IM NOT ATTACKING RELIGIONS....IM ATTACKING IT WHEN IT TURNS INTO A FORM OF "CONTROL". I MEAN......IF YOU BELIEVE IN GOD AND IT HELPS YOU GET THROUGH YOUR DAY.....I DONT SEE ANYTHING WRONG WITH THAT....BUT IF YOUR TRYING TO DENY SOMEONE "PAINLESS ASSISSTED SUICIDE" BECAUSE YOU THINK ITS A "SIN" THEN THATS JUST STRAIGHT SELFISH......MEANING THAT YOU NO LONGER LOOK TO RELIGION AS A WAY TO FEEL GOOD BUT AS A WAY TO IMPOSE YOUR BELIEFS ON OTHERS......JUST ANOTHER STORY OF TYPICAL HUMAN BULLSHIT
EVERYONES LIVES ARE DIFFERENT....THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE LOVE TO "GENERALIZE". DISREGARDING THE FACT THAT WE LIVE 2 SEPERATE LIVES, THE OTHER PERSON WILL SAY, "I CLIMBED OUT OF DEPRESSION SO YOU CAN". THAT STATEMENT MIGHT WORK ON SOME PEOPLE BUT FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE JUST TIRED OF LIFE AND ALL ITS BULLSHIT, IT WONT WORK. THESE TYPE OF PEOPLE LOVE TO PROJECT THEIR OWN STORY AND TRY TO GENERALIZE YOURS WITH THEIRS.......FRANKLY.....ITS BULLSHIT....
AND PEOPLE SEEM TO THINK ALL DEPRESSION CAN BE CURED.....OF COURSE MANY HAVE CLIMBED OUT OF DEPRESSION BUT....MANY MANY PEOPLE CANNOT. AND THESE PEOPLE ARE LIVING IN PAIN WITH NO WAY OUT BECAUSE THE "LAW" DOESNT ALLOW IT....ITS BULLSHIT.....ITS EVEN MORE RIDICULOUS HOW SOME PEOPLE HAVE NEVER BEEN REALLY DOWN JUST GO ALONG WITH THE BANDWAGON BY AGREEING WITH ANTI-EUTHANASIA PEOPLE. BUT THERE ARE ALSO PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN DOWN AND SAY YOU CAN GET OUT OF IT....ALL I HAVE TO SAY TO THOSE PEOPLE IS
YOU SEE PEOPLE PICK RELIGIONS BASED ON THEIR OWN PERSONAL EXPERIENCES. DEPENDING ON WHERE THEY GREW UP, WHO TAUGHT THEM, WHAT EVENTS THEY SEE ARE HAPPENING AROUND THEM. THAT IS WHY THERE IS NO 1 RELIGION. THERE ARE MANY RELIGIONS BECAUSE RELIGIONS ARE JUST WAYS OF THOUGHT TO HELP YOU GET THROUGH THE DAY. RELIGIONS ARE BASICALLLY JUST THE "ANCIENT WAY" OF THERAPY. PSYCHOLOGY AND PSYCHIATRY IS THE NEW MODERN FOR OF THERAPY FOR THE HUMAN MIND. THINK ABOUT IT.
BECAUSE THEY UNDERSTAND LIFE THRU THE "SCREEN" OF CHRISTIANS BELIEFS. SO IF WE LEGALIZE ASSISTED SUICIDE FOR ANYONE NOT JUST THE TERMINALLY ILL......THEN THESE TYPE OF PEOPLE WOULD LITERALLY GET OFFENDED AND TRY TO PUT YOU IN JAIL. BECAUSE OF THEIR OWN SELFISH BELIEFS. I MEAN.....THERE ARE SO MANY RELIGIONS IN THE WORLD.....WHICH ONE IS THE RIGHT NOW? THERE IS NOT F UCKEN "RIGHT" ONE PEOPLE.....ITS WHATEVER YOU WANT TO BELIEVE OR MAKES SENSE TO YOU
@JohnLeguizamo1 TURN OFF THE FUCKING CAPS LOCK KEY YOU FUCKING INBRED DONKEY FUCKING SHEEP FONDLING ASS REAMING PIECE OF CUNT DISCHARGE. Seriously dude...
i dont like to use the world christians because its a big generalization. Right now im talking about specific christians that do not believe in euthanasia because of their "own beliefs". Can you see how SELFISH that is? Behind all the words that this type of christian is saying. that person is not saying its really a sin.....that person is REALLY SAYING...."YOUR INTERFERING WITH MY BELIEFS". THINK ABOUT IT.....it would DESTROY their "belief(something that makes their life worth living".
IF SOMEONE REALLY WANTS TO DIE.....I SAY...ITS THEIR CHOICE. WE ALL HAVE DIFFERENT BELIEFS. SOME PEOPLE REALLY BELIEVE IT IS THE ONLY WAY OUT AND THE ONLY PERSON THAT KNOWS BEST IS YOURSELF.....YOU ARE THE ONE THAT KNOWS WHAT YOU NEED NOT ANY DOCTOR, POLITICIAN, PARENT, FRIEND........
People Love to say that Euthanasia is "morally wrong"
tell me......what defines what is right or wrong?
ALL LIFE IS BULLSHIT.....ITS JUST PEOPLE TRYING TO GAIN "POWER" BY ATTACHING TO SUCH IDEAS THAT HELPED THEM IN THEIR LIVES SO THEY THINK IT MIGHT HELP OTHERS......SUCH AS NOT ALL BUT CERTAIN CHRISTIANS BELIEVE SUICIDE IS A SIN. WHO THE HELL ARE YOU TO TELL ME THAT THIS IS A SIN.....I CAN TURN IT OVER ON YOU AND SAY.....YOU EATING MEAT IS A VIOLENT ACT.....PEOPLE ARE ALWAYS FULL OF SHIT.
Proof that not only does the patient consent, but also fully understands the proceedure. & not just some waiver that they or thier POA signs, but a written, typed or verbal statement as to thier understanding of what euthana is but also why they want to be euthanized, backed by medical history supporting thier reason. That way doctors cant get rid of people they deem "not worth saving" if for no other reason than to avoid the beaurocracy & red tape that would be required to do so, in other words
without assistance, (this same argument also applies to things like stem cell research too). However if someone is being kept artificially alive, & left to simple natural law without any man made intervention, would die. Then that also is playing God. So it does create a conflict where there is a clear benefit to some, but a grave risk to others. I think that it should be legal, but with specific & rigid qualifiers to ensure that it is only reserved for cases where it will help WITH documented
Who was confined to a wheelchair & had to breathe through a ventilator went through the process from start to finish, including legal red tape & extensive travel to be euthanized by a company in Switzerland, (I think), by a company called Humanitas. & I can see that to some euthenasia may be a great relief. Especially in the case of those who are on life support with no hope of recovery. That man posed the argument that people claim you are playing God in choosing to take your own life, with or
that they simply feel that they would be better off dead. Especially if they feel like they are being a burden on thier family or friends. So yes I agree that in leagalizing euthenasia, that would be a very real concern.
However on the other hand, I have also seen those who, due to injury or terminal illness, are in so much pain that they want to die. I cant recall the title of the program, or the name of the person that was the focus of it, But I recall watching a PBS World program wherin a
Well it is a catch 22, there is no question about that. One one side, I can see Norman's concern about euthenasia being used as a means to "dispose of people not worth saving", and I do applaud him for that. Because, although the goal of those of us who support people with disabilities is to support them & help them lead thier own lives, sadly there are some who still are unable to communicate thier consent to a DNR. Or they simply have been demoralized so much by people pitying thier disability
True newspaper story. Because of Medicare and Medicade cuts from Obama and his new legal Health Care Plan,Indiana got major cuts and unfortunately many with severe disabilities in nursing homes and group homes will be removed,and what's the unkind replies or response from ALL Indiana health care and/or nursing home and group care providers to the families of the poor disabled,retarded and crippled patients? "Take them to a homeless shelter!" From the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette newspaper.
@dragonknight1984 The HOLOCAUST continues! In Amerika,we don't really give a frak at all for all the unfortunate patients who are crippled,paralized,blind,retarded,old and unable to walk and talk. Belive it or not,I belive ALL American hospitals atre much like Nazi consentration camps and Soviet Gulags! No matter who's running Amerika,Democrats and Republicians DON'T care. The ones running Washington DC are not the ones reading Hitler's Mein Kamph but still carrying Hitler's tradition, Sig Heil!
Loved the video and the song was great what's the title of it? I am disabled and I want to choose my own death. I am for euthanasia if the person specified how they wanted to die, not just what a Dr. felt like doing.
The problem with that.. Is if you make what is effectively suicide legal, how much of an effect will it have on societies opinion of it. Suddenly, people think it's a valid way out. All the teenagers, all the mentally ill, all the people who can get better but don't give it a chance
When I go, I hope I look like I went 10 rounds with the Angel of Death. What is that poem, "Do not go gentle into that good night.." by Dylan Thomas?
Having walked that final road with my parents, I know it is a privilege to share those last hours. It was NOT an inconvenience to anyone who loved them. No one else should matter.
I feel disabled people should have the right to choose whether they want to die or not. It's the people's choice, not the doctor's. Why should doctors poison people against their will?!?!
Please, it can't possibly be that bad. I have a four-year old autistic son who I would doabsolutely ANYTHING for (except euthanize) and I couldn't bear him growing up thinking the world is so terrible he just wants to leave it. Right now he's the sweetest, happiest person I know and I hope he'll always keep that. Despite his problems,the world is a wonderful and beautiful place and I hope he and everyone else will see that. Life, even disabled life, is too precious to give up.
