• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Right to die

Right to die

  • People have no right to die under any circumstance

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Only terminally ill people have the right to die

    Votes: 4 7.5%

  • People have the right to die, but healthcare professionals should not aid in the process

    Votes: 10 18.9%

  • People have the right to die, and healthcare professionals should be allowed to assist suicide

    Votes: 36 67.9%

  • Suicide attempts should not be a criminal offense

    Votes: 23 43.4%

  • Suicide attempts should be illegal

    Votes: 2 3.8%

  • other

    Votes: 8 15.1%
  • Total voters
    53
taxigirl said:
"mental patient" includes those who have been suffering from debilitating depression / anxiety for years and it does not go away.

People who have suffered for 20 years, people that have to take 17 pills a day, that can't get out of bed, that cry for one or two hours every day. People who are so debilitated by their disease that their quality of life sucks. We have this compassion for people with physical ailments, why not mental? They are just as debilitating. It's parity. There is no parity for mental health care because some people don't believe it is real, or that it can hurt just as much as physical ailments. There is no parity in caring for those will mental illness (which is another thread entirely). I would never advocate for compassionate suicide for someone suffering from something, as one person called "'curable' as guilt, shame, or a broken heart"
Click to expand...

dear taxigirl,depression and anxiety are not mental illness,but if it is a major depression,it may turn into a psychotic illness and that person may be called a mental patient.
 
Medusa said:
dear taxigirl,depression and anxiety are not mental illness,but if it is a major depression,it may turn into a psychotic illness and that person may be called a mental patient.
Click to expand...

You are attempting to say that depression and anxiety are not mental illness?

Mental illness refers to a wide range of mental health conditions — disorders that affect your mood, thinking and behavior. Examples of mental illness include depression, anxiety disorders, schizophrenia, eating disorders and addictive behaviors.
Click to expand...
Mental illness - MayoClinic.com

Note the "Topics" section on this site
NIMH · Home


In addition, The DSM IV does exactly what the quote below says it does. The DSM is the world's standard for diagnosing etc... of mental illness, mental disorder, psychiatric diseases, what ever you want to call them. If this not proof enough I suggest you look up Axis 1 297.1 Delusional Disorder.

Psychiatric Diagnoses are categorized by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th. Edition. Better known as the DSM-IV, the manual is published by the American Psychiatric Association and covers all mental health disorders for both children and adults. It also lists known causes of these disorders, statistics in terms of gender, age at onset, and prognosis as well as some research concerning the optimal treatment approaches.

Mental Health Professionals use this manual when working with patients in order to better understand their illness and potential treatment and to help 3rd party payers (e.g., insurance) understand the needs of the patient. The book is typically considered the ‘bible’ for any professional who makes psychiatric diagnoses in the United States and many other countries.
Click to expand...
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM IV)

Categories:
300 Anxiety Disorder, NOS
311 Depressive Disorder NOS
 
taxigirl said:
You are attempting to say that depression and anxiety are not mental illness?


Mental illness - MayoClinic.com

Note the "Topics" section on this site
NIMH · Home


In addition, The DSM IV does exactly what the quote below says it does. The DSM is the world's standard for diagnosing etc... of mental illness, mental disorder, psychiatric diseases, what ever you want to call them. If this not proof enough I suggest you look up Axis 1 297.1 Delusional Disorder.


Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM IV)

Categories:
300 Anxiety Disorder, NOS
311 Depressive Disorder NOS
Click to expand...

i mean they are all different types and some of them are psychotic disturbances,for instance obsessive compulsive disorder may turn into schizophrenia ,and the second one is more dangerous and psychotic .a schizophrenic person is different from obsessive one.what we call them depends on which illness they have.
 
Last edited:
Medusa said:
i mean they are all different types and some of them are psychotic disturbances,for instance obsessive compulsive disorder may turn into schizophrenia ,and the second one is more dangerous and psychotic .a schizophrenic person is different from obsessive one.what we call them depends on which illness they have.
Click to expand...

