This may be suited for IMHO, but I’m posting here in GD instead, since it’s a weighty topic:
(1) Scenario #1: You and your best friend (or spouse, child, whatever) are hiking deep in the woods when suddenly, a tree falls on your friend and pins him to the ground. You can see that he is severely injured and in great pain, you have no way to contact the outside world (you left your cell phone in the car) and you’re too far away from help for you to hike out and get help before he dies. (Let’s assume you have psychic powers and know this already.) However, you do have a six-inch knife which could end your friend’s suffering by cutting his throat, thus sparing him/her from hours or possibly days of agony. Do you think you could draw the blade?
(2) Scenario #2: You and your two best friends are in a helicopter crash deep in the woods, once again, far from human contact. Both friends are trapped, but they’re stuck in the wreckage in such a way that to save one would require you to kill and/or permanently paralyze the other. If you do nothing, though, both will die. Could you choose to save one friend’s life by ending the other? Or would you do nothing.
My vote: (1) Yes, and (2) Depends on which friend owes me money. Actually, seriously, (2) is yes, but it would be much harder decision than (1).
I’d let them decide, then do what they asked.
The reality is that, in both situations, I’d try to get help regardless. If I fail, I’ll at least know I tried, and really, the important thing is that I would be ok.
I like the answer in the other thread of shooting yourself so you do not have to witness their suffering.
My honest answer is I have no freaking idea. I doubt anyone ever really could till faced with that situation. It is one thing to calmly contemplate this stuff on a message board and a whole world of difference to be in that situation, holding the knife and having to choose to slit a loved one’s throat.
The best I can offer is a lot would depend on the wishes of the person/people trapped. Even then I cannot say for sure but certainly they would be a big factor in the decision making process.
(Wow, it’s strange to be typing that about someone else’s thread, being that I am the duke of pointless questions.)
Let’s say you and your best friend live in a jurisdiction in which euthanasia is illegal. Your friend is suffering from terminal bone cancer and is in enormous pain which morphine, at best, only dulls slightly; and the friend is too weak to do anything to end his or her own life. The doctor is not willing to adjust the morphine drip to administer a fatal dose, but you know how to. Are you willing to do so?
Scenario #1, Hell yeah, I would kill my friend. [del]That is what deserted woods are for. Killing people and disposing of the bodies.[/del] I would not want to see him suffer any longer than necessary, and he is going to die anyway. Besides, I would have my gun with me so I could end it quicker and more painlessly.
Scenario #2, Kill the both of them. Can’t leave any witnesses living. She may decide to call the cops on me when we get back.
Have there been any documented cases of someone euthanizing a companion after an accident? I don’t remember any and am pretty confident that’s exactly how I’d behave.
All my efforts would be in continuing to try and save them. Ending their suffering would not be a consideration when there’s still any possibility, no matter how remote, of saving their life. No way I would end someone’s life in either scenario.
Actually, seriously, (2) is yes, but it would be much harder decision than (1).
