My uncle is diabetic and in generally poor health, and is often sad. He's single, in his forties, and when he came out as gay a few years ago it was after years of hiding it from his church and family, and the family's reaction was not gentle. (Among other things they [temporarily, thank goodness] banned nieces and nephews from being around him.)
So anyway he adopted the attitude that his life is hard enough and he doesn't want to deal with increased hardship, and he established a do-not-resuscitate order.
So he visits a friend in Florida, has a heart attack, and quickly cascades to kidney failure and is put on a breathing machine, and isn't responsive or conscious as far as anyone can tell. The most staid members of the family, the same who reacted strongly to his coming out, push the DNR, say "well, that's it. Take him off the life support." I don't know with what combination of sadness of relief but I do know it was a combination. Two sisters object and race to Florida to run interference. The doctors themselves demur, they don't feel it's gonna stay that bad. A fight ensues. Well, a few days later he's off the respirator, his kidneys seem to be doing better, and he comes around enough to explain that yes, he still wants to live, thanks for not turning off the machines.
A few months later he's essentially back where he was prior to the heart attack, and there's some rather heavy atmosphere at family gatherings since various people have to reconcile his willing living presence with their push to let him die. He seems to take it in good humor. (!! but he did write the DNR.)
I happen to believe that people should be able to end their own lives if they wish, as long as they are of sound mind. I also support the idea of removing life support when a spouse or parent or guardian decides it is time, and the patient is mentally gone. (And I don't think I can proscribe reasons.)
But this experience with my uncle has been sufficient to convince me to deliberate long and hard before ever involving myself in such a decision, or finalizing one.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Dang, I hope things get better for your uncle and that he finds a nice boyfriend.
I don't know if I believe in being DNR because one never knows.
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
I'm not sure if he's looking or if he's trying to reconcile with church. I ought to write him, actually.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
That group, Not Dead Yet, was founded by sndrake and his wife Dianne. They are posters here at Hatrack, although sndrake posts mer than Dianne does I believe.
I haven't seen sndrake in a while, but he is cool. Posted by Eaquae Legit (Member # 3063) on :
He definitely is! And they also deserve a shout-out as part of why I study what I do (disability in the medieval world).
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
I've thought about a DNR simply because I fear dying more than I fear death. And I sure as hell don't want to do it twice.
scifi: I wish I could give your uncle a hug.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote: The most staid members of the family, the same who reacted strongly to his coming out, push the DNR, say "well, that's it. Take him off the life support."
Sigh.
Posted by Tara (Member # 10030) on :
I don't believe assisted suicide should be legal. The way I see it, how long you're alive doesn't change how long you'll be dead. You may want to end your life now, but, no matter whether you commit suicide or not, you'll be dead EVENTUALLY. You'll get what you want eventually. So why not just live as long as possible while you can, no matter how painful it is? Life is not a universal guarantee; you could just as easily have gotten NO life at all, AND you will eventually be dead for the rest of time anyway! I would never write a DNR for myself, nor would I ever perform it for someone else. (I suppose it's more complicated if the person is 100% brain dead). Everyone should take every pain-filled, terrible, rotten day they are given because those days are all among only a handful of alive days you will get, while the other million trillon days of eternity, you will be dead. This belief is so important to me that I would do everything possible to make other people believe it as well, even if it means going against someone's expressed wish to be euthanized.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
If a person is brain dead/PVS, there's nothing there to kill. They're gone. You have a corpse with some autonomous biological function.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
Sorry Tara, but everyone's life is their own. It should be their choice, not yours and people should be free to help them (assuming reasonable precautions to make sure it's not murder.)
In other words, ~~It's my body, I can die if I want to.~~
Happiness, Freedom and Life. To lose one is to render the other two meaningless.
Posted by andi330 (Member # 8572) on :
I have to say that I think a blanket "I would never" is a bit extreme. You are entitled to your viewpoint, but DNRs serve a useful purpose too. My grandmother had one before she passed away, and my mother chose to honor it. She was 92, she was in poor health overall, she'd been seeing people long dead for more than 2 years, and there was no chance at making her better. When she passed away a year ago and my mother chose to honor her DNR, she could have pushed the doctors to bring her back. It might even have worked. But what quality of life would that have been for her? How much longer would she truly have lived?