Yes, some are more serious. Some people are delusional, paranoid, psychotic and some have depression or agoraphobia or generalized anxiety and all of them can have a severe impact on your life. They don't all make you irrational all the time, which is my point about parity in compassion. Some of these illnesses are just as bad as physical illnesses.
 
taxigirl said:
Yes, some are more serious. Some people are delusional, paranoid, psychotic and some have depression or agoraphobia or generalized anxiety and all of them can have a severe impact on your life. They don't all make you irrational all the time, which is my point about parity in compassion. Some of these illnesses are just as bad as physical illnesses.
Click to expand...

yes i agree,taxigirl.
 
roguenuke said:
No it's not what I said. I said that just because a medical professional feels that it is a violation of their ethical code to assist in a suicide, does not mean that another medical professional will believe that it is against their ethics to assist in a suicide. The only way to assist in a suicide is if the person wants to die and makes that wish known, otherwise, it is murder, not suicide.
Click to expand...

Again, the provider that took the lives of those they were supposed to be caring for had no ethical problems with that. You say that the only way to assist is with permission. Why? Because this is your ethical standard? Your standard holds sway while others do not? What makes yours more important than that of others?
 
Without reading any of the responses:

If we have a right to life, then as adults we have a right to end our own lives. Now as to how to deal with that legally might present some problems. I believe that in order to take one's own life some kind of proceeding needs to be done where the person is witnessed by some kind of official as stating that they are making use of this option. This is simply to protect their right to life insofar as to not have someone murder them and then claim they wanted to die. As a rule I think that the action should only be performed by the person themselves, aiding materials not included. If they want to build a gallows, then I'm certainly not going to hold Home Depot accountable, and likewise I would not hold a doctor or pharmacist accountable for providing a given drug towards that end. With that, the law needs to be clear that neither the doctor nor pharmacist are required to provide that drug. Finally, there would need to be a legal exception for those who are physically incapable to doing so themselves and again they would have to be seen by an official of some sort (an NP should be sufficient) to be assured that they indeed want to die.
 
maquiscat said:
Without reading any of the responses:

If we have a right to life, then as adults we have a right to end our own lives. Now as to how to deal with that legally might present some problems. I believe that in order to take one's own life some kind of proceeding needs to be done where the person is witnessed by some kind of official as stating that they are making use of this option.
Click to expand...

How can you claim that someone should have to oversee something that you say is a right? I have a right to free speech. I do not have to have an advocate around for me to excersise that right.

This is simply to protect their right to life insofar as to not have someone murder them and then claim they wanted to die.
Click to expand...

How is this different than laws today? People kill others and then claim it was suicide.

As a rule I think that the action should only be performed by the person themselves, aiding materials not included. If they want to build a gallows, then I'm certainly not going to hold Home Depot accountable, and likewise I would not hold a doctor or pharmacist accountable for providing a given drug towards that end. With that, the law needs to be clear that neither the doctor nor pharmacist are required to provide that drug. Finally, there would need to be a legal exception for those who are physically incapable to doing so themselves and again they would have to be seen by an official of some sort (an NP should be sufficient) to be assured that they indeed want to die.
Click to expand...

It's either a right or not. If it's a right, I do not need to get permission.
 
lizzie said:
So, I guess to you, compassion means killing someone against their own ethical and professional standards. Sorry, but I'm not in the business to kill anyone. Relieve suffering when I can, yes. Killing someone with an overdose, no. If that makes me less than compassionate in your own eyes, then so be it.
Click to expand...

I did not mean to seem insulting, and apologize if I came off as such. Compassion comes in many forms, and this issue is a very personal one.
 
roguenuke said:
No it's not what I said. I said that just because a medical professional feels that it is a violation of their ethical code to assist in a suicide, does not mean that another medical professional will believe that it is against their ethics to assist in a suicide. The only way to assist in a suicide is if the person wants to die and makes that wish known, otherwise, it is murder, not suicide.
Click to expand...

Regardless of how someone feels on the issue, we are all regulated by ethical and professional conduct codes. If a medical professional thinks it's okay to kill someone at their request, the professional would still be in violation of his own codes of behavior. I'm not suggesting that this couldn't hpapen, but it would be a violation on his/her part.
 
1Perry said:
Again, the provider that took the lives of those they were supposed to be caring for had no ethical problems with that. You say that the only way to assist is with permission. Why? Because this is your ethical standard? Your standard holds sway while others do not? What makes yours more important than that of others?
Click to expand...