Choice, choice, choice. It's nice to know that as only 4 percent of students with learning disorders go on to a four year college, I can now legally kill myself under a proposed canadian bill that would make euthanasia legal for people suffering from psychological conditions. What a choice! Go pro-choicers!
This bill sounds like an opening of the floodgates for the Eugenics Crew. They has forced sterilisations of people with disability in Canada in the past. So Eugenics as always is kicking around in its cesspool ready to poison all if it can con people into letting it.
Euthanasia is murder.Don't send people quickly 2 hell.The temporary pain will end but the eternal in the lake of fire will begin.Come back 2 christ and ask 4 help.Thou shalt not kill.(Exodus 20:13)
Anti-lifers (falsely called "pro-lifers" as they are against the life of the human being involved).You all talk about Religious, Science...But you don't understand that euthanasia have to do with free choice!!!A person isn't FREE if he/she have the control of his/her BODY & MIND!!!
Euthanasia is murder.Don't send people quickly 2 hell.The temporary pain will end but the eternal in the lake of fire will begin.Come back 2 christ and ask 4 help.Thou shalt not kill.(Exodus 20:13)
Sometimes people confuse personal issues with political ones. By making laws about this, it is no longer just a personal choice. It depends on others choices, and actually doctors who work with terminally ill say that when they address pain issues and depressions NONE of their patients want help dying anymore! Sometimes it's more about the fear of future that makes people want to die. They just need our support to LIVE not to die.
You can't trust the goverment the people...they are not perfect..this is like a loaded gun. God is our only answer. People who don't want to die might get killed. The system is wicked.
I'm not preventing you from sitting in a running car in your garage and having a peaceful, dignified death. I'm deeply concerned that the widely held catastrophised view of disability has led many health professionals to presume that a life with a severe disability is not worth living . SASs such, unsolicited DNR orders are often placed on disabled patients' files. Your trust in health professionals may be naive. Read the experiences of other disabled people shown below.
Why shouldn't people have a right to choose if they want to live or not? Pro-choice is about people's autonomy, not about the health care system being "pro-death" or against the disabled. Nice scare tactics pal...
Why shouldn't people have a right to choose if they want to live or not? Pro-choice is about people's autonomy, not about the health care system being "pro-death" or against the disabled. Nice scare tactics pal...
Jack Kevorkian was a great doctor who only assisted peolple in doing what couldn't do themselves: the right to die. In fact, when a person survives suicide, he/she has never ever been charged with attemptive murder.
The Oregon PAS law seems pretty good... the doctors don't get to push the button, they can only prescribe you the lethal pills (barbiturates). So, you don't get all these nightmare scenarios of helpless people being murdered by Dr Death.
This vid is plain stupid. Well you go ahead en suffer to dead when it ever comes to that. I want the right to die if there's only suffering ahead. It was never meant to kill off people, it's a way to prevent suffering. It's your own choice, it's your right and it's humane.
Both life and death should be respected. There is no either/or answer to the two sides to this issue, and I am not trying to be wishy washy on the subject. I have seen some horrific things done by doctors to both prolong and shorten life. Truly, when the 'helpless' life in the womb was disrespected, no other form of life was far behind.
Just because you find dignity in suffering doesn't mean that everyone does. And it certainly doesn't mean that everyone should be forced to suffer until their "natural" death.
Uh..I never claimed there is dignity in suffering. I'm not against euthanasia. I'm against LEGALIZING euthanasia. Given that DNR's and "slow codes" are commonly assigned to disabled people without their consent, its evident many medical professionals as well as many in society believe that disabled people aren't worth saving. Legalizing euthanasia would be the first step towards the genocide of disabled people.
But people can already commit suicide by refusing artificial feeding and life-saving/sustaining treatment. Should the right to refuse treatment be revoked?
Sigh... Do your homework. Refusing medical treatment is already legal. No one is questioning that. Its legalizing the intentional initiation of death (irrespective of consent) that will jeopardize the lives of sick, elderly, and disabled people.
@normemma Personally, I think everyone should have the right to die. If they don't want to live, it should be their choice, why have them around to suffer and make the rest of us miserable.
@normemma what if we legalize it only under that persons consent.....then how will it be genocide? alot of old people want to die too.....shit alot of "people" want to die.
How cruel certain people are to not let certain people who are suffering die,
those people think they know what your going through,
what the fuck do you know about the pain im in, your not in by body,
i dont know if its them not understanding or them being selfish(selfish reason to want to save someones life), but all i know is its fucked up the government does not provide a painless way to kill yourself, leaving you to go to extremes to do it which makes it even harder to do.....
The point is missed. Listen to how he talks about doctors who are trained in palliative care. There are so many ways pain and suffering can be alleviated now, but doctors, nurses and family members need to be trained in these methods. There is another side to this story, which is keeping people with only a very short time to live alive with methods which are painful, invasive and horrific, and I do mean horrific!
What a crock of distorted bullshit. Another example of whiny liberals exploiting a non-issue with lies. What makes you think death is so horrible anyhow? It's just the other end of being born and an inescapable fact of life for each and every one of us. Prolonging an ending life for a year or two so somebody can keep on suffering is ridiculous.
Euthanasia is forced on people through futile care laws. Doctors can stop treating patients without the consent of their families. There have also been cases where dehydrating patients have had requests for food denied because they were not "rational." Look it up on Google with an open mind. It is a HUGE issue, and the video is saying that death is not the ultimate answer to suffering.
That's a lot of hooey. People should be ready to die when they get old, sick or disabled. I'm not saying we should kill everybody that reaches a certain age, but there should be no such thing as life-sustaining machines or hospice. Hospitals and doctors rack up obscene amounts of dollars while the taxpayers can't pay their bills. Look at the big picture. Turning the world into a giant old-folks day care center is no good for the rest of society.
You mean you'd be willing to kill yourself for the rest of society? Thanks a whole bunch! I guess we can save on tax dollars we pay for any public services you might have used.
You're damn right I would! I'm disabled and living on social security. I've tried to kill myself three times already...twice in one day. Check out my channel and you'll see. The last time I tried, I broke my leg. They sent me to the county hospital. I got an invoice the other day. The fucking hospital charged 75 grand for that leg! That brings the total up to about a half a million dollars over the last four or five years. Your sarcasm is wasted on me.
I don't know if my email went through to you, as the site seems to be having issues, but yes, I was replying to your TMWKK comment, which I assumed was someone without a disability.
I do empathize with your situation, as I have a disability as well and recieve SS benefits. It's just that I do feel that our society devalues the disabled and that that is wrong.
Moreover, I feel that those around you should take you to the hospital when you attempt to harm yourself out of basic respect and concern for you as an individual. I would hope that those around you would support you and try to help improve your life rather than encouraging you to kill yourself.
I, too, have had times when I've felt that it would be better to be in heaven-or even unconscious-than continue suffering. But that is why I don't want others in our society to take freedom of choice away from anyone by insisting that they have to die, which devalues life and encourages despair.
Finally, I don't think that death is horrible, especially when someone has been suffering for a long time. Because of my personal belief in God, I do look forward to a world where I will not be disabled, lonely, or devalued.
Uh, Cap'n... liberals? They're the ones who are ALL FOR euthanasia, abortion (including the partial birth variety), and any other excuse to kill people "legally."
i believe euthanasia is only appropriate when someone is terminally ill. When they have advancded stages of cancer or lou gherigs disease or something. If someone is depressed it is no reason for assisted suicide
No government can tell me that I don't have the right to die. It doesn't matter if I'm terminally ill, or if I'm just psyhologically depressed, if I want to die then I'm going to die. It's a sad day when the government gets so involved that they force people to stay alive even in worse case scenarios when there is no way a patient is going to get better. Nothing has the right to tell people that they cannot die.
To finish my statement: Utilitarianism knows nothing of love -- as Peter Singer discovered when he found himself lavishing money and care on his Alzheimer's-stricken mother, something that's completely against his own philosophy.
Well that shows what a load of crap Singer talks. We've been through all that in the past: All you get is a bunch of sadistic psychopaths satisfying their deviant urges killing people and making everyone's lives hell: Who's happy other than the psychos? What's the point of being alive in such a barren world able bodied, healthy, physically attractive and gifted: A living hell: Only a psychopath would see no wrong in that.
Consider this: and please, check it out for yourself! Peter Singer, the famous utilitarian philosopher from Princeton, and his argument that societies ought to spend their resources creating the maximum happiness for the greatest number. Singer's logic would urge us to think about how many starving children could be fed for the cost of a disabled child's tuition.
What if it turned out, that I, the disabled person, was much more of an asset to sociaty than you? Who gets to decide who has a right to live? What if you where deemed weak yourself. Life sucks from time to time for all of us. Would you, if you valued your life go quietly to your doom? I know, I wouldn't.
In a 1994 study, Scheper & Duursma reviewed 1400 cases of euthanasia in Holland and found the majority of people were "assisted to die" without any explicit request (N = 1000) in comparison to those who request assisted suicide (N = 400).
Singer would argue against letting Max come into the world at all. And that argument has infiltrated our culture to an almost unbelievable extent. Ninety percent of couples who learn that their unborn children have a disability end up aborting them. Singer takes that mentality a step further, however, arguing that it's ethical to kill these children after they're born.
Many normal able bodied people desiring suicide want physician assistance because they believe it will be painless, dignified, and a botched suicide would be less likely. But why a normal able bodied would want physical assistance isn't relevant. The question is, "Do you think ALL people should have the LEGAL right to physician assisted suicide, or should the LEGAL right to physician assisted suicide only be offered to sick, elderly, and disabled people?
