Promoting the Culture of Death: Children being taught how to die

[Feuer Frei!]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Religous zealots who argue "My religion demands, and so you must obey", and everybody who when reading my post thought he must answer by calling me a Nazi who promotes evil wicked Nazi ways and eunasthasia.

Ah ok, understand.
Wasn't sure if you were referring to me.

[Bakkels]

Originally Posted by Feuer Frei!

Good analogy, no?

No. It's a childish, simplified comparison, it's saying that helping someone end their life who isn't able to do that himself is the same as killing a handicapped person you never met before.
If someone were to kill himself like that, you try to stop him. Because you don't know their reasons and their story. If someone willingly chooses to end their life, and isn't able to do so himself, a doctor should help him with that.
If you live in a country where the law makes this impossible, than it's not surprising that there will be organizations that, by giving instructions to people on how to end their lives, attempt to give them their right on the choice of life or death back. imo that's a good thing.

Originally Posted by Feuer Frei!

If society allows voluntary euthanasia, it is my belief that this will send us towards the allowing of other forms of euthanasia. Including non-voluntary euthanasia.

Yes, because after all, we're all just waiting for killing someone to become legal! That just makes absolutely no sense at all.

Originally Posted by Feuer Frei!

It is a hard-line article with questions being asked in a more blunt way perhaps than a lot of articles written about this topic.
Because it is more blunt or straight to the point and asks perhaps some uncomfortable questions, is this the reason that we should shy away from asking ourselves the exact same questions?
Just because the article is addressing the topic matter differently or in a way that may seem a little too straight to the point, is that any reason to dismiss it and laugh it off as garbage?

Don't really care for the tone there. You're suggesting we're afraid of adressing these questions? Not at all.
But you're almost in admiration of how blunt and ballsy this article is. I have no problem with someone being blunt about a subject. This article however is not just blunt, it is shrewdly linking euthanasia with killing over and over again. THAT is why I can't take it seriously.

Of course there are problems arising with euthanasia. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't allow it at all. For example, to avoid people taking advantage of others, you could only allow (assisted) euthanasia if the person in question wrote up a will before falling ill. And there are a lot of these issues that should be well thought about by lawmakers. But they should be thought about from an objective stance, leaving religion completely out of the matter.

[Feuer Frei!]

Originally Posted by Bakkels

Don't really care for the tone there. You're suggesting we're afraid of adressing these questions? Not at all.
But you're almost in admiration of how blunt and ballsy this article is. I have no problem with someone being blunt about a subject. This article however is not just blunt, it is shrewdly linking euthanasia with killing over and over again. THAT is why I can't take it seriously

The tone? I'm not suggesting anything. I don't believe in talking in riddles.
The flavor of the replies made so far, in particular by Tribesman seems to indicate that the article is BS.
Now so far i haven't had one reply to state exactly why this article is BS.
1 reply was that it was all about linking to killings, made by you.
Well, correct me if i'm wrong but, isn't that what euthanasia is?
Giving someone the consent to kill.
Assisting someone to die=killing someone.
Voluntary or not.
Blunt as can be.
Now, as for people's stance on pro or anti, well, we are going to disagree aren't we?
And that is why i posted this.
To invite discussion about the topic at hand.
Not to go off on a tangent about wether i posted this because i think it is ballsy and i am apparently glorifying the article because it is written with some gusto.
Glorifying? No.
Liking it? Yes.
Why? Because i am pro life.
That is my belief. I respect other's belief in this matter as well. If we can't have a civil discussion about this topic then that's a shame. Being attacked or confronted about the nature of why i posted this article is somewhat disappointing.
And making reference to religion? I never ever brought religion into this. So, moot.
I am happy to discuss the pros and cons of euthanasia, but i find it's a waste of time to discuss my supposed tone in the last paragraph you linked.
Ok, i have posted the article, you and a few others don't like it, that's fine, i respect that. No dramas. You don't need to like it. Like so many other articles written about subject matter, you are never going to agree fully with one, i know i don't. Heck, i don't fully agree with the article i posted.
But, it resonates with me.
On your challenge of it not making sense about the legalities of euthanasia, ponder this, Premeditated murder is illegal. Euthanasia is premeditated murder. Therefore, euthanasia is as illegal as premeditated murder.
Now, it's late here, i'm happy to retort in more detail, to your concerns/disagreements if needed, that can be arranged tomorrow.