Because rights end where another person's rights begin. Once you start talking about taking a person's life without their permission, it has nothing to do with their ethics any more, and everything to do with a violation of the other person's right to life.
 
lizzie said:
Regardless of how someone feels on the issue, we are all regulated by ethical and professional conduct codes. If a medical professional thinks it's okay to kill someone at their request, the professional would still be in violation of his own codes of behavior. I'm not suggesting that this couldn't hpapen, but it would be a violation on his/her part.
Click to expand...

Ethics, particularly as parts of professional codes, do change. Obviously it is a violation of US doctors' professional ethics code. However, this is not true for all doctors, all over the world. Many health care professionals feel that their interpretation of the ethical code would allow them to assist a person to commit suicide in a pain-free way. Obviously, this is true in some other countries that do allow medical personnel to assist suicide, particularly for terminally ill patients. And those who are here in the US generally do not because they probably feel that they can do more good by pushing for the law/ethical code to change here and continue caring for their patients to the best of their ability.
 
roguenuke said:
Because rights end where another person's rights begin.
Click to expand...

Rights? I thought we were discussing ethics?

Once you start talking about taking a person's life without their permission, it has nothing to do with their ethics any more, and everything to do with a violation of the other person's right to life.
Click to expand...

A law doesn't change a persons ethics. Pot is illegal but yet, ethically thousands see no problem with it.
 
People do have the right to die. When someone is suffering there should be no reason to not allow them the peace and dignity of death.
 
taxigirl said:
"mental patient" includes those who have been suffering from debilitating depression / anxiety for years and it does not go away.

People who have suffered for 20 years, people that have to take 17 pills a day, that can't get out of bed, that cry for one or two hours every day. People who are so debilitated by their disease that their quality of life sucks. We have this compassion for people with physical ailments, why not mental? They are just as debilitating. It's parity. There is no parity for mental health care because some people don't believe it is real, or that it can hurt just as much as physical ailments. There is no parity in caring for those will mental illness (which is another thread entirely). I would never advocate for compassionate suicide for someone suffering from something, as one person called "'curable' as guilt, shame, or a broken heart"
Click to expand...
Many of us believe that 'real' therapy can actually help with fear symptoms such as anxiety and that with actual therapy and appropriate med management those symptoms do not need to dominate peoples lives. However...again...we typically do not see in hospitals people that are exhausted from the life long stress of anxiety but rather people that are experiencing immediate and in the moment stressors...things with identifiable triggers. Like the terminally ill individual, someone who has truly reached the end of their figurative rope isnt going to 'attempt' suicide. They are going to 'commit' suicide, and the medical profession likely will never come into the picture.
 
katiegrrl0 said:
People do have the right to die. When someone is suffering there should be no reason to not allow them the peace and dignity of death.
Click to expand...

I agree with you on that point. The issue that seems to be the sticking point for some of us is the issue of assisted suicide by the medical community. I don't have a problem with the idea of assisted suicide itself, if a medical professional wants to participate in that (and it's also legal), but it's illegal in most states, and several posters here seem to believe it is something that should be allowed regardless of legal status.

As I pointed out earlier in the thread- there is a distinction which needs to be made between the right to die and the right to be killed. Assisted suicide falls in the latter category.
 
1Perry said:
How can you claim that someone should have to oversee something that you say is a right? I have a right to free speech. I do not have to have an advocate around for me to excersise that right.
Click to expand...

But you may have to secure someone else's permission to make use of a broadcast medium. Or look at guns. A right to bear an arm, does not mean that you don't have to register said arm.



How is this different than laws today? People kill others and then claim it was suicide.
Click to expand...

In this case it's the difference of "Why yes I killed him. He asked me to take his life for him". Currently the murder kills the person and then tries to cover it up so he doesn't seem involved at all. If assisted suicide were legal, then why bother with cover up? Just claim it was assisted suicide.



It's either a right or not. If it's a right, I do not need to get permission.
Click to expand...