You sound like you're speculating again Norm. Where's this supposed "study" that says that normal able bodied people would want doctor assisted suicide. This sounds merely like your own personal beliefs and not what is relevant to the debate. You're throwing out the same red herring again as if it was applicable
oh for god's sake. chk out kevorkian's "clients." geesh. you insult ppl, ask for studies, yet offer none of your own and apparently have no disability experience 0f your own. cough up your own studies or your experiences as a disabled person. ever visit an er as a dis person? i have many times. yes, you have no idea why i brought that up, i'm sure.
what about kevorkian's clients? Most of them were terminally ill and killed themselves. You make a stupid assumption that i have no experience with disabled people. Once again Cassie you're way out in left field. what you just stated had nothing to do with norm's crazy notion of dr assisted suicide for healthy people
And yet these people took their own lives. Technically they committed suicide themselves all he did was build the machine while they pushed the button. That is why Kevorkian was so hard to prosecute cassie. He never actively killed a patient until recently
oh brother. you are a bit ignorant on this topic. and you still don't see the connection. btw, why not address the fact you were wrong about "most" of his clients being terminally ill?? once again, you are wrong. why are you here? is this a game?
Po, there are many variations on the RTD position. Some people maintain ALL people should have the legal right to PAS. Others say that only terminally ill people should have the right to PAS. Still others claim that the legal right should be extended to terminally ill, sick, elderly, and disabled people. I'm just trying to figure out what your position is.
All Right, Po, let's take this one logical premise at a time. Do you think that terminally ill people and severely disabled people (like your brother) should have the legal right to request physician assisted suicide?
Look, I'm not saying that you shouldn't have followed your brother's wishes in discontinuing his treatment, but I do think you are ignoring fundamental facts about how the euthanasia ethic affects medical care in our country. For one very serious case, look up "Emilio Gonzales" and "Futile Care" online.
It's actually not a straw man argument (i.e. unrealistic or improbable example). Its quite common for abused women to want to commit suicide. You're proposing that we pass legislation that would provide people with assistance to die. I'm simply asking who would be included in this legislation: all people who ask to die or only elderly, sick, and disabled people who ask to die?
yes it is a straw man you're using a totally weak argument there norm. That's like having a taste test between colas and having Coke take on orange juice. It is not related. You're talking about the difference between terminally ill patients and suicidal healthy people. They have nothing to do with what is supported in the mainstream.
I'm just trying to understand your position. 3 comments above, you said, "people should choose for themselves." All I'm asking is, "Which people? Everyone or only terminally ill people?"
I've already given you the answer multiple times you threw out the red herring of comparing suicide of healthy people to terminally ill patients easing their own pain which was not relevant. All people should have the right to self-determination without government intervention. You're continuing to make a non-logical argument norm no one is arguing healthy vs terminally ill here but you
I'm confused. You're saying that "ALL people should have the right to self-determination without government intervention." But then you say suicidal healthy people are "red herrings" and should not be included in the discussion. So, who are you saying should have the legal right to assisted suicide, all people or only terminally ill people? I'm not making any claim, I'm simply asking you to clarify your position.
Norm again you aren't using any logic. I said your argument about comparing suicidal healthy people to the real issue of euthanasia is a red herring not the people themselves. They shouldn't be included in the discussion as normal healthy people don't need doctor assisted suicide
you are making claims. This discussion has nothing to do with people who are healthy committing suicide and for you to throw that out there is a red herring to divert attention away from the original subject. Tell me why would normal healthy people need assisted suicide?
So, you're saying that legislation should only apply to terminally ill people who are unable to commit suicide. All other "normal healthy people" don't need legislation because they have the ability to kill themselves, right?
You're making no sense norm. When did this discussion divert from doctor assisted suicide to normal able bodied individuals using doctor assisted suicide to commit suicide? You're not making any sense
You made the claim that "ALL people should have the right to self-determination." I would think that is when the discussion became about normal able bodied individuals having the right to use physician assisted suicide
i'm a c7 quad. meaning i have full use of my arms, not my fingers. i type with a thumb knuckle. was hit while at red light by vehicle going over 80mph. went back to engineering job 13 months later. 6 yrs later gave birth to my son. people need to get over media definitions and portrayals.
What gets lost in the pro-assisted suicide bullshit is that if you are young, healthy and nondisabled and threaten to jump off a bridge, you'll be pulled off, followed by a minimum 72-hour stay in the hospital and possibly longer. Assisted suicide advocates don't want to change that for young, healthy nondisabled people. They just want to change the law for the old, ill and disabled - and give suicidal people out of those groups *assistance* so they don't screw things up and live.
Wow now you're comparing apples to oranges here sndrake that's what you call a kansas city shuffle. Certainly there's a difference between people that are totally unhealthy and someone who just wants to commit suicide. Even so its not the prochoice people who made society that way
No, PoMo, you're the one who is separating humans into different categories. In your own breezy offhand and airheaded way, you're saying that bigotry is a valid basis for public policy. Sanctioning some suicides and condemning others is just that - bigotry.
No drakey you're the one confusing the issue. Where was I being a bigot? I do recall the RTL movement as being the ones who advocate strongly to rid people of choice. You're off on a random tangeant. You're comparing a terminally ill person to someone who just wants to off themselves. That's like saying a double amputee just has arm trouble.
sndrake, there's a reason why the suicide rate among the elderly has always been high. They know that life is only going to get worse, and on top of that, they could get a stroke at any time and be trapped in an existence that no one in their right mind would choose voluntarily.
Winjen, nice to make assertions with nothing to back it up. The rise in suicide rates is a fairly recent development. Elderly suicides have always had a higher *success* rate, since they have more experience than younger people. Still, it's only a minority of the elderly who want to commit suicide. Guess the majority must be clueless that their plight is hopeless, eh?
BTW drakey maybe you can tell me where the "pro-assisted suicide" advocates made the suicide watch rule? You act like they have something to do with it because they're not doing anything to change it. Once again drake you compare apples to oranges. Hell right now people can refuse medical treatment and die on their own but i don't see you complaining about that version of suicide
Tell that to the hundreds of disabled people who have had unsolicited DNRs put on their medical record. (DNR = Do NOT Resuscitate). You're so empassioned (fanatical?) about having the right to die, you seem to be intentionally oblivious to the justified concerns and fears of disabled that their lives may be prematurely ended because of economics or convenience. From your commens, I expect that you're non-disabled.
Which hundreds of patients who had DNRs? Give your source instead of spouting random information. That's like me saying every year there are 100s of deaths because of fanatic right to life abortion clinic bombers. No I'm for the right of self determination nor. Every person has the right to determined how they live their life and how they leave this world. From your comments I can tell you've never been around someone who had to make an end of life decision.
How would you like me to prove it? Names and phone numbers? I said I know them. How about you visit a disability board and read some statistics. I'm guessing you must not have any friends with a disability.
Cassie now you're just pulling stuff out of thin air. My own brother was disabled and he knew a lot better than you seem to let off what pain was like. He ended up in a nonrecoverable brain damaged state and we followed his oral directives to pull the plug. Once again this was his choice something you seem content to willingly take away. Statistics don't mean jack if there isn't any actual documented cases to back up your theories.
There are plenty of cases. Do the research. You asked me to prove it. I asked how. Simple question. Sorry about your brother. No, I would not deny his right to pull the plug. I am in severe pain 24/7. have been for 20 yrs. It's called neuropathic pain. You do not seem to understand. Anybody can deny medical care. Talk about apples and oranges, pogue, you just bit an orange.
The only one biting oranges here is you cass. You're making arguments that do not relate. If you're going to make such claims cass its normal for you to actually prove what you say instead of having everyone else do your research for you.
I asked you how you would like me to prove it? You never answered. I am talking people I know. I don't need any research done for me. I've done plenty as well as lived it for 20 years.
After watching your video nor I've only come to realize you know less about the meaning of euthanasia than you let off. You're talking about creating a society where a person doesn't get to choose how they leave this life. By your own definition you'd be saying that Euthanasia is currently legalized in the state of Texas as medical treatment is allowed to be withdrawn against the objection of the patient since they cannot pay. Did you cry a river for Sun Hudson?
Keeping assisted suicide illegal will not prevent able-bodied people from killing themselves. If Assisted suicide remains illegal, non-disabled people will have the ability, and as such, the opportunity to end their lives prematurely. Nothing is being taken away from non-disabled people. Keeping euthanasia and assisted suicide illegal ensures that disabled people have the same protection as non-disabled people.
Every person regardless of Euthanasia would have the same rights as non-disabled people. You've shown yourself to use personal beliefs over dispassioned logic. Right now every patient has the right to refuse medical treatment. However a conservative republican who is in the white house passed a law in texas where the patient's income determines whether a doctor should treat or not
Exactly Jen they're attacking a position that no one openly advocates in the mainstream. They're trying to push their will onto the American people by using control. A lot of the RTL activists in the Terri Schiavo case cared nothing about written directives and thought that people shouldn't have the right to withhold their own medical treatment.
nah, you're wrong. terri schiavo does count. her husbands memory is not reliable. he couldn't remember her wishes until it was jogged by a multi-million dollar settlement for her care.
No sal you're wrong again. The wishes came up in 1993. You would have faulted Michael if he had pulled the plug right then. Now you fault him because he actually had hope. You notice the schindlers never attacked terri's wishes and instead tried to focus on the PVS diagnosis which they agreed with back when they thought they'd win money
All of that money was gone, because he used it all on Terri's care.
Also, if it was about the money, why did he turn down an offer for over a million dollars to hand Terri over to her parents so they could look after her?
bull. the court gave him permission to pay lawyers, namely Felos, with Terri's money. which he did. read court testimony. michael's memory is, by his own admission, not good.
Nor your comment alone shows more about your own fear and hostility towards allowing people the right to self-determination. I've had a loved one who went through an end of life decision with no hope of recovery and I know how difficult it is to pull the plug. So stop trying to make claims about someone you have no idea about. Once again this is about a person's own choice you'd rather a person not have a choice as to how they live their life or how they leave it?
