Do you agree with the following statement.
It is illogical, unreasonable and unacceptable to prolong the life of another against their will if they are suffering in order to satisfy anothers moral and or relgious beliefs.
Take into consideration that this is aimed at the non-religious or better said non-believers in the existence of a god. (no offence intended)
What control does one have over their own life if they can not choose when to end it, if they are of sound mind?
I’m no hero, but there have been a few times I’ve risked my life, both wisely and foolishly, to accomplish something I thought was necessary. If I can do that, why can I not choose to end it?
And if you can not choose to end your own life, then can you choose to risk it? Where does the restriction end?
Putting aside the terminally-ill and in pain for the moment…
There are plenty of people in the world who are suicidal but, for whom, life is really a better option than death. It is not in people’s best interests to provide a mechanism whereby one can end their life on a whim. Many people have suicidal thoughts from time to time and recover from them and go on to lead full and productive lives.
In other words, the right to die should not be absolute since it is subject to abuse by people who are not mentally competent to make that judgement.
Zev Steinhardt
In this case I refer to an existing or deliberate documented expression of will (compos mentis) in the event of an accident or illness.
I agree that there are those that due to mental illness (for example: depression) may abuse such an option. Hence I point in the more specific direction of terminal illness or post accident.
(emphasis change = mine).
Strike the italicized part. It makes no difference whether they are suffering or not, and you have no way of assessing that anyhow.
Peeking at some other responses —if the individual in question has been found to be incompetent, then that individual does not get to make much of anything in the way of meaningful life decisions: where to live, whether or not to consent to an operation, whether or not to have sex, etc. And certainly not whether or not to commit suicide.
However, choosing “not to be” does not in and of itself constitute evidence of incompetence. Nor does a psychiatric diagnosis, by the way. And anyone not found incompetent should be allowed to make that decision.
I think public policy would be best served by imposing a waiting period. People who wish to do away with themselves should register their intent. They should be checked for competency (albeit by professionals who do not know that the individual they are checking intends on committing suicide) and external pressure/coercion ruled out (i.e., verify that it is chosen of the individual’s own volition). Waiting period also screens out spur-of-the-moment depression-trough actions that one would regret if one were around to regret it later, etc.
Damn! Forgot that quoted sections are already italicized in their entirety!
The changed emphasis: It is illogical, unreasonable and unacceptable to prolong the life of another against their will if they are suffering in order to satisfy anothers moral and or relgious beliefs.
(Strike the italicized part).
Good point about the waiting period or registry of intent.
Perhaps an annual or bi-annual re-assesment of this intent could be implemented?
If I were to make certain choices now and document them and make them known to family, friends, etc. that in the event that I am reduced, for example, to a persistent vegetative state or that I am striken with a life threatening disease that will at some point during the progression of this supposed illness, experience pain and or an unpleaseant death. Does this informed decision not warrant the respect, understanding and or unobstructed path to have my wishes carried out?
You seem to be conflating “right-to-die” with “right-to-suicide”. The two aren’t treated the same in our culture today. We all (theoretically) have the right to refuse life-saving medical treatment which would then result in our deaths. (Does not apply if you are found incompetent.). That is “right-to-die”. Get it in writing, talk to your family, and sign the DNR. The hospital is generally not interested in forcing unwilling patients to live if they are in a persistent vegetative state or other precarious medical situation and they have been clear about their wishes.
The right to active suicide - that is, the right to take action to kill yourself, as opposed to not taking action which would save your life - is another matter. Should it be? I don’t think so. But the right-to-die is protected while the right-to-suicide is not. I think that should change and both should be honored.
I agree.
I don’t agree.
Suffering is not a strict enough qualification. Almost everyone who contemplates suicide believes that they are suffering. Depression, bipolar disorder, and other mental illnesses are all real and certain cause suffering, even extreme suffering in some cases. Nevertheless there’s a good chance that people with those conditions may be cured, or have their worst symptoms alleviated, and go one to long stretches of happy life afterwards. Thus it would be negligent of the government to allow them to commit suicide.
In the case of a physical ailment, if the pain is extreme and the chances of recovery are zero or extremely small and the person’s wishes are clear, then prolonging their life against their wishes is illogical, unreasonable, and unacceptable.
I agree with the OPs statement for the most part, although I’m not averse to taking reasonable precautions to ensure that the person’s desire to die isn’t a temporary phase (As AHunter3 already suggested).
A good movie to watch about this topic is “The Sea Inside.” It is a Spanish movie, I think, so if you don’t speak it, you will have to read subtitles. It is pretty compelling, so I thought I would throw it out. (Sorry, I know this isn’t Cafe Society…)
To close off this topic I thank you all for giving what for the most part are balanced and sensitive responses.
The reason that I put forward this topic was to see which countries were more tolerant or respectful in the recognition of a patients right to die, whom has documented such an informed request prior to the onset of a terminal and or painful illness or in the event of a specific and permanent mental or physical incapacitation. For the purposes of this argument I did not include depression. I realise that there are various forms of depression that are detrimental to both physical and mental health.
I am based in northern Italy (Irishman married to an Italian) where people are generaly petrified of the excessively invasive religious organisations. Physicans for the most part shy away from this argument and prefer that another country makes and takes these decisions.