• 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!

Should American adopt the right to Doctor Assisted Suicide?

Should Doctor assisted suicide be legal?

  • yes

    Votes: 42 70.0%
  • Depends on the regulation put in place and circumstances

    Votes: 11 18.3%
  • no

    Votes: 7 11.7%

  • Total voters
    60
Living is always better than death.

That's an individual decision and some people would disagree with you. Many prove it all the time.

So that is only your opinion. Most would agree with you....until there are other circumstances that makes them reconsider. As is their right.
 
You are correct, henrin, and I can't believe it needed to be said: yes, killing is always harm.

One caveat - if one feels their life is not worth continuing, then they are welcome to that opinion and if they want to, then they can do something about that. That's their business. If any one else kills them, that's not a suicide but a murder.
 
Last edited:
I presented you with an ethical option that is very peaceful.

Killing another human being in aggression remains evil and barbaric.


Dying in pain, suffering, is not 'very peaceful.'

Allowing that suffering when one could alleviate it is evil and barbaric.
 
That's an individual decision and some people would disagree with you. Many prove it all the time.

I have actually attempted suicide before. I assure you I'm fully aware of what you're talking about. I might have wanted to die, but I was wrong.
 
Living is always better than death.
According to who. You? Are you an authority on that? I really don't think you are.
That is objectively true.
no, it's not.
You might disagree in certain cases mentally, but you are objectively wrong.
I'm absolutely not wrong. You are though and I'm pointing that out to you again.
Killing someone else is always a harm and I fail to see how it can be anything else.
No it's not. It's not always harm. I just explained to why it's not. Keep rereading my previous post until you can comprehend what to me should be rather obvious.




That's not new in the slightest. Check your history again.

It's is and I have.
 
I have actually attempted suicide before. I assure you I'm fully aware of what you're talking about. I might have wanted to die, but I was wrong.

You are wrong all the time. Your anecdotal evidence means nothing and certainly doesnt apply to everyone.

And unless you were terminally ill, has nothing to do with this thread. (ah...apparently you were not terminally ill)
 
I have actually attempted suicide before. I assure you I'm fully aware of what you're talking about. I might have wanted to die, but I was wrong.

That is you own subjective truth. It is only relevant to you. You believed you were wrong and you know yourself better than anyone else could possibly know you - so you probably were wrong. If that was your ultimate conclusion.

However, your anecdote doesn't trump the reality of other individuals and the lives they live and the suffering they endure. You may have decided against it, but not everyone does.

And in context of this thread - doctor assisted suicide is tailored towards the ill who are suffering from physical ailments that will not leave them ever. They will spend their life in pain.

Before they can go ahead with the suicide they must undergo extensive psychiatric evaluation.
 
Dying in pain, suffering, is not 'very peaceful.'

Allowing that suffering when one could alleviate it is evil and barbaric.

Do you ever run out of these ridiculous and stupid lies?

You call dehydration with palliative care "barbaric" "suffering?" So hospices should just shove a pillow over granny's face then so Lursa will approve?

You don't know what the hell you're talking about. You're just being contrary for the sake of being contrary, and it's a tired schtick.
 
Do you ever run out of these ridiculous and stupid lies?

You call dehydration with palliative care "barbaric" "suffering?" So hospices should just shove a pillow over granny's face then so Lursa will approve?

You don't know what the hell you're talking about.

If someone is dying of dehydration and there is no way, medically, to prevent this - i'm not understanding the logic of prolonging the inevitable.

What about dying a slow death where one must constantly consume pills do you think it preferable to a peaceful one?

It's inevitable either way - but of the two only one offers the patient a peaceful exit.
 
Palliative care is all about achieving said peaceful exit, and it's already used for those wracked with terminal disease.

If you still have your mind and your mobility then there is no shortage of ways in which you can kill yourself. It's not hard to do. You don't need a prescription.

Anyone in any state can refuse fluids. You do need to make your end of life desires known, preferably in writing and notorized.
 
Last edited:
That is you own subjective truth. It is only relevant to you. You believed you were wrong and you know yourself better than anyone else could possibly know you - so you probably were wrong. If that was your ultimate conclusion.

However, your anecdote doesn't trump the reality of other individuals and the lives they live and the suffering they endure. You may have decided against it, but not everyone does.