In a world without prejudice and professional power, it may be simply about a person's choice. You seem to be oblivious to our society's devaluation of disabled people.
You sound pretty fanatical here. How often does this happen? Do you have actual facts or are you pulling absurd made up statistics out of thin air. Even if it did happen it is a small minority and has nothing to do with the legalization of euthanasia
- In the researchers' opinion, the DNR requests were inappropriate (there was no legal basis for DNR orders for these patients) and arbitrary (the same request was sent to all of the families at the same time, regardless of the patient's current health status).
- While only two families (6.7%) of 30 families who responded refused consent to the implementation of DNR, all these patients' charts were labelled "Do Not Resuscitate."
Thus, it was the physician and not the patient or the family who played the dominant role in this vital decision.
So you're telling me most of the families okayed the DNRs. So the study does not support your opinion. The families acted as a proxy and gave consent for the DNRs those who did not give consent did not have a DNR put in the patients chart. Forgive me but were you trying to make an actual point?
Read the data again, Po. The first point says NONE of the families requested the DNR. 100% of the doctor, without the consent the families, assigned a DNR to a disabled patient. The research shows that medical personnel do independnetly place DNRs on disabled people. A fact you disputed above.
Doctors recommend DNRs Norm. The study you pointed to according to you said that only 2 families didn't give consent. The rest gave consent meaning the DNRs were okayed by the families. The ones that didn't give consent did not get a DNR. You originally stated people were being euthanized without consent. A DNR is not the same as euthanization
No it said doctors suggested DNRs there was only one such case in that study where the doctor didn't get permission from the family for the DNR and it was posted in the patients chart. Even so a DNR is not an active "killing" of the patient as you pretent it to be and has nothing to do with euthanasia
No I said that doctors couldn't force one into a chart like you claim they can only recommend it and the patient or a proxy can okay it or deny it. It is rare for it to be inputted without consent. Even so Norm. A DNR is not relevant to the debate as normal people put DNR's into their charts all the time. This does not mean they are suicidal.
ok, google david glass, 12 yr old whose mom had to resuscitate him in hospital cause docs wouldn't. look at laws in canada which expressly say docs can put dnr on chart w/o consent. chk out futile care laws and hosp. ethics committees.
Oh yes futile care laws like the one signed by this president while he was governor of texas? This has more to do with the greedy choice of insurance companies not wanting to pay for patients. Once again you guys are jumping all over the place on this one. We went from Euthanasia to DNRs which are only active if a patient goes into cardiac arrest. When are we going to get back on the original subject?
when are you going to see the connection? when are you going to see the trend? perhaps when you develop a disability yourself. nobody is jumping all over the place, except possibly you. hmm...now how could ins. companies not wanting to pay influence dnr orders? that's a toughie.
Its common practice for medical personnel to put DNRs and "Slow Codes" on disabled people's charts. The term "initiated" in the study means that the DNR was put on the chart, not that the doctor recommended it. The parents were contacted after the DNR was on the chart.
Um yeah Norm you obviously have no clue what a DNR is what does this have to do with Euthanasia? DNRs only take effect when the patient say has their heart stop it is not an active attempt to "kill" the patient like you seem to think
you have not checked out the debate in the medical community as to what dnr means exactly. there is an ongoing debate amongst drs exactly what it means. you are the one w/o a clue. and dnr IS put on charts w/o patient's or family knowledge. subscribe to the lancet.
DNRs only take affect upon cardiac arrest. Debate in the medical community? Hardly you're talking about a few fringe people trying to redetermine what things mean. A DNR is plain and simple for most of the medical community.
You're not making sense here norm you went from saying a DNR was considered to it being initiated. Which is it how many actual DNRs were put in the patients records?
btw, you seemed to have missed this statement from the study quoted above so i'll repeat it: "The request was initiated by the attending physician in 100% of the cases." do you understand that the doctors put a dnr on the charts w/o consulting the families or patient in ALL 36 cases?
Well Uppitycrip has said it. Besides i know a number of people who write with mouthsticks or their feet. One without arms or legs. All live rich lives and would not want euthanasia for such "suffering". A high % of people want euthanasia for loss of "independence." It's a mistaken idea about what suffering is.
It was just a simple question uppity got snippity. Even so when people talk about euthanasia they aren't talking about forcing anyone to do anything. This is all about choice.
So, PoMo,if a woman in an abusive relationship says she want assistance commiting suicide, should we respect her choice to uie or should we steer her towards getting counseling in a women's center? Saying "it's all about choice" fails to recoginize the complexity of the issues.
IM NOT ATTACKING RELIGIONS....IM ATTACKING IT WHEN IT TURNS INTO A FORM OF "CONTROL". I MEAN......IF YOU BELIEVE IN GOD AND IT HELPS YOU GET THROUGH YOUR DAY.....I DONT SEE ANYTHING WRONG WITH THAT....BUT IF YOUR TRYING TO DENY SOMEONE "PAINLESS ASSISSTED SUICIDE" BECAUSE YOU THINK ITS A "SIN" THEN THATS JUST STRAIGHT SELFISH......MEANING THAT YOU NO LONGER LOOK TO RELIGION AS A WAY TO FEEL GOOD BUT AS A WAY TO IMPOSE YOUR BELIEFS ON OTHERS......JUST ANOTHER STORY OF TYPICAL HUMAN BULLSHIT
JohnLeguizamo1 1 year ago
EVERYONES LIVES ARE DIFFERENT....THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE LOVE TO "GENERALIZE". DISREGARDING THE FACT THAT WE LIVE 2 SEPERATE LIVES, THE OTHER PERSON WILL SAY, "I CLIMBED OUT OF DEPRESSION SO YOU CAN". THAT STATEMENT MIGHT WORK ON SOME PEOPLE BUT FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE JUST TIRED OF LIFE AND ALL ITS BULLSHIT, IT WONT WORK. THESE TYPE OF PEOPLE LOVE TO PROJECT THEIR OWN STORY AND TRY TO GENERALIZE YOURS WITH THEIRS.......FRANKLY.....ITS BULLSHIT....
JohnLeguizamo1 1 year ago
AND PEOPLE SEEM TO THINK ALL DEPRESSION CAN BE CURED.....OF COURSE MANY HAVE CLIMBED OUT OF DEPRESSION BUT....MANY MANY PEOPLE CANNOT. AND THESE PEOPLE ARE LIVING IN PAIN WITH NO WAY OUT BECAUSE THE "LAW" DOESNT ALLOW IT....ITS BULLSHIT.....ITS EVEN MORE RIDICULOUS HOW SOME PEOPLE HAVE NEVER BEEN REALLY DOWN JUST GO ALONG WITH THE BANDWAGON BY AGREEING WITH ANTI-EUTHANASIA PEOPLE. BUT THERE ARE ALSO PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN DOWN AND SAY YOU CAN GET OUT OF IT....ALL I HAVE TO SAY TO THOSE PEOPLE IS
JohnLeguizamo1 1 year ago
YOU SEE PEOPLE PICK RELIGIONS BASED ON THEIR OWN PERSONAL EXPERIENCES. DEPENDING ON WHERE THEY GREW UP, WHO TAUGHT THEM, WHAT EVENTS THEY SEE ARE HAPPENING AROUND THEM. THAT IS WHY THERE IS NO 1 RELIGION. THERE ARE MANY RELIGIONS BECAUSE RELIGIONS ARE JUST WAYS OF THOUGHT TO HELP YOU GET THROUGH THE DAY. RELIGIONS ARE BASICALLLY JUST THE "ANCIENT WAY" OF THERAPY. PSYCHOLOGY AND PSYCHIATRY IS THE NEW MODERN FOR OF THERAPY FOR THE HUMAN MIND. THINK ABOUT IT.
JohnLeguizamo1 1 year ago
BECAUSE THEY UNDERSTAND LIFE THRU THE "SCREEN" OF CHRISTIANS BELIEFS. SO IF WE LEGALIZE ASSISTED SUICIDE FOR ANYONE NOT JUST THE TERMINALLY ILL......THEN THESE TYPE OF PEOPLE WOULD LITERALLY GET OFFENDED AND TRY TO PUT YOU IN JAIL. BECAUSE OF THEIR OWN SELFISH BELIEFS. I MEAN.....THERE ARE SO MANY RELIGIONS IN THE WORLD.....WHICH ONE IS THE RIGHT NOW? THERE IS NOT F UCKEN "RIGHT" ONE PEOPLE.....ITS WHATEVER YOU WANT TO BELIEVE OR MAKES SENSE TO YOU
JohnLeguizamo1 1 year ago
@JohnLeguizamo1 TURN OFF THE FUCKING CAPS LOCK KEY YOU FUCKING INBRED DONKEY FUCKING SHEEP FONDLING ASS REAMING PIECE OF CUNT DISCHARGE. Seriously dude...
Surpulicious 10 months ago
i dont like to use the world christians because its a big generalization. Right now im talking about specific christians that do not believe in euthanasia because of their "own beliefs". Can you see how SELFISH that is? Behind all the words that this type of christian is saying. that person is not saying its really a sin.....that person is REALLY SAYING...."YOUR INTERFERING WITH MY BELIEFS". THINK ABOUT IT.....it would DESTROY their "belief(something that makes their life worth living".
JohnLeguizamo1 1 year ago
IF SOMEONE REALLY WANTS TO DIE.....I SAY...ITS THEIR CHOICE. WE ALL HAVE DIFFERENT BELIEFS. SOME PEOPLE REALLY BELIEVE IT IS THE ONLY WAY OUT AND THE ONLY PERSON THAT KNOWS BEST IS YOURSELF.....YOU ARE THE ONE THAT KNOWS WHAT YOU NEED NOT ANY DOCTOR, POLITICIAN, PARENT, FRIEND........
