Depends on the regulation put in place and circumstances
(avatar by Thomas Nast)
No I haven't warped a single thing, that is your strawman though.
No it doesn't. That is just your skewed opinion on a doctor who, in his medical expertise, can see the suffering of an individual and at that individuals request allow them to pass peacefully. There is nothing about that - that is aggressive, unethical, or murderous. Period.Hyperbole is synonymous with exaggeration. There is no exaggeration in pointing out to you that "assisted suicide" is not legal, violates the principles of medical ethics, aggressively violates the human right to life, and the act could / should / and has been prosecuted as murder.
No they wouldn't. With precedence set in the U.S. by some states - and the fact that the reason for the assisted suicide would be taken into consideration. There would be no reason for serious charges. Most people, unlike you, know that if someone is suffering and they want out granting them a peaceful exit is not the same is murdering someone against their will. <--- again, that is your strawman.If your location is accurate, it is a serious felony to assist in a suicide in your state. I suppose what specific criminal charge is issued would be up to prosecutorial discretion. If someone pulled that in my state, things would go very badly for them; as they should.
I know it's meaning. Murder, by law, is defined as killing with malice aforethought.Murder is a specific criminal charge as defined by legal jurisdiction; it is not, as you claimed "taking the life from someone who did not want to die." Do you need examples of why your effort at defining the term is a failure, or is that self-evident? A lot of humans are killed who have not expressed a desire to die. A lot of criminals don't want to die, they want to profit at the expense of others, but then they get killed while committing their crimes. If you need more examples, do let me know.
Again it doesn't fit with what we are discussing. Mutual agreement between patient and medical professional - in which the patient willfully, voluntarily, decides that they want their professional medical care giver to help them die in peace is not the same as murder.
And it never will be no matter how hard you try to warp the definition of the word.
Nothing in this sentence is a fact that can't be amended by further regulatory wording written into some book for legislation. You appeal to the authority to old archaic words of man is noted, but your insistence that such fallible decrees can not be updated continues to be the wrench in your argument.The initiation of force. Killing is justified only in very limited circumstances, such as self-defense.
Again nothing you said is some sort of universal fact written in to the fabric the holds all things together. All of that of which you wrote is an opinion of what is considered harm. And it is that exact opinion that is be challenged and is loosing it's footing.If a patient is so helpless they cannot perform any sort of active action to kill themselves, then clearly they do not meet those criteria, as they cannot possibly be attacking anyone else. Therefore by inflicting intentional, lethal harm on them, that is aggression as you the party initiating force.
People believe that anyone should have the right to choose their fate. That's a fact.
What are natural rights and who defines them?What is unethical is the subject of debate within the philosophy of ethics. You clearly have a divergent philosophy and you think that folks can abdicate their own natural rights. That runs counter to our country's mission statement, the Declaration of Independence, which asserts that we humans have several unalienable rights.
Our countries principles have made many claims? are you arguing that those claims are infallible truths? Are you suggesting that we have never amended the wording in our constitution to better reflect our evolving understanding of things?
(avatar by Thomas Nast)
(avatar by Thomas Nast)
As far as assisted suicide goes I agree that persons who are dying from non curable diseases should be able to choose Doctor assisted suicides if they want to. Our laws are sometimes kinder to sick pets than they are to our loved ones.
I know in the 1990s Dr. K from Michigan tried very hard to make doctor assisted sucide legal and even invented a suicide machine that patients could use themselves to commit sucide. Eventually he was arrested and spent several years in jail but it was a cause in which he believed , and a cause I believed in and I was hoping the SC would take it up and make it legal.
They looked at it twice in 1997 but said there was no constional right for assisted suicide.
Oregon passed a law that allows assisted sucide and in 2006 the SC did allow the Oregon to stand so maybe we getting closer to
Making assisted sucide legal.
We can hope.
As a nurse, I have known many patients that are totally at peace with the process of dying and desire to extract every ounce of life (no matter ho painful) until the end. I have clearly known others that just want it all over with now.
By the way...I highly recommend "Sill Alice" - a movie about how a woman with early onset Alzheimer's deals with her disease. Julianne Moore kicked butt in the lead.
Still Alice (2014) - Moviefone