[DarkFish]

Originally Posted by Feuer Frei!

Why? Because i am pro life.

But are you also pro the right for anyone to choose if they want to live? If not, why?
So far we haven't heard any of your own arguments.

[tater]

I though this was gonna be about Palestinian TV kid's shows taching kids to be martyrs.

If people want to bump themselves off, that's their own business. Not sure if I think docs should be allowed to help. My gut says no. There are already way more suicides in the US than murders, it's not like killing oneself is hard to figure out.

[AVGWarhawk]

it's not like killing oneself is hard to figure out.

My pop always said, "If people knew how easy it was to kill themselves they would not live they way they do."

The flavor of the replies made so far, in particular by Tribesman seems to indicate that the article is BS.
Now so far i haven't had one reply to state exactly why this article is BS.

sorry wasn't it explained well enough for you?
The article is BS because it is full of lies and deliberate misrepresentations of fact, it then tries to build arguements on lies and "facts" which are not facts which means its arguements are nonsense as they have no foundation.
So from start to finish the article is best described as pure BS because it contains very little that isn't crap.

But I did enjoy your link and I thank you for it, that leading piece which seems so popular is a real eye opener. I never realised before today that Mick Jagger was actually part of a huge government conspiracy involving human sacrifice.

The issue with assisted suicide is that, in those jurisdictions where it is legal, only the means are provided, the actual act is entirely in the hands of the person committing suicide. The subject can back out at any time before the ultimate button push or triggering whatever means is being used. It is not homicide if you do the deed yourself.

Ironically, suicide is often the final act in gaining control of ones life; the ability to exit the world at the time and place and using the method of ones choice may seem huge to some.

At some point there is every possibility that my life will no longer be worth living due to certain health issues that are irrelevant here. I really like the idea that I can die by my own hand in the presence of my lovely wife before the man that she married is reduced to a mere shell. Far better to depart in a hospital or clinic, with all the "T's" crossed and "I's" dotted and surrounded by loved ones than taking the old Remington 870 into the deep woods with an magnum Special SSG up the spout; to be found perhaps months later by emergency personnel or volunteer searchers. As an active member of the latter group, I have helped recover enough human remains from successful wilderness suicides to know that I would really prefer to avoid inflicting that experiance on others. Other methods often messy or unpleasent also involve innocent bystanders or unwilling participants, first responders, police, firemen etc. With assisted suicide there should be nobody directly involved that does not want to be there.

Suicide may generally be considered a selfish act but assisted suicide in controlled conditions with reasonable legal and medical checks and balances can do much to assuage the grief of the survivors. Ultimately they are the ones who matter since once one has determined that suicide is the answer, all the interventions in the world won't prevent the act from being carried out.

I have already signed off my DNR and organ donor documentation. We all have to go sometime, and there might just be circumstances where it could be comforting to have a say in the where and when.

The article that the OP posted is heavy with unspoken religion but once god and churches are removed from the equation, the moral objections to assisted suicide tend to fall away.

[Betonov]

Originally Posted by Randomizer

Suicide may generally be considered a selfish act but assisted suicide in controlled conditions with reasonable legal and medical checks and balances can do much to assuage the grief of the survivors. Ultimately they are the ones who matter since once one has determined that suicide is the answer, all the interventions in the world won't prevent the act from being carried out.

Sums it up.

When it is confirmed by doctors, consented by the patient, and confirmed that a cure is not going to be discovered in reasonable time, it should not be termed ''assisted suicide'', but an ''act of mercy''. But it is a delicate issue and should be handled profesionaly. With consent of a number of doctors, and only with terminaly ill patients. I'm still pro life when life is possible, we don't want an epidemic of assisted suicides for people with an amputated arm or a broken heart.

[Growler]

First, before I go any further: Apologies in advance; this is going to be long, and again, apologies to anyone who may find offense.

When Mom had been diagnosed with leukemia in April of 2010, she decided to go for broke, and elected to participate in an experimental study that would use stem cells and leukocytes from a donor to rebuild her immune system after severe radiation was employed to wipe out the leukemia-damaged one. After testing, it was determined that I would be her donor; my sister and I were identical for donation purposes, but as the older brother and without little kids at home, I was the one. So, in essence, once they beat the leukemia back enough, they'd nuke Mom's immune system, pull the cells from my blood, and give them to her (Or, as I put it, "Give them back to her"). For all the work, planning, testing, and effort, the transplant never happened - we got close both times, but the particular count they were looking for - BCR/ABL - was still too elevated to proceed.

