Now you’ve introduced yet another deviation that clouds the issue. At this point, I give up.
The killing of a person with a clear desire to live is not “euthanasia”. It’s true that we kill lots of people despite outlawing euthanasia, but calling those killings euthanasia just muddies the water.
I was responding to @Smapti’s idea that voluntary euthanasia is a slippery slope toward involuntary euthanasia. Involuntary euthanasia is murder under the law. There are of course fringe areas, but they don’t intersect with situations where rational adults clearly state their desire to live or die. I won’t continue this line of wordplay though, it’s not leading anywhere useful.
Yeah, euthanasia by definition implies the suffering person wishes to die and assesses their death as an improvement over remaining alive. Otherwise there’s no “eu” about it. It’s just thanasia, the killing of other people.
This.
Why should anyone have a say in how I live – or end – my life if it doesn’t directly harm them?
A friend once asked “Is suicide justified?”. To which I replied, “In what circumstances?” She countered, “No qualifications. My question stands, as is.”
I don’t think it took two heartbeats for me to reply “Yes”.
(she volunteered at a suicide prevention hotline)
If you talk to a financial advisor, you will discover that they expect you to consume most of your wealth in the final two years of your life – regardless of how long you expect to live.
This isn’t because they imagine you will go on a spending spree and buy a $1M MacLaren, take a trip around the world, charter a seat on a near earth excursion, etc.
No, it’s entirely expected to go to the health care industry.
Many hospitals survive because older folks are good customers. Those near death, even moreso!
Note the number of folks in their 20’s who take medications – of any type (prescription, OTC, etc.). Repeat the exercise for people in their 50s, 60s, 80s, etc. Pharma sure isn’t going to get rich selling aspirins to youngsters with headaches!
Incidentally, I’m knee-deep in Ron Wipond’s frightening book Your Consent is Not Required.
There is a lot of documentation about suicide hotlines that promise confidentiality but where they actually have access to your phone’s GPS and they have an AI or other programmed computer interaction with the responses heard that prompt what the next question should be, to rule out an intent to self-harm with immediate risk, and they can and do send EMT squads to your door if that is discerned to be the case, and they can and will whisk you off to a locked-ward environment with forced drugging, all because you thought you could safely express this stuff on a confidentiality-guaranteed hotline!
Ron is explicit in saying that not all suicide hotlines participate in this, but that a huge major grant and the likelihood of ensconcing all 988 calls under the jurisdiction of a parent organization that does this means most other suicide prevention hotlines will be under huge pressure to accept this protocol and participate in involuntary incarceration of anyone whose phone call seems to overlap with keywords indicating that they might be thinking of offing themselves for real.
Amusing that the same people who will fight you for a parking place at your local grocer are SO concerned with your well-being to impose this sort of thing on you!
My twisted sense of humor: Suicide Helpline
And, I sent this one to my second favorite childhood math teacher (my favorite had predeceased her).
[BTW, the site is quite amusing, if you’re into that sort of “off” humor]
I’m mostly ponderously serious and humor-impaired but I can giggle at some of them on occasion.
That was worth an LOL.
We were chatting, recently, about the likelihood of AIs being able to “create humor”.
It was argued that an AI could bounce ideas off of humans to determine which are funny and, thus, learn incrementally, from taht feedback.
I contend that one has to be able to appreciate humor in order to deliberately be able to create it (some folks can accidentally say something that, on reflection, turns out to be funny). I.e., I don’t think comics bring material to their performances that THEY haven’t chuckled at, in private, (and likely refined) beforehand.
“How was golf, today, dear?”
“Terrible!”
“Why? What happened?”
“Well, things were going well and then George collapsed and died of a heart attack on the third green!”
“Oh, my! That’s terrible!”
“It sure was. Spent the rest of the round hitting the ball, dragging george, hitting the ball…”
When the patient doesn’t have the means or ability to commit suicide themselves, and their true, un-coerced, unpressured, entirely voluntary consent is given.
I have grave doubts about the ability of most to give such consent, however. Or rather, our ability to discern it, as outsiders. It is very easy for me to imagine family members, caregivers, powers of attorney, and guardians manipulating these patients for their own ends, either knowingly or unknowingly.
The lack of universal healthcare is a big knock against the idea all by itself, as basically every patient in America knows how expensive it is and what a burden they leave their loved ones. That right there is a whole lot of pressure, on its own, for people to choose a quicker way out. And nobody should be making these kind of decisions for purely financial reasons.
So while I fully support the right to decide to end your life at any time, and to obtain professional help when you can’t do it yourself, I would have serious misgivings about any particular legal scheme for allowing it, especially in our current unworkable healthcare quagmire we live in. The specific implementation details will matter, a lot.
If suicide / euthanasia becomes more of a thing, you might well wind up with that MacLaren. Get that terminal diagnosis with x months to live, have some fun, then pull the plug on yourself.
Arguably, such an approach is better for the economy than blowing it all on high-tech medical care, though I suspect it would be a wash, all in all. Your money is gone - either on luxury items / experiences, on medical care, or to be spent by your heirs.
This is a popular myth. However it is only true for a small percentage of people, although for a somewhat larger percentage but still minority of people it will happen over a longer period of time. The financial burden of end of life health care is high, but spread over the population through taxes and insurance premiums.