Euthanasia - should it be legal?

[DearAbby]

With the case that has been dragging on in Florida, and those that are talking about how inhumane it is to not allow a person life support, once it is detirmined that there is no medical recourse to save the life. Should there be a law allowing Euthanasia, for such cases?

[Spinzonner]

1. Over my dead body

[whistle]

2. At periods in U.S. history it has been.....

http://dying.about.com/cs/euthanasia/l/bl_timeline.htm

[DearAbby]

7. Very interesting links, thank you for posting.

With people that are terminally ill, no hope of recovery. They should also have the right to die with dignity. Who gains from forcing them to endure until they naturally expire? The family? The patient that is terminally ill? Who?

[Wat_Tyler]

3. Yes, of course.

It should be a human rights matter.

[tmooses]

4. When I had my cat euthanised because cancer was destroying his body and he

was in constant pain, it was called "humane" treatment. What does that mean? Does curtailing suffering of a creature a more "human" quality? If so, why are we more human to non-humans than humans? I have gone through both my parents dying, suffering deaths through cancer in which we had no alternative in California to end their agony. Now I live in Oregon where we have assisted suicide and the "moral' administration in DC wants to take take that right away. Why should a govt impose their religious "morality" on my personal life and death?

[murray hill farm]

5. Well...there still would have to be laws to

regulate euthanasia..so, in the case in florida..it would make no difference since the choice for euthanasia would have to be made by the one wanting it to occur. If the person wanting to be euthanized were not able to voice it, then it still would not be allowed to occur...and that, of course is as it should be..ha!

[DemExpat]

6. Yes.

DemEx

[pinto]

8. I greatly appreciate the work Elisabeth Kubler-Ross did with

those living with dying and those living with loss. She saw letting go, living the moment, as important for those who would carry the loss as for the one who was leaving. I think she pushed the button of loss for us all.

[purduejake]

9. Of course it should.

I see no purpose to ending my life in agony while sucking away medical resources from people who might actually benefit from treatment. Using medicine to keep me in an extended state of agony is inhumane, especially when I would rather pass away naturally or with the aid of a drug.

[DearAbby]

10. while sucking away medical resources ...that have to be paid for

wondering who is the main benefit in not allowing legal euthanasia? Certainly not the one who is suffering, and not the family who has to pay for the pro-longed hospital care, watching this process. Again who gains in these situations?

[SuperWonk]

11. re:

Why force people live in agony?
If a person wants to die, who can say no?

This is definitely a can of worms though.

[etherealtruth]

15. If the person wants to die...

isn't that more a case for assisted suicide vs. euthanasia?

[purduejake]

18. Who benefits?

Hospitals who charge $12 for a box of Kleenex? I honestly don't think that keeping people in agony is the choice of most doctors -- some just tend to OD people on pain meds when they have no chance of living as it is, from what I understand. I think there needs to be some regulation though. Let's look at countries where it is legal and see how it works, shall we?

[Vinca]

12. Yes, it should be legal.

Why should we be forced to suffer agonies we would never allow our pets to suffer? I've always figured if I had something incurable and wanted out, I'd buy the best bottle of champagne in town, take it out into a snowstorm and drink/freeze myself to death. Plan B: an injection in my own bed, beneath my favorite quilt, music playing, with loved ones around and my favorite cat at my side. Figure it out.

[etherealtruth]

13. I don't see the Terri Schiavo case as euthanasia...

More a "right to die" case. Euthanasia would need to be regulated (somehow) and I sure as hell don't trust lawmakers or physician groups to make those decisions----I guess, because I do not trust euthanasia to be carried out in an ethical manner, I do not believe in it.

[Stop_the_War]

14. Yes

[DearAbby]

16. In the link above stated that in Oregon, only 126 people have used the law

I dont see it as a means to bump off grandma to get her estate. It should be a process that has to meet qualifications and safeguards in order to be allowed. A person has the right to life, and the pursuit of happiness, why not the right to die with dignity?

[DemExpat]

19. There are also strong restraints on it here in The Netherlands.

DemEx

[Nikia]

17. No

With the rising costs of medicine and the greed of insurance companies and HMOs, definitely not. With the devluing of the elderly, weak, and disabled, definitely not. I have had rather scary conversations with people who would euthanize anyone who was not capable of taking care of themselves and earning a living after treatment and who were against life extending treatment, especially to the elderly, for terminal illnesses because we would be better off using our resources elsewhere. I do not support social Darwinism. No one should be killed just because they are judged not to be as valuable as able bodied young adults.

[imenja]

20. it is allowed

Florida law already permits it. The dispute in the Schiavo case is what Terry's wishes would be in this situation.

Though technically they will not euthanize her. They will instead stop feeding her. I'm not sure if that's actually a distinction or not, but Florida law obviously permits this or the courts would not have ruled that her feeding tube can be removed.