JohnLeguizamo1 1 year ago
People Love to say that Euthanasia is "morally wrong"
tell me......what defines what is right or wrong?
ALL LIFE IS BULLSHIT.....ITS JUST PEOPLE TRYING TO GAIN "POWER" BY ATTACHING TO SUCH IDEAS THAT HELPED THEM IN THEIR LIVES SO THEY THINK IT MIGHT HELP OTHERS......SUCH AS NOT ALL BUT CERTAIN CHRISTIANS BELIEVE SUICIDE IS A SIN. WHO THE HELL ARE YOU TO TELL ME THAT THIS IS A SIN.....I CAN TURN IT OVER ON YOU AND SAY.....YOU EATING MEAT IS A VIOLENT ACT.....PEOPLE ARE ALWAYS FULL OF SHIT.
JohnLeguizamo1 1 year ago
Correction, the company wasn't Humanitas, It was called Dignitas & the name of the program is suicide tourist.
xSlappykinkaidx 1 year ago
Make it more of a hassle to euthanize than to treat. I think it would help ensure that euthanasia is only used for those who genuinly want & need it.
xSlappykinkaidx 1 year ago
Proof that not only does the patient consent, but also fully understands the proceedure. & not just some waiver that they or thier POA signs, but a written, typed or verbal statement as to thier understanding of what euthana is but also why they want to be euthanized, backed by medical history supporting thier reason. That way doctors cant get rid of people they deem "not worth saving" if for no other reason than to avoid the beaurocracy & red tape that would be required to do so, in other words
xSlappykinkaidx 1 year ago
without assistance, (this same argument also applies to things like stem cell research too). However if someone is being kept artificially alive, & left to simple natural law without any man made intervention, would die. Then that also is playing God. So it does create a conflict where there is a clear benefit to some, but a grave risk to others. I think that it should be legal, but with specific & rigid qualifiers to ensure that it is only reserved for cases where it will help WITH documented
xSlappykinkaidx 1 year ago
Who was confined to a wheelchair & had to breathe through a ventilator went through the process from start to finish, including legal red tape & extensive travel to be euthanized by a company in Switzerland, (I think), by a company called Humanitas. & I can see that to some euthenasia may be a great relief. Especially in the case of those who are on life support with no hope of recovery. That man posed the argument that people claim you are playing God in choosing to take your own life, with or
xSlappykinkaidx 1 year ago
that they simply feel that they would be better off dead. Especially if they feel like they are being a burden on thier family or friends. So yes I agree that in leagalizing euthenasia, that would be a very real concern.
However on the other hand, I have also seen those who, due to injury or terminal illness, are in so much pain that they want to die. I cant recall the title of the program, or the name of the person that was the focus of it, But I recall watching a PBS World program wherin a
xSlappykinkaidx 1 year ago
Well it is a catch 22, there is no question about that. One one side, I can see Norman's concern about euthenasia being used as a means to "dispose of people not worth saving", and I do applaud him for that. Because, although the goal of those of us who support people with disabilities is to support them & help them lead thier own lives, sadly there are some who still are unable to communicate thier consent to a DNR. Or they simply have been demoralized so much by people pitying thier disability
xSlappykinkaidx 1 year ago
At least Al-Qaeda's victims tend to die instantly, and therefore painlessly.
JPWMT 1 year ago
True newspaper story. Because of Medicare and Medicade cuts from Obama and his new legal Health Care Plan,Indiana got major cuts and unfortunately many with severe disabilities in nursing homes and group homes will be removed,and what's the unkind replies or response from ALL Indiana health care and/or nursing home and group care providers to the families of the poor disabled,retarded and crippled patients? "Take them to a homeless shelter!" From the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette newspaper.
dragonknight1984 1 year ago
@dragonknight1984 The HOLOCAUST continues! In Amerika,we don't really give a frak at all for all the unfortunate patients who are crippled,paralized,blind,retarded,old and unable to walk and talk. Belive it or not,I belive ALL American hospitals atre much like Nazi consentration camps and Soviet Gulags! No matter who's running Amerika,Democrats and Republicians DON'T care. The ones running Washington DC are not the ones reading Hitler's Mein Kamph but still carrying Hitler's tradition, Sig Heil!
dragonknight1984 1 year ago
At least Al-Qaeda`s victims tend to die instantly, and therefore painlessly.
JPWMT 1 year ago
google Doe's Account, mindblowing.
Wintblash 1 year ago
My solution keeeep them alive and collect there checks. Money does grow on trees after all.
Howard Stern
HowardSternn 1 year ago
is it a joke. causes its hilarious
joeschmoescupojo 2 years ago
This is ridiculous. It's like saying allowing abortions will lead to the legal murdering of unwanted children.
Why is choosing to die illegal? You're pretending a liberty granting proposition would take away our rights... It's Orwellian.
LukeShetler 2 years ago
12 gauge shells are cheap, I don't get needing doctors care for that?
IronicallyVague 2 years ago
Loved the video and the song was great what's the title of it? I am disabled and I want to choose my own death. I am for euthanasia if the person specified how they wanted to die, not just what a Dr. felt like doing.
Healingscars114 2 years ago 2
The problem with that.. Is if you make what is effectively suicide legal, how much of an effect will it have on societies opinion of it. Suddenly, people think it's a valid way out. All the teenagers, all the mentally ill, all the people who can get better but don't give it a chance
rawrgoesthelioness 2 years ago
Suicide is legal. It's helping people with it thats illegal
joeschmoescupojo 2 years ago
suicide isn't legal where I live.
rawrgoesthelioness 2 years ago
That's a fact, unless society can get us to kill ourselves first. Oh. I'm sorry. Did I say that out loud?
kalacaw 2 years ago
When I go, I hope I look like I went 10 rounds with the Angel of Death. What is that poem, "Do not go gentle into that good night.." by Dylan Thomas?
Having walked that final road with my parents, I know it is a privilege to share those last hours. It was NOT an inconvenience to anyone who loved them. No one else should matter.
And...as it choice it is totally non-refundable!
pmartin03461 2 years ago
I feel disabled people should have the right to choose whether they want to die or not. It's the people's choice, not the doctor's. Why should doctors poison people against their will?!?!
SurfingSinger 2 years ago 2
Please, it can't possibly be that bad. I have a four-year old autistic son who I would doabsolutely ANYTHING for (except euthanize) and I couldn't bear him growing up thinking the world is so terrible he just wants to leave it. Right now he's the sweetest, happiest person I know and I hope he'll always keep that. Despite his problems,the world is a wonderful and beautiful place and I hope he and everyone else will see that. Life, even disabled life, is too precious to give up.
lizbyu 2 years ago
I'm so sorry for all the disabled in washington state, we got beat so bad.
acow352 3 years ago
Choice, choice, choice. It's nice to know that as only 4 percent of students with learning disorders go on to a four year college, I can now legally kill myself under a proposed canadian bill that would make euthanasia legal for people suffering from psychological conditions. What a choice! Go pro-choicers!
Progo35 3 years ago
This bill sounds like an opening of the floodgates for the Eugenics Crew. They has forced sterilisations of people with disability in Canada in the past. So Eugenics as always is kicking around in its cesspool ready to poison all if it can con people into letting it.
Isochest 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I am pro euthanasia...
What would happen to us if we don't have the free choice of live of death for our self?
Loxandra1312 3 years ago
Euthanasia is murder.Don't send people quickly 2 hell.The temporary pain will end but the eternal in the lake of fire will begin.Come back 2 christ and ask 4 help.Thou shalt not kill.(Exodus 20:13)
VictorShmoon 3 years ago
Palliative care's new slogan should be "Because 75% is good enough."
Study Finds 25% of Terminal Cancer Patients Suffer Significantly.
Suffering with Advanced Cancer, Journal of Clinical Oncology, 25 (3), May 1, 2007, pp 1691-1697.
Perrine234 3 years ago
Anti-lifers (falsely called "pro-lifers" as they are against the life of the human being involved).You all talk about Religious, Science...But you don't understand that euthanasia have to do with free choice!!!A person isn't FREE if he/she have the control of his/her BODY & MIND!!!
Zoya9may 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Euthanasia is murder.Don't send people quickly 2 hell.The temporary pain will end but the eternal in the lake of fire will begin.Come back 2 christ and ask 4 help.Thou shalt not kill.(Exodus 20:13)
VictorShmoon 3 years ago
Sometimes people confuse personal issues with political ones. By making laws about this, it is no longer just a personal choice. It depends on others choices, and actually doctors who work with terminally ill say that when they address pain issues and depressions NONE of their patients want help dying anymore! Sometimes it's more about the fear of future that makes people want to die. They just need our support to LIVE not to die.
donemyownresearch 3 years ago
That is $%#$%#%^&#$%&.Everyone have the right he/she want to do with his /her body
(life but the creator)
Yadichick81 "Faith is believing something you know ain't true." - Mark Twain
Zoya9may 3 years ago
That is $%#$%#%^&#$%&.Everyone have the right he/she want to do with his /her body
(life but the creator)
Yadichick81 "Faith is believing something you know ain't true." - Mark Twain
Zoya9may 3 years ago
You can't trust the goverment the people...they are not perfect..this is like a loaded gun. God is our only answer. People who don't want to die might get killed. The system is wicked.
Yadichick81 3 years ago
I'm not preventing you from sitting in a running car in your garage and having a peaceful, dignified death. I'm deeply concerned that the widely held catastrophised view of disability has led many health professionals to presume that a life with a severe disability is not worth living . SASs such, unsolicited DNR orders are often placed on disabled patients' files. Your trust in health professionals may be naive. Read the experiences of other disabled people shown below.
normemma 4 years ago
Why shouldn't people have a right to choose if they want to live or not? Pro-choice is about people's autonomy, not about the health care system being "pro-death" or against the disabled. Nice scare tactics pal...