It's not getting permission. That's why I noted that a Notary Public should suffice. If nothing else, you right is to remove your own life. If you need any kind of "permission" it is to allow someone else to do it for you. Otherwise, by registering your intent with officials, you then free up LEO from having to investigate.
 
lizzie said:
I agree with you on that point. The issue that seems to be the sticking point for some of us is the issue of assisted suicide by the medical community. I don't have a problem with the idea of assisted suicide itself, if a medical professional wants to participate in that (and it's also legal), but it's illegal in most states, and several posters here seem to believe it is something that should be allowed regardless of legal status.

As I pointed out earlier in the thread- there is a distinction which needs to be made between the right to die and the right to be killed. Assisted suicide falls in the latter category.
Click to expand...
I think that the healthcare staff should have the choice to assist or not. If a person has requested to be put to rest that is not murder. It is the easing of suffering. I do not see it as any form of murder. It is a medical measure to help the patient.

If I am only going to suffer and make those around me hurt I would hope someone had the courtesy to honor my wish to end it.
 
Last edited:
lizzie said:
I agree with you on that point. The issue that seems to be the sticking point for some of us is the issue of assisted suicide by the medical community. I don't have a problem with the idea of assisted suicide itself, if a medical professional wants to participate in that (and it's also legal), but it's illegal in most states, and several posters here seem to believe it is something that should be allowed regardless of legal status.

As I pointed out earlier in the thread- there is a distinction which needs to be made between the right to die and the right to be killed. Assisted suicide falls in the latter category.
Click to expand...

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Is that why you have been arguing so hard with me? You think I believe that medical personnel should just help people kill themselves regardless of the law?

I never once said that. I think the law should change. Until it does, medical professionals should not be helping people commit suicide where it is illegal. But those that would be willing to provide assistance should advocate and could help present the case much better than those of us with no medical experience.

In fact, I'm not sure anyone in this thread has actually advocated that someone ignore the law and assist in suicide anyway.
 
roguenuke said:
Whoa, whoa, whoa. Is that why you have been arguing so hard with me? You think I believe that medical personnel should just help people kill themselves regardless of the law?

I never once said that.
Click to expand...

Who said anything about you?
 
1Perry said:
Rights? I thought we were discussing ethics?

A law doesn't change a persons ethics. Pot is illegal but yet, ethically thousands see no problem with it.
Click to expand...

Ok. I said that ethics are different from person to person. Ethics generally aren't the basis for most laws. The violation of rights is generally the basis of laws. You can't change a person's belief on what is ethical for them, only they can do that. But we can change what is lawful or not and we can change rules that deal with ethics in certain organizations, such as medical professionals. This is what I have been talking about the entire time.

If you are talking about an ethical belief to help people be free of pain and suffering that allows assisted suicide, then in order for it to not be a violation of a law, it must include the person's permission to take their life for it to not be a violation of their rights. A person can hold the ethical belief all day that they should always relieve a person's pain and suffering in any situation, but they should not do so without the person's permission (or at least a person legally allowed to give such permission). I'm sure there were plenty of medical professionals that had every desire to relieve my pain and suffering while I was giving birth to my children, but legally they could not do so without my permission. With my permission it was completely within the law to relieve my pain and suffering.
 
lizzie said:
Who said anything about you?
Click to expand...

Did someone else say that in this thread? Because I thought I was following pretty closely, and I haven't noticed anyone mention that a medical professional should ignore the law and help a patient commit suicide.
 
roguenuke said:
Did someone else say that in this thread? Because I thought I was following pretty closely, and I haven't noticed anyone mention that a medical professional should ignore the law and help a patient commit suicide.
Click to expand...

I was called uncompassionate based on my own views, which are that the right to die and the right to be killed are two different matters. The right to die implies (to me) that one dies from disease/illness, not at the hands of someone else administering something which will kill them. I have stated that I have no problems with withholding treatment if the patient so desires, but I personally wouldn't want to give a lethal dose of something to kill them. It's not in my nature to do this. I have a realistic expectation of death, and I've watched people die for almost 30 years now. It's a part of my profession. Most people, when they are in the late stages of life, aren't cognizant of what is happening. If they have pain, relieve the pain. If they don't want food, water, or IV hydration, then withhold them. If they want me to give them something which I know will be fatal, I'm unwilling to do so. If it's legal, and other medical professionals feel ethically okay with it, that's no problem to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom