Why should anyone be refused? Why should someone else be allowed to make a life-or-death call for someone who wants to make it for themselves?
I can’t speak to actual current practice, but in theory having a “thorough process” need not be about refusal–just about making sure that would-be suicides are really resolved, and assisting in putting things in order.
Right. Legalizing assisted suicide isn’t about leading more people to death. It’s about making the process more dignified and compassionate, and reducing collateral harm to others.
When I am Queen of the World, there will be no absolute contraindications for assisted suicide. Those diagnosed with Clinical Depression or taking drugs known to cause suicidal thoughts/ideation will be delayed while treatment for their condition is attempted or their drugs are changed, with the knowledge that if treatment is ineffective in…let’s say 6 months for the sake of argument, but it really should be set by mental health experts, not me, then their application will be approved.
Depression hurts. (Catchy, that, maybe we should use it in an ad or something. 
) I see no reason why that pain should be excepted from resolution by death, as long as the person is otherwise mentally competent.
In other words, suicidal ideation as a *symptom *should be treated by other means if possible, suicidal ideation as an actual informed decision should not.
I’m glad Helen Keller didn’t feel this way
Very, very subtly.
“Mom, you’re in a lot of pain today, aren’t you?”
“That pain isn’t really ever going away, is it?”
“It’s so sad that we won’t be able to afford a college education for little Johnny, since these medical bills are just so expensive.”
“It must be awfully lonely for you now that all of your friends are gone.”
“I’d really like to take that job in another city, but I will be right here to take care of you for as long as you need me.”
“It’s so sad how our neighbor couldn’t cope with his illness, and opted for assisted suicide. Of course, I’m sure his family’s grief is eased knowing that he made this decision on his own terms.”
“I know that when the time comes, I will choose suicide. I wouldn’t ever want my kids to have to take care of me.”
“So what do you think, Mom? How do you feel about assisted suicide?”
Why does medically assisted suicide make this any more likely than DIY suicide?
Meh. If mum is not really all that lonely and not really in all that much pain then the three doctors should be able to catch that. If they don’t then she probably is in that much pain. Also note that the person doing that is doing something against the law, and they would be in pretty serious trouble if it was found out.
Anyway, I doubt it happens. Euthanasia, where it is legal, is still pretty rare. And mainly used by cancer patients in their final days (80%). Worry about hypothetical what-ifs that already have a pretty good safety net in place & are already against the law is not a particularly strong argument to make people suffer “unbearably and hopelessly” (the criteria used in the Netherlands).
Not all pain is physical.
Two reasons:
It creates a culture where it is generally assumed that someone who is old, sick, in pain, or no longer able to care from themselves will choose suicide as an option.
Killing yourself is a difficult and decisive effort. Having the nice doctor give you the appropriate shot or pills doesn’t take much effort on your part. Your well-meaning relative makes the arrangements, and it just seems like the right thing to do.
Ah, that’s what I was asking for earlier, an explanation of what the criteria are in the Netherlands. It sounds like it’s not just about “I don’t feel like living anymore.” There’s a big difference between that kind of law and what has been suggested by some people in this thread.
I’m still not sure how it can be illegal to talk to your Mom about her pain, or tell her what your choice would be. I’m talking about Mom ultimately being convinced in a subtle way to make the choice for euthanasia. I don’t know what the safety net is against that.
Sorry, I missed that question. The protocol is as follows:
The doctor must be satisfied that the following conditions are fulfilled:
At the end of the day, the patient either is or isn’t “suffering unbearably and hopelessly”. The doctor must determine this. The hypothetical nasty daughter can say those things, and then the doctor must determine, using the above list, if the patient would like to end their life. He can determine “suffering” to some degree, be it Alzheimers, Parkinsons, cancer etc. He can determine it will not improve. He can ask her what she wants, and see if she persistently wants that. If he is satisfied on all those counts, in what way would you differentiate to say that it was in fact not what the mother wanted at all, but purely what the daughter wanted? Apparently, the mother wants this, or she wouldn’t get through the criteria. You propose that she is “faking” to get through the criteria…to die. Does that not mean that she wants to die?
“Generally assumed” is a pretty big assumption. It doesn’t sound like this is a common course of action where it’s legal.
Like I said up thread, it’s rare. 1% of all deaths, and 80% of those are cancer patients in their final days. Not old people.
gracer - Thanks for the clarification. I do see an enormous difference between the type of legal restrictions that you are describing, in which I agree that it would be very difficult for coercion to play a significant role, and what some people in this thread are advocating, which is basically that euthanasia should be available to anyone who chooses it. I think that under the conditions you describe, euthanasia will be rare and therefore not become a general cultural expectation. This is not the case for a society where anyone can request and receive euthanasia, and I think it’s important to make that distinction.
That’s a good point. I was a safety attendant for an 19 year old kid who hanged himself. Failing to end his life, he nonetheless was successful at causing enough brain damage that he is going to need permanent, 24-hour watch for the rest of his institutionalized life. And he’s not himself anymore. The person he was, he DID manage to kill. But what remains is a permanently angry, out of control ball of rage. All. The. Time.
What a terrible thing to do to your family, not to mention yourself.
I’m willing to admit when I’m wrong. Unless I don’t feel like it.
Anyway, it does appear that this was a legit story and my earlier suspicions were wrong. We’ve now had additional information released about the story (the brothers’ names and home town) and there have been statements by family members and other doctors.
I just can’t support assisted suicide if I can’t support myself committing suicide. And I already know I can’t support that, even when I thought I was in hell and would not get better.