TBOBT1985 3 years ago
Why shouldn't people have a right to choose if they want to live or not? Pro-choice is about people's autonomy, not about the health care system being "pro-death" or against the disabled. Nice scare tactics pal...
TBOBT1985 3 years ago
Why do disabled people need you to nanny them?
YourTubeSpellChecker 4 years ago
Jack Kevorkian was a great doctor who only assisted peolple in doing what couldn't do themselves: the right to die. In fact, when a person survives suicide, he/she has never ever been charged with attemptive murder.
surfboyabry007 4 years ago
The Oregon PAS law seems pretty good... the doctors don't get to push the button, they can only prescribe you the lethal pills (barbiturates). So, you don't get all these nightmare scenarios of helpless people being murdered by Dr Death.
RescueMich 4 years ago
This vid is plain stupid. Well you go ahead en suffer to dead when it ever comes to that. I want the right to die if there's only suffering ahead. It was never meant to kill off people, it's a way to prevent suffering. It's your own choice, it's your right and it's humane.
marksdump 4 years ago
Instead of going though a procedure
I would just shoot a bullet through my head
all would be over
azmhyr 4 years ago
so if euthanasia becomes illegalized, then how can a person be free to make a personal choice to end his sufferings!
whats next, give away the parents rights on how to descipline their children? because they use spanking!?
no one should dictate what goes on with personal lives.
people should only but in, on special occasions, like opression and sufferings!
fogfrogblog 4 years ago
Both life and death should be respected. There is no either/or answer to the two sides to this issue, and I am not trying to be wishy washy on the subject. I have seen some horrific things done by doctors to both prolong and shorten life. Truly, when the 'helpless' life in the womb was disrespected, no other form of life was far behind.
machiecat 4 years ago
Just because you find dignity in suffering doesn't mean that everyone does. And it certainly doesn't mean that everyone should be forced to suffer until their "natural" death.
Perrine234 4 years ago
Uh..I never claimed there is dignity in suffering. I'm not against euthanasia. I'm against LEGALIZING euthanasia. Given that DNR's and "slow codes" are commonly assigned to disabled people without their consent, its evident many medical professionals as well as many in society believe that disabled people aren't worth saving. Legalizing euthanasia would be the first step towards the genocide of disabled people.
normemma 4 years ago
But people can already commit suicide by refusing artificial feeding and life-saving/sustaining treatment. Should the right to refuse treatment be revoked?
Perrine234 4 years ago
Sigh... Do your homework. Refusing medical treatment is already legal. No one is questioning that. Its legalizing the intentional initiation of death (irrespective of consent) that will jeopardize the lives of sick, elderly, and disabled people.
normemma 4 years ago
Then why don't you campaign against terminal sedation without consent? That's carried out every day, but no one gets prosecuted.
And if consent is important to you, why can't we have VOLUNTARY euthanasia where the patient, not the doctor, is in control?
Perrine234 4 years ago
@normemma Personally, I think everyone should have the right to die. If they don't want to live, it should be their choice, why have them around to suffer and make the rest of us miserable.
Surpulicious 10 months ago
@normemma what if we legalize it only under that persons consent.....then how will it be genocide? alot of old people want to die too.....shit alot of "people" want to die.
JohnLeguizamo1 7 months ago
How cruel certain people are to not let certain people who are suffering die,
those people think they know what your going through,
what the fuck do you know about the pain im in, your not in by body,
i dont know if its them not understanding or them being selfish(selfish reason to want to save someones life), but all i know is its fucked up the government does not provide a painless way to kill yourself, leaving you to go to extremes to do it which makes it even harder to do.....
JohnLeguizamo1 7 months ago
The point is missed. Listen to how he talks about doctors who are trained in palliative care. There are so many ways pain and suffering can be alleviated now, but doctors, nurses and family members need to be trained in these methods. There is another side to this story, which is keeping people with only a very short time to live alive with methods which are painful, invasive and horrific, and I do mean horrific!
machiecat 4 years ago 2
Great video & lyrics! KJeep up the great work & open some eyes!
PHEELINA 4 years ago
What a crock of distorted bullshit. Another example of whiny liberals exploiting a non-issue with lies. What makes you think death is so horrible anyhow? It's just the other end of being born and an inescapable fact of life for each and every one of us. Prolonging an ending life for a year or two so somebody can keep on suffering is ridiculous.
CapnPegleg 4 years ago
Euthanasia is forced on people through futile care laws. Doctors can stop treating patients without the consent of their families. There have also been cases where dehydrating patients have had requests for food denied because they were not "rational." Look it up on Google with an open mind. It is a HUGE issue, and the video is saying that death is not the ultimate answer to suffering.
Progo35 4 years ago
That's a lot of hooey. People should be ready to die when they get old, sick or disabled. I'm not saying we should kill everybody that reaches a certain age, but there should be no such thing as life-sustaining machines or hospice. Hospitals and doctors rack up obscene amounts of dollars while the taxpayers can't pay their bills. Look at the big picture. Turning the world into a giant old-folks day care center is no good for the rest of society.
TMWKK 4 years ago
You mean you'd be willing to kill yourself for the rest of society? Thanks a whole bunch! I guess we can save on tax dollars we pay for any public services you might have used.
Progo35 4 years ago
You're damn right I would! I'm disabled and living on social security. I've tried to kill myself three times already...twice in one day. Check out my channel and you'll see. The last time I tried, I broke my leg. They sent me to the county hospital. I got an invoice the other day. The fucking hospital charged 75 grand for that leg! That brings the total up to about a half a million dollars over the last four or five years. Your sarcasm is wasted on me.
CapnPegleg 4 years ago
The "TMWKK" comment above was mine. I was mistakenly signed in to my other YouTube account when I wrote it.
CapnPegleg 4 years ago
I don't know if my email went through to you, as the site seems to be having issues, but yes, I was replying to your TMWKK comment, which I assumed was someone without a disability.
I do empathize with your situation, as I have a disability as well and recieve SS benefits. It's just that I do feel that our society devalues the disabled and that that is wrong.
Progo35 4 years ago
Moreover, I feel that those around you should take you to the hospital when you attempt to harm yourself out of basic respect and concern for you as an individual. I would hope that those around you would support you and try to help improve your life rather than encouraging you to kill yourself.
Progo35 4 years ago
I, too, have had times when I've felt that it would be better to be in heaven-or even unconscious-than continue suffering. But that is why I don't want others in our society to take freedom of choice away from anyone by insisting that they have to die, which devalues life and encourages despair.
Progo35 4 years ago
Finally, I don't think that death is horrible, especially when someone has been suffering for a long time. Because of my personal belief in God, I do look forward to a world where I will not be disabled, lonely, or devalued.
Progo35 4 years ago
Uh, Cap'n... liberals? They're the ones who are ALL FOR euthanasia, abortion (including the partial birth variety), and any other excuse to kill people "legally."
MaskedMan66 4 years ago
Is anybody dying tonight? Youtube for "If you die tonight"
benroeb 4 years ago
Wow- sorry, but I just couldn't sit through this music.
Dagibit 4 years ago
I wish my medical ethics prof played this for us. Nice summary of that side of the PAS/euthanasia debate!
WesternWhiteWolf 4 years ago
i believe euthanasia is only appropriate when someone is terminally ill. When they have advancded stages of cancer or lou gherigs disease or something. If someone is depressed it is no reason for assisted suicide
kwikimart579 4 years ago
It's good when they get euthanasia when they are told they will not survive - many times doctors are wrong: sucked in sick people :D
URAGR8M8 4 years ago
No government can tell me that I don't have the right to die. It doesn't matter if I'm terminally ill, or if I'm just psyhologically depressed, if I want to die then I'm going to die. It's a sad day when the government gets so involved that they force people to stay alive even in worse case scenarios when there is no way a patient is going to get better. Nothing has the right to tell people that they cannot die.
Discord555 5 years ago
Plus there will be less emos :D
URAGR8M8 4 years ago
To finish my statement: Utilitarianism knows nothing of love -- as Peter Singer discovered when he found himself lavishing money and care on his Alzheimer's-stricken mother, something that's completely against his own philosophy.
donemyownresearch 5 years ago
Well that shows what a load of crap Singer talks. We've been through all that in the past: All you get is a bunch of sadistic psychopaths satisfying their deviant urges killing people and making everyone's lives hell: Who's happy other than the psychos? What's the point of being alive in such a barren world able bodied, healthy, physically attractive and gifted: A living hell: Only a psychopath would see no wrong in that.
Isochest 3 years ago
Consider this: and please, check it out for yourself! Peter Singer, the famous utilitarian philosopher from Princeton, and his argument that societies ought to spend their resources creating the maximum happiness for the greatest number. Singer's logic would urge us to think about how many starving children could be fed for the cost of a disabled child's tuition.
donemyownresearch 5 years ago
Exactly - by removing the weak from society we can focus on those who are fit and will survive.
URAGR8M8 4 years ago
Go to hell, you fascist.
Progo35 4 years ago
(In response to URAGR8M8). I'm not being close minded: that IS how the Nazis saw the disabled: as social detriments).
Progo35 4 years ago
What if it turned out, that I, the disabled person, was much more of an asset to sociaty than you? Who gets to decide who has a right to live? What if you where deemed weak yourself. Life sucks from time to time for all of us. Would you, if you valued your life go quietly to your doom? I know, I wouldn't.
nergregga 4 years ago
In a 1994 study, Scheper & Duursma reviewed 1400 cases of euthanasia in Holland and found the majority of people were "assisted to die" without any explicit request (N = 1000) in comparison to those who request assisted suicide (N = 400).
normemma 5 years ago
Singer would argue against letting Max come into the world at all. And that argument has infiltrated our culture to an almost unbelievable extent. Ninety percent of couples who learn that their unborn children have a disability end up aborting them. Singer takes that mentality a step further, however, arguing that it's ethical to kill these children after they're born.