And in context of this thread - doctor assisted suicide is tailored towards the ill who are suffering from physical ailments that will not leave them ever. They will spend their life in pain.

Before they can go ahead with the suicide they must undergo extensive psychiatric evaluation.

I never went to therapy even though it might have helped. For me, I had to deal with the aftermath of my attempt and battle it on my own terms. I no longer suffer from that state of mind anymore thankfully, and I know that rationally speaking my thoughts were wrong. Life might suck, it might be terrible, I might be unhappy, and I might be in pain, or on the other hand, it might be great, I'm happy, healthy, and just enjoying every minute I'm alive, but no matter what is going on the alternative to life is no longer feeling anything or being anything. I don't think it's rational to believe in an afterlife, but if it exists, hell, I might be wrong and maybe it's goddamn fantastic, but I kind of doubt it. More than likely there is nothingness, and while I'm not scared of death and I see no reason to be scared of nothingness, there is also nothing there. You're nothing, you experience nothing, feel nothing, you see nothing, you feel nothing, you're nothing. How could nothing in any way be better than something? Even if that something is terrible and miserable it is better than nothing.
 
Palliative care is all about achieving said peaceful exit, and it's already used for those wracked with terminal disease.
Mmhmm. Right. So the ultimate purpose is to make their exit easy. So if the ultimate goal is make their passing one that is of peace, why is it suddenly if they were, at the patients request of course, to administer the cocktail to allow the patient to leave on their own accord is it all of sudden, murderous? If the goal in both instances is that same - peace.
If you still have your mind and your mobility then there is no shortage of ways in which you can kill yourself. It's not hard to do.

Sure, you may be right. And if this said individual would prefer the most painless exit, one that can only truly by offered by a professional, why can't they have that option.

Again nothing about that is unethical.
 
I never went to therapy even though it might have helped. For me, I had to deal with the aftermath of my attempt and battle it on my own terms. I no longer suffer from that state of mind anymore thankfully, and I know that rationally speaking my thoughts were wrong. Life might suck, it might be terrible, I might be unhappy, and I might be in pain, or on the other hand, it might be great, I'm happy, healthy, and just enjoying every minute I'm alive, but no matter what is going on the alternative to life is no longer feeling anything or being anything. I don't think it's rational to believe in an afterlife, but if it exists, hell, I might be wrong and maybe it's goddamn fantastic, but I kind of doubt it. More than likely there is nothingness, and while I'm not scared of death and I see no reason to be scared of nothingness, there is also nothing there. You're nothing, you experience nothing, feel nothing, you see nothing, you feel nothing, you're nothing. How could nothing in any way be better than something? Even if that something is terrible and miserable it is better than nothing.

That is probably the only real response I've ever gotten from you.
I'm sorry you hit such a low point in your life that you considered ending it.

However, I still stand by my argument. Your resilience in the face of the depression you faced is not universal. And sometimes the pain isn't only psychological.

- If I'm reading it correctly, Doctor assisted suicide, is primarily aimed for the the ill who are suffering from physical pains that will never go away and that are severe. Many whom have used this service are individuals who were, not only in pain, but had a short time left a few years or so.

And even still - this option is not mandated by law. A physician does not have to grant the request. So it really boils down to the psychiatric evaluation and finding a doctor who is willing to go there.
 
Do you ever run out of these ridiculous and stupid lies?

You call dehydration with palliative care "barbaric" "suffering?" So hospices should just shove a pillow over granny's face then so Lursa will approve?

You don't know what the hell you're talking about. You're just being contrary for the sake of being contrary, and it's a tired schtick.

Palliative care is part of assisted suicide, enabling, assisted.

You seem to ignore that. If you agree to that, then you agree to assisted suicide, no matter what semantic contortions you will next assume (always fascinating btw).
 
I presented you with an ethical way to achieve that end.

Killing is not necessary. Anyone is capable of zero fluid intake and anyone who does so will die from that choice in a very brief timeframe.

I cannot believe this is a serious suggestion.

If the patient has the ability to feel discomfort why should they die in discomfort?

Why not just suggest they can throw themselves out in the freezing cold ad die of exposure?
 
Mmhmm. Right. So the ultimate purpose is to make their exit easy. So if the ultimate goal is make their passing one that is of peace, why is it suddenly if they were, at the patients request of course, to administer the cocktail to allow the patient to leave on their own accord is it all of sudden, murderous? If the goal in both instances is that same - peace.