Instead, it meant she went back to the hospital for another battery of chemotherapy and radiation, in an attempt to reduce that BCR/ABL count to levels they could tolerate for the transplant. As far as I knew, Monday, 15 November, 2010, Mom was being admitted for the third battery of such treatment.

The Sunday before her death, when I delivered her groceries, she was in bed and weak, but anticipating beginning the next battery of treatment; I didn't worry anymore than I already was, as I'd seen her in similar states before during this process. I delivered the groceries, ran some errands for her and the stepfather, and headed back home.

I knew Monday would be wearing for her, so I tried phoning her cell later in the day, after she'd be established in her room. No answer, but that'd happened before - she slept a lot after beginning her chemotherapy series in all three previous instances.

Tuesday, 16 November, 2010, I had my regularly scheduled telephone contact with my student mentor from college. During that conversation, we spoke about Mom's situation, and I decided to phone her after we finished the call. I dialed her cell number, and she picked up. She was very, very weak, she said, and tired, so she was going to hang up and get some rest. She told me she loved me. I told her I'd call her tomorrow. That was it, some twenty seconds on the phone from dial to click.

Those were her last words to me.

On Wednesday, 17 November, 2010, I got a phone call at ~0730 Eastern time, from my brother-in-law, who told me, simply, "You'd better get up here; Mom's going."

My wife and I made it to the hospital three and a half hours away in time; Mom was hooked to a machine to do her breathing for her, another machine administering medication from - I counted - EIGHT different intravenous sources. Another machine kept track of her blood pressure, heart rate, and specific oxygen levels in her blood. Another machine carried away waste she could no longer control. Seven months of treatment for Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia had taken a toll already; her hair was long gone to the radiation treatment, and her list of prescription medication easily numbered thirty different items, at least once daily - many, more.

My sister and brother-in-law were already there, as was my Uncle and two of my three cousins, and a few of my mom's friends. I thought it was due to Mom's neutropenic condition that we were required to gown, mask, and glove-up just to be in the room with her. Each time we left the room, we had to discard the garments and get new ones if we wanted to go back in. We were taking these precautionary measures not because of leukemia, but because of clostridium difficile, commonly called C-Dif. The link is there; the wiki article says it better than I can. The doctors had given my sister and brother-in-law the lowdown on why the gowns and such, but I hadn't been there when that happened, and no one ever gave my wife or I a similar brief.

After all the treatment that Mom had gone through, here we were on this day. Her blood was becoming poisoned due to the effects of C.Dif., but they were unable to dialyze because her blood pressure was too low as a consequence of the weakened state she was in due to the leukemia treatment. They had every drug in their arsenal deployed to fight the blood poisoning, to raise her blood pressure, to do something to get her to the point they could safely dialyze her blood and decrease the toxin levels. At one point, the doctor told me that they were dumping epinephrine into her system every minute, desperately trying to get her blood pressure up.

This entire time, she's wide awake, and scared. She couldn't speak, but I could see it in her eyes. I will never forget standing there at her bedside, trying in vain to do for her what she'd always done for her kids, trying to make it all right, to make it all better.

They added in a morphine drip to ease some of the pain she was feeling - blood occasionally welled in her mouth from the breathing tube, and her lips were brutally chapped, cracked, and dried from the plastic. Her stomach was distended - tympanic is the word they used - from the toxic gasses in her intestines that were poisoning her blood. And through it all, she was still awake.

At ~1600, the doctor approached my sister, my uncle, and I, and asked to speak with us. The latest blood tests they'd done earlier that afternoon had come back: In addition to the blood poisoning, her kidneys were now shutting down, as she was showing signs of liver failure. Even if her condition turned around right then, they couldn't be sure she'd survive the recovery. There was nothing more they could do - every card was on the table. And it wasn't enough. We had two options: Continue as was happening, and watch as more and more systems failed until she passed, or make her as comfortable as we could and let her go. The result was going to be the same.

I was supposed to be the one saving her life; instead I got to decide how to end it.

I sincerely hope that no one here EVER has to be in that place; if you have, all I can say is, I am so sorry that you had to go through that hell.

Together, my sister, my Uncle, and I made the decision. Withdrew the medication, except for the morphine drip, whose frequency was increased to encourage Mom to sleep. Pennsylvania law forbade the removal of the breathing tube, or any other machine that was supporting her life, but it did not prohibit the withdrawal of the medication.

Somewhere after 1600, Mom closed her eyes, and finally, mercifully, fell asleep. My father, who'd been divorced from her since 1984, sang a lullaby to her as she fell asleep. Her family and closest friends were with her at ~1640 that afternoon, when the monitors in the room recorded the last input they would receive from my Mother. She was 64.

Her oncologist managed to make it to her room right at the end, and remarked to me that she knew this would happen. I didn't understand then, but I would learn later that she was diagnosed with the C Dif. infection ~23 October, and that, considering the weakened state she was in from the leukemia treatment, she had little to no chance of surviving it.

So.

Instead of being allowed to end her own life with dignity, in a manner that befits a person, our laws required my Mom to be like a slab of beef on the table, just to earn a few more dollars out of her before she died.

Someday, someone will be able to explain to me why it is that we cannot accept that human death is as natural as human life, especially when we so arbitrarily deal it out to each other and to other living things on this planet.

Want to be Pro-Life? What do you eat that doesn't kill something else? Or does Pro-Life not mean what it says?

Face it, death happens. Why not give people the ability and the freedom to face it on their terms?

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Randomizer

The issue with assisted suicide is that, in those jurisdictions where it is legal, only the means are provided, the actual act is entirely in the hands of the person committing suicide. The subject can back out at any time before the ultimate button push or triggering whatever means is being used. It is not homicide if you do the deed yourself.

Ironically, suicide is often the final act in gaining control of ones life; the ability to exit the world at the time and place and using the method of ones choice may seem huge to some.

At some point there is every possibility that my life will no longer be worth living due to certain health issues that are irrelevant here. I really like the idea that I can die by my own hand in the presence of my lovely wife before the man that she married is reduced to a mere shell. Far better to depart in a hospital or clinic, with all the "T's" crossed and "I's" dotted and surrounded by loved ones than taking the old Remington 870 into the deep woods with an magnum Special SSG up the spout; to be found perhaps months later by emergency personnel or volunteer searchers. As an active member of the latter group, I have helped recover enough human remains from successful wilderness suicides to know that I would really prefer to avoid inflicting that experiance on others. Other methods often messy or unpleasent also involve innocent bystanders or unwilling participants, first responders, police, firemen etc. With assisted suicide there should be nobody directly involved that does not want to be there.

Suicide may generally be considered a selfish act but assisted suicide in controlled conditions with reasonable legal and medical checks and balances can do much to assuage the grief of the survivors. Ultimately they are the ones who matter since once one has determined that suicide is the answer, all the interventions in the world won't prevent the act from being carried out.

I have already signed off my DNR and organ donor documentation. We all have to go sometime, and there might just be circumstances where it could be comforting to have a say in the where and when.

The article that the OP posted is heavy with unspoken religion but once god and churches are removed from the equation, the moral objections to assisted suicide tend to fall away.

Well said.

[Bakkels]

That story really moved me Growler. Thank you for sharing, and I'm sorry for your loss.

[tater]

Terrible story, growler. My mom died just a few days after checking into a hospice facility. Luckily the end was under less stress than your mom.

That said, knowing the c-diff diagnosis a few weeks ahead, why did her doc not really push for a DNR/DNI order? This really shows why a living will is so very important. The trouble is you end up with a 9-11 call and no standing orders, and they are forced to intubate you, etc. My mom had such a note on her bedroom door before she went to hospice so that it was clear they'd not put her in a situation where it would be (painfully) dragged out.

I'm so sorry for your loss. It gets better over time, but I still think about my mom most every day, and it's been almost 2 years.

[Jimbuna]

Sincere condolences Growler.

[DarkFish]

Very moving story Growler. My condolences for your loss.

Originally Posted by Growler

Want to be Pro-Life? What do you eat that doesn't kill something else? Or does Pro-Life not mean what it says?

Face it, death happens. Why not give people the ability and the freedom to face it on their terms?

Couldn't have said it better