Utilitarianism knows nothing of love -- as Peter
donemyownresearch 5 years ago
Why? Are you saying handicapted people should not have the right to live?
MrGavster 5 years ago
Many normal able bodied people desiring suicide want physician assistance because they believe it will be painless, dignified, and a botched suicide would be less likely. But why a normal able bodied would want physical assistance isn't relevant. The question is, "Do you think ALL people should have the LEGAL right to physician assisted suicide, or should the LEGAL right to physician assisted suicide only be offered to sick, elderly, and disabled people?
normemma 5 years ago
You sound like you're speculating again Norm. Where's this supposed "study" that says that normal able bodied people would want doctor assisted suicide. This sounds merely like your own personal beliefs and not what is relevant to the debate. You're throwing out the same red herring again as if it was applicable
PogueMoran 5 years ago
oh for god's sake. chk out kevorkian's "clients." geesh. you insult ppl, ask for studies, yet offer none of your own and apparently have no disability experience 0f your own. cough up your own studies or your experiences as a disabled person. ever visit an er as a dis person? i have many times. yes, you have no idea why i brought that up, i'm sure.
cassie711 5 years ago
what about kevorkian's clients? Most of them were terminally ill and killed themselves. You make a stupid assumption that i have no experience with disabled people. Once again Cassie you're way out in left field. what you just stated had nothing to do with norm's crazy notion of dr assisted suicide for healthy people
PogueMoran 5 years ago
kevorkian: 60% were not terminally ill. i call that most. i said you have no disability exp. of YOUR OWN, i.e. you are not disabled.
cassie711 5 years ago
And yet these people took their own lives. Technically they committed suicide themselves all he did was build the machine while they pushed the button. That is why Kevorkian was so hard to prosecute cassie. He never actively killed a patient until recently
PogueMoran 5 years ago
oh brother. you are a bit ignorant on this topic. and you still don't see the connection. btw, why not address the fact you were wrong about "most" of his clients being terminally ill?? once again, you are wrong. why are you here? is this a game?
cassie711 5 years ago
Holding a gun up to a guys head and he tells you to pull the trigger is murder, not suicide.
MrGavster 5 years ago
Po, there are many variations on the RTD position. Some people maintain ALL people should have the legal right to PAS. Others say that only terminally ill people should have the right to PAS. Still others claim that the legal right should be extended to terminally ill, sick, elderly, and disabled people. I'm just trying to figure out what your position is.
I'm just trying to figure out what w
normemma 5 years ago
I'll let you flounder around on this norm as it is not relevant to the debate. Remember no matter which position I take you'll instantly attack it.
PogueMoran 5 years ago
All Right, Po, let's take this one logical premise at a time. Do you think that terminally ill people and severely disabled people (like your brother) should have the legal right to request physician assisted suicide?
normemma 5 years ago
Look, I'm not saying that you shouldn't have followed your brother's wishes in discontinuing his treatment, but I do think you are ignoring fundamental facts about how the euthanasia ethic affects medical care in our country. For one very serious case, look up "Emilio Gonzales" and "Futile Care" online.
Progo35 4 years ago
The preceding message was directed at P.M.
Progo35 4 years ago
It's actually not a straw man argument (i.e. unrealistic or improbable example). Its quite common for abused women to want to commit suicide. You're proposing that we pass legislation that would provide people with assistance to die. I'm simply asking who would be included in this legislation: all people who ask to die or only elderly, sick, and disabled people who ask to die?
normemma 5 years ago
yes it is a straw man you're using a totally weak argument there norm. That's like having a taste test between colas and having Coke take on orange juice. It is not related. You're talking about the difference between terminally ill patients and suicidal healthy people. They have nothing to do with what is supported in the mainstream.
PogueMoran 5 years ago
I'm just trying to understand your position. 3 comments above, you said, "people should choose for themselves." All I'm asking is, "Which people? Everyone or only terminally ill people?"
normemma 5 years ago
I've already given you the answer multiple times you threw out the red herring of comparing suicide of healthy people to terminally ill patients easing their own pain which was not relevant. All people should have the right to self-determination without government intervention. You're continuing to make a non-logical argument norm no one is arguing healthy vs terminally ill here but you
PogueMoran 5 years ago
I'm confused. You're saying that "ALL people should have the right to self-determination without government intervention." But then you say suicidal healthy people are "red herrings" and should not be included in the discussion. So, who are you saying should have the legal right to assisted suicide, all people or only terminally ill people? I'm not making any claim, I'm simply asking you to clarify your position.
normemma 5 years ago
Norm again you aren't using any logic. I said your argument about comparing suicidal healthy people to the real issue of euthanasia is a red herring not the people themselves. They shouldn't be included in the discussion as normal healthy people don't need doctor assisted suicide
PogueMoran 5 years ago
you are making claims. This discussion has nothing to do with people who are healthy committing suicide and for you to throw that out there is a red herring to divert attention away from the original subject. Tell me why would normal healthy people need assisted suicide?
PogueMoran 5 years ago
So, you're saying that legislation should only apply to terminally ill people who are unable to commit suicide. All other "normal healthy people" don't need legislation because they have the ability to kill themselves, right?
normemma 5 years ago
You're making no sense norm. When did this discussion divert from doctor assisted suicide to normal able bodied individuals using doctor assisted suicide to commit suicide? You're not making any sense
PogueMoran 5 years ago
You made the claim that "ALL people should have the right to self-determination." I would think that is when the discussion became about normal able bodied individuals having the right to use physician assisted suicide
normemma 5 years ago
You could also paint everyone with such a broad stroke. Each person would define pain differently and to paint such a broad stroke is erroronious
PogueMoran 5 years ago
i'm a c7 quad. meaning i have full use of my arms, not my fingers. i type with a thumb knuckle. was hit while at red light by vehicle going over 80mph. went back to engineering job 13 months later. 6 yrs later gave birth to my son. people need to get over media definitions and portrayals.
cassie711 5 years ago
What gets lost in the pro-assisted suicide bullshit is that if you are young, healthy and nondisabled and threaten to jump off a bridge, you'll be pulled off, followed by a minimum 72-hour stay in the hospital and possibly longer. Assisted suicide advocates don't want to change that for young, healthy nondisabled people. They just want to change the law for the old, ill and disabled - and give suicidal people out of those groups *assistance* so they don't screw things up and live.
sndrake 5 years ago
Wow now you're comparing apples to oranges here sndrake that's what you call a kansas city shuffle. Certainly there's a difference between people that are totally unhealthy and someone who just wants to commit suicide. Even so its not the prochoice people who made society that way
PogueMoran 5 years ago
No, PoMo, you're the one who is separating humans into different categories. In your own breezy offhand and airheaded way, you're saying that bigotry is a valid basis for public policy. Sanctioning some suicides and condemning others is just that - bigotry.
sndrake 5 years ago
No drakey you're the one confusing the issue. Where was I being a bigot? I do recall the RTL movement as being the ones who advocate strongly to rid people of choice. You're off on a random tangeant. You're comparing a terminally ill person to someone who just wants to off themselves. That's like saying a double amputee just has arm trouble.
PogueMoran 5 years ago
sndrake, there's a reason why the suicide rate among the elderly has always been high. They know that life is only going to get worse, and on top of that, they could get a stroke at any time and be trapped in an existence that no one in their right mind would choose voluntarily.
winstonjen 5 years ago
Winjen, nice to make assertions with nothing to back it up. The rise in suicide rates is a fairly recent development. Elderly suicides have always had a higher *success* rate, since they have more experience than younger people. Still, it's only a minority of the elderly who want to commit suicide. Guess the majority must be clueless that their plight is hopeless, eh?
sndrake 5 years ago
BTW drakey maybe you can tell me where the "pro-assisted suicide" advocates made the suicide watch rule? You act like they have something to do with it because they're not doing anything to change it. Once again drake you compare apples to oranges. Hell right now people can refuse medical treatment and die on their own but i don't see you complaining about that version of suicide
PogueMoran 5 years ago
Tell that to the hundreds of disabled people who have had unsolicited DNRs put on their medical record. (DNR = Do NOT Resuscitate). You're so empassioned (fanatical?) about having the right to die, you seem to be intentionally oblivious to the justified concerns and fears of disabled that their lives may be prematurely ended because of economics or convenience. From your commens, I expect that you're non-disabled.
normemma 5 years ago
Which hundreds of patients who had DNRs? Give your source instead of spouting random information. That's like me saying every year there are 100s of deaths because of fanatic right to life abortion clinic bombers. No I'm for the right of self determination nor. Every person has the right to determined how they live their life and how they leave this world. From your comments I can tell you've never been around someone who had to make an end of life decision.
PogueMoran 5 years ago
I know several dis people who have discovered a non-requested DNR on their charts.
cassie711 5 years ago
and can you prove it or are you merely going on hearsay?
PogueMoran 5 years ago
How would you like me to prove it? Names and phone numbers? I said I know them. How about you visit a disability board and read some statistics. I'm guessing you must not have any friends with a disability.
cassie711 5 years ago
Cassie now you're just pulling stuff out of thin air. My own brother was disabled and he knew a lot better than you seem to let off what pain was like. He ended up in a nonrecoverable brain damaged state and we followed his oral directives to pull the plug. Once again this was his choice something you seem content to willingly take away. Statistics don't mean jack if there isn't any actual documented cases to back up your theories.
PogueMoran 5 years ago
There are plenty of cases. Do the research. You asked me to prove it. I asked how. Simple question. Sorry about your brother. No, I would not deny his right to pull the plug. I am in severe pain 24/7. have been for 20 yrs. It's called neuropathic pain. You do not seem to understand. Anybody can deny medical care. Talk about apples and oranges, pogue, you just bit an orange.
cassie711 5 years ago
The only one biting oranges here is you cass. You're making arguments that do not relate. If you're going to make such claims cass its normal for you to actually prove what you say instead of having everyone else do your research for you.
PogueMoran 5 years ago
I asked you how you would like me to prove it? You never answered. I am talking people I know. I don't need any research done for me. I've done plenty as well as lived it for 20 years.
cassie711 5 years ago
how about real data from non-biased sources for starters
PogueMoran 5 years ago
Read the University of Alberta research cited below.
normemma 5 years ago
After watching your video nor I've only come to realize you know less about the meaning of euthanasia than you let off. You're talking about creating a society where a person doesn't get to choose how they leave this life. By your own definition you'd be saying that Euthanasia is currently legalized in the state of Texas as medical treatment is allowed to be withdrawn against the objection of the patient since they cannot pay. Did you cry a river for Sun Hudson?
PogueMoran 5 years ago
Keeping assisted suicide illegal will not prevent able-bodied people from killing themselves. If Assisted suicide remains illegal, non-disabled people will have the ability, and as such, the opportunity to end their lives prematurely. Nothing is being taken away from non-disabled people. Keeping euthanasia and assisted suicide illegal ensures that disabled people have the same protection as non-disabled people.
normemma 5 years ago
Every person regardless of Euthanasia would have the same rights as non-disabled people. You've shown yourself to use personal beliefs over dispassioned logic. Right now every patient has the right to refuse medical treatment. However a conservative republican who is in the white house passed a law in texas where the patient's income determines whether a doctor should treat or not
PogueMoran 5 years ago
Keeping euthanasia illegal will increase the suffering caused by people who are in great pain, and for whom death would be a mercy, if they fail.
Why should doctors and vets be the only ones with access to Nembutal?
You can't argue against voluntary euthanasia, so you're attacking a position that no one advocates - the genocide of disabled people.
Terri Schiavo does not count. No one would have known what her wishes were better than Michael Schiavo.
winstonjen 5 years ago
Exactly Jen they're attacking a position that no one openly advocates in the mainstream. They're trying to push their will onto the American people by using control. A lot of the RTL activists in the Terri Schiavo case cared nothing about written directives and thought that people shouldn't have the right to withhold their own medical treatment.
PogueMoran 5 years ago
nah, you're wrong. terri schiavo does count. her husbands memory is not reliable. he couldn't remember her wishes until it was jogged by a multi-million dollar settlement for her care.
SAL2you 5 years ago
No sal you're wrong again. The wishes came up in 1993. You would have faulted Michael if he had pulled the plug right then. Now you fault him because he actually had hope. You notice the schindlers never attacked terri's wishes and instead tried to focus on the PVS diagnosis which they agreed with back when they thought they'd win money
PogueMoran 5 years ago
so if michael had not lost hope, do you think terri would still be alive?
SAL2you 5 years ago
All of that money was gone, because he used it all on Terri's care.
Also, if it was about the money, why did he turn down an offer for over a million dollars to hand Terri over to her parents so they could look after her?
winstonjen 5 years ago
bull. the court gave him permission to pay lawyers, namely Felos, with Terri's money. which he did. read court testimony. michael's memory is, by his own admission, not good.
cassie711 5 years ago
Nor your comment alone shows more about your own fear and hostility towards allowing people the right to self-determination. I've had a loved one who went through an end of life decision with no hope of recovery and I know how difficult it is to pull the plug. So stop trying to make claims about someone you have no idea about. Once again this is about a person's own choice you'd rather a person not have a choice as to how they live their life or how they leave it?
PogueMoran 5 years ago
In a world without prejudice and professional power, it may be simply about a person's choice. You seem to be oblivious to our society's devaluation of disabled people.
normemma 5 years ago
You sound pretty fanatical here. How often does this happen? Do you have actual facts or are you pulling absurd made up statistics out of thin air. Even if it did happen it is a small minority and has nothing to do with the legalization of euthanasia
PogueMoran 5 years ago
Research conducted at the University of Alberta, reviewed 36 medical
records of healthy people with severe developmental disabilities for whom
"Do Not Resuscitate (DNR)" orders had been considered.
- None of these patients had any acute severe health problems. Of these 36, none of them had a request for the DNR order initiated by the family.
- The request was initiated by the attending physician in 100% of the cases.
normemma 5 years ago
.../continued
- In the researchers' opinion, the DNR requests were inappropriate (there was no legal basis for DNR orders for these patients) and arbitrary (the same request was sent to all of the families at the same time, regardless of the patient's current health status).
normemma 5 years ago
.../continued
- While only two families (6.7%) of 30 families who responded refused consent to the implementation of DNR, all these patients' charts were labelled "Do Not Resuscitate."
Thus, it was the physician and not the patient or the family who played the dominant role in this vital decision.
Dick Sobsey, D. (1994) An Illusion of Autonomy
normemma 5 years ago
So you're telling me most of the families okayed the DNRs. So the study does not support your opinion. The families acted as a proxy and gave consent for the DNRs those who did not give consent did not have a DNR put in the patients chart. Forgive me but were you trying to make an actual point?
PogueMoran 5 years ago
Read the data again, Po. The first point says NONE of the families requested the DNR. 100% of the doctor, without the consent the families, assigned a DNR to a disabled patient. The research shows that medical personnel do independnetly place DNRs on disabled people. A fact you disputed above.
normemma 5 years ago
Doctors recommend DNRs Norm. The study you pointed to according to you said that only 2 families didn't give consent. The rest gave consent meaning the DNRs were okayed by the families. The ones that didn't give consent did not get a DNR. You originally stated people were being euthanized without consent. A DNR is not the same as euthanization
PogueMoran 5 years ago
Moreover, it said that doctors assigned DNR's to "all these patients' charts," irrespective of what the parents wanted.
normemma 5 years ago
No it said doctors suggested DNRs there was only one such case in that study where the doctor didn't get permission from the family for the DNR and it was posted in the patients chart. Even so a DNR is not an active "killing" of the patient as you pretent it to be and has nothing to do with euthanasia
PogueMoran 5 years ago
Okay. At least your admitting that doctors recommend DNRs on disabled people. A point you disputed above.
normemma 5 years ago
No I said that doctors couldn't force one into a chart like you claim they can only recommend it and the patient or a proxy can okay it or deny it. It is rare for it to be inputted without consent. Even so Norm. A DNR is not relevant to the debate as normal people put DNR's into their charts all the time. This does not mean they are suicidal.
PogueMoran 5 years ago
source?
cassie711 5 years ago
ok, google david glass, 12 yr old whose mom had to resuscitate him in hospital cause docs wouldn't. look at laws in canada which expressly say docs can put dnr on chart w/o consent. chk out futile care laws and hosp. ethics committees.
cassie711 5 years ago
Oh yes futile care laws like the one signed by this president while he was governor of texas? This has more to do with the greedy choice of insurance companies not wanting to pay for patients. Once again you guys are jumping all over the place on this one. We went from Euthanasia to DNRs which are only active if a patient goes into cardiac arrest. When are we going to get back on the original subject?
PogueMoran 5 years ago
when are you going to see the connection? when are you going to see the trend? perhaps when you develop a disability yourself. nobody is jumping all over the place, except possibly you. hmm...now how could ins. companies not wanting to pay influence dnr orders? that's a toughie.
cassie711 5 years ago
Its common practice for medical personnel to put DNRs and "Slow Codes" on disabled people's charts. The term "initiated" in the study means that the DNR was put on the chart, not that the doctor recommended it. The parents were contacted after the DNR was on the chart.
normemma 5 years ago
Um yeah Norm you obviously have no clue what a DNR is what does this have to do with Euthanasia? DNRs only take effect when the patient say has their heart stop it is not an active attempt to "kill" the patient like you seem to think
PogueMoran 5 years ago
you have not checked out the debate in the medical community as to what dnr means exactly. there is an ongoing debate amongst drs exactly what it means. you are the one w/o a clue. and dnr IS put on charts w/o patient's or family knowledge. subscribe to the lancet.
cassie711 5 years ago
DNRs only take affect upon cardiac arrest. Debate in the medical community? Hardly you're talking about a few fringe people trying to redetermine what things mean. A DNR is plain and simple for most of the medical community.
PogueMoran 5 years ago
do you subscribe to the lancet?
cassie711 5 years ago
You're not making sense here norm you went from saying a DNR was considered to it being initiated. Which is it how many actual DNRs were put in the patients records?
PogueMoran 5 years ago
btw, you seemed to have missed this statement from the study quoted above so i'll repeat it: "The request was initiated by the attending physician in 100% of the cases." do you understand that the doctors put a dnr on the charts w/o consulting the families or patient in ALL 36 cases?
cassie711 5 years ago
Well Uppitycrip has said it. Besides i know a number of people who write with mouthsticks or their feet. One without arms or legs. All live rich lives and would not want euthanasia for such "suffering". A high % of people want euthanasia for loss of "independence." It's a mistaken idea about what suffering is.
Kijkerd 5 years ago
It was just a simple question uppity got snippity. Even so when people talk about euthanasia they aren't talking about forcing anyone to do anything. This is all about choice.
PogueMoran 5 years ago
So, PoMo,if a woman in an abusive relationship says she want assistance commiting suicide, should we respect her choice to uie or should we steer her towards getting counseling in a women's center? Saying "it's all about choice" fails to recoginize the complexity of the issues.
normemma 5 years ago