Sure, you may be right. And if this said individual would prefer the most painless exit, one that can only truly by offered by a professional, why can't they have that option.

Again nothing about that is unethical.

Killing in aggression is always barbaric, is always unethical, and should always warrant the criminal charge of murder.

If I give you pain medication I am helping relieve a negative symptom. If I give you a lethal dose of pain medication on accident, and I'm a doctor or a nurse, that negligence is going to cost me my career in all likelihood. If it can be proven I did it on purpose, it would likely cost my freedom or even my life.
 
I cannot believe this is a serious suggestion.

If the patient has the ability to feel discomfort why should they die in discomfort?

Why not just suggest they can throw themselves out in the freezing cold ad die of exposure?

I can't believe so many people are so ignorant of basic bioethics or basic medical / healthcare information, but I'm not surprised to find an overlap in certain demographics.

If you can throw yourself out you definitely don't need anyone else to kill you.
 
Killing in aggression is always barbaric, is always unethical, and should always warrant the criminal charge of murder.
Nope. Wrong again. Your inflating your opinions and in doing so confusing them with facts. Nothing you said is a fact. Period.
There is nothing murderous about assisting someone who wants to die peacefully. Nothing at all.
If I give you pain medication I am helping relieve a negative symptom.
If you give pain medicine to an individual who is committing suicide for the sole purpose of making that suicide painless, then you are assisting in that suicide. Your refusal to use the English language correctly will not distort that fact.
If I give you a lethal dose of pain medication on accident, and I'm a doctor or a nurse, that negligence is going to cost me my career in all likelihood.
What does any of that have to do with the mutual agreement between patient and physician to the end the patient's life at their request?

If it can be proven I did it on purpose, it would likely cost my freedom or even my life.

If it can be established that you entered a legal contract in which both you and the patient agreed to end the patient's life. Then, absolutely, nothing would happen to you if it's legal in the given area you are practicing.

All of this further establishes the subjectivity of the topic. There is nothing objective about you stance on this. Nothing. At. All.
 
Last edited:
I can't believe so many people are so ignorant of basic bioethics or basic medical / healthcare information, but I'm not surprised to find an overlap in certain demographics.
The ignorance is all on you buddy. Not on anyone else.

If you can throw yourself out you definitely don't need anyone else to kill you.
That's not always the case. Nor is throwing yourself to your death peaceful. The key word is peaceful. The key concept is people seeking a peaceful death.
 
Objectively, where I live, anyone doing what you suggest would land them in prison until their death, which would probably occur from lethal injection. Objectively, their crime would be murder and the former physician would be a convicted murderer.

Subjectively, aside from the death penalty aspect, I wholeheartedly agree with locking up such murderers.
 
I can't believe so many people are so ignorant of basic bioethics or basic medical / healthcare information, but I'm not surprised to find an overlap in certain demographics.

If you can throw yourself out you definitely don't need anyone else to kill you.
Jay, have you ever seen anybody suffer to death?
 
Objectively, where I live, anyone doing what you suggest would land them in prison until their death, which would probably occur from lethal injection.

I doubt it. You're exaggerating. Do you live outside of the U.S? Because that definitely wouldn't happen here - seeing that a precedence has already been established by some states.

That would be taken into consideration in any trial here.

Subjectively, aside from the death penalty aspect, I wholeheartedly agree with locking up such murderers.
And I wholeheartedly disagree with you.

If anything I think people who have the power to allow some to die peacefully but instead choose to just watch them wither away in agony should be taken to the ethics counsel.
 
Forgive the typo in title - *Should America...*

Canadians have right to doctor-assisted suicide, Supreme Court rules - The Globe and Mail

Canada can now be added to the small list of countries that give humans the right to decide when they want to end their lives legally.

Is this a fundamental human right?

And should the U.S. (on a national level) and other countries adopt it?

The right to life in the end is a right.

And rights don't HAVE to be exercised.

Thus is my stance.
 
Jay, have you ever seen anybody suffer to death?

I don't share personal details with you people.

I do know a lot about this topic but how I know it is my business, and we're not going to play a guessing game... or at least I'm not going to.

Dehydration has symptoms that can be palliated. That I do know and not just from reading it in a book.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom