suicide Hold” rules AND physician-assisted suicide.
In the cat analogy: one ear up; other ear down.
You raise an interesting question that I’d be curious to hear more about. But I don’t want to hijack the thread. Perhaps you could start a suitable GD?
In your view for your personal situation, would you rather that CA 5150 provide that they restrain you as they did, leave you completely alone, or help you fulfill your suicidal desires? Which really is the compassionate choice there?
I have no experience with suicidal people. I have some experience with mentally disturbed people and know a bit of the frustration of dealing with the disordered thinking that can’t even get near correctly computing cause and effect. Reasoning with such folks is hopeless, but once they’re brought out of that state (usually against their stated wishes at the time) they can become happy and productive members of society of value to themselves and others.
Would it have been compassionate to kill them while they were raving? It certainly might have seemed like it at the time to both them and the observer, although viewed in hindsight that would clearly have been an unnecessary move.
I wouldn’t dare mention it to any of my doctors. Louis C. K. has a bit about mentioning suicide to his shrink and the doctor pressed a button beneath the desk and the doors locked and the warning went off and they carted him off to lock-up.
We don’t let our pets suffer. I wish we could do the same for our loved humans.
Unless you are able to recognize on some level that you need help and shouldn’t be left alone.
I have never been “suicidal”. I simply recognize that, at some point, it would be preferable to die rather than continue “life” as it had become.
So far, I have not come close - the pulse of 37 had to be fixed some way. Had it continued and the Cardiology folks still refused pacemaker, I could see the point being reached.
Simply activity fixed the pulse - the Bradycardia was caused by my continued bed
rest following the Acute Renal Failure of February.
If I had been actively wanting death, it is none of the State’s business.
CA 5150 should have never existed.
I suspect it will sink, but a thread in GD coming up - re 6150 = lock 'em up! and SB 128 (can’t find the actual code number) = "give 'em barbies and be done with 'em.
Note: Gov. Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown signed the law - he is a former Jesuit, and one of the folks he consulted was the local (RC) Archbishop.
Catholic veiwpoint well represented…
GD thread launched to withering criticism.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=830738
Apparently, death can be entirely different things, depending…
Thanks for sticking your head above the parapet. Reinforcements are on the way.
I think we now know why the two cross-currents are fine with the general population - compartmentalization.
It is only the “bad” people who want to die who get locked up.
They aren’t the ones eligible for barbiturates anyway.
Only the “truly deserving”* are eligible for the “safe, humane” treatment provided by SB128.
We would NEVER lock up the truly deserving.
Simple.
Vote GOP!
We now have medical treatment allotted like “Welfare” - OK as long as it goes only to the “right” people.
I for one have long since ceased to bang head against hard objects…
,