Tara, you referred to a DNR as assisted suicide. I have to say that I disagree with that statement EXTREMELY strongly. In fact, I find it offensive. There is a huge difference between assisted suicide, when a doctor or other person is enlisted to administer drugs or otherwise cause the death of a person, and a DNR. A DNR is a legal document signed by either the individual in question, or the person in charge of their medical decisions, and it states specifically what may or may not be done if resuscitation is required. It can be very specific, indicating exactly what you do and do not want done to your body, stating anywhere from do absolutely nothing, to no feeding tube but cardio stimulation is permitted and many other things. Essentially it is a document that determines what treatments are permitted and what aren't, and it gives the person the opportunity to say, "I want my life to take its natural course." I don't currently have a DNR. I'm 30 with no major health issues and it isn't necessary. But if 10 years from now, I find that I've been battling a fatal illness and it has come to the point where my quality of life is minimal and there is little to no hope for recuperation, I am glad that I live in a country where it is perfectly legal for me (being of sound mind) or my family (whom I will be sure to let know of my wishes) to tell the doctors, enough. No more treatments.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by andi330: Tara, you referred to a DNR as assisted suicide. I have to say that I disagree with that statement EXTREMELY strongly.
Agreed.
quote:Originally posted by andi330: But if 10 years from now, I find that I've been battling a fatal illness and it has come to the point where my quality of life is minimal and there is little to no hope for recuperation, I am glad that I live in a country where it is perfectly legal for me (being of sound mind) or my family (whom I will be sure to let know of my wishes) to tell the doctors, enough. No more treatments.
Agreed, and I am strongly against euthanasia.
Posted by Tara (Member # 10030) on :
I apologize for my wording, I'm glad you took the time to point that out to me.
Posted by Tara (Member # 10030) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Pixiest: Sorry Tara, but everyone's life is their own. It should be their choice, not yours and people should be free to help them (assuming reasonable precautions to make sure it's not murder.)
That's precisely it -- I don't believe those precautions could ever be taken successfully. You state your position clearly but you don't give me any reason to be convinced that you could ever be certain it wasn't murder.
quote:Originally posted by The Pixiest: In other words, ~~It's my body, I can die if I want to.~~
Happiness, Freedom and Life. To lose one is to render the other two meaningless.
I disagree. The only thing that would render my life meaningless would be lack of hope. While there's still hope for happiness and freedom in the future (even if not at the present) I will still want to live. There's no reason not to. I repeat, everyone will die eventually. So what's the point of bringing it about earlier, while there's still hope? And isn't there always hope for everyone, besides those cases of being brain dead, right at the end of your life, etc. Was that a rebuttle to your point, or did I miss the point? Your statement was brief and kind of general, and I'm not sure I'm understanding the scope of it.
I confess, I've never really understood the whole "give me freedom or give me death" thing. How do you judge freedom? How much freedom are we talking about? Is it freedom from government, freedom from religion, freedom from society... All of those, or only some of those? Absolute freedom is not something that even appeals to me. I can't even really imagine it. Freedom from society I certainly would never want -- I would be completely unhappy. Or is it implied that those who say "give me freedom or give me death" aren't taking it THAT far?
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
quote:I disagree. The only thing that would render my life meaningless would be lack of hope.
I agree with this statement. And it is precisely lack of hope that makes DNR and euthanasia necessary.
Posted by Tara (Member # 10030) on :
I guess I can't really imagine a situation with no hope, so it makes it difficult for me to see the other side of this issue.
And please don't read any arrogance or nuance into that statement...And I AM honestly trying to imagine the other side of this issues, I just can't.
Posted by andi330 (Member # 8572) on :
I don't agree that signing a DNR indicates that people have no hope. There is a reality in this world that we will all die at some point. Some people will die of incurable disease, others will die of old age, and others due to health problems caused by their own behaviors in life. When you come to a certain point, whether it is the reality that the current medical treatments available cannot cure your disease or improve your quality of life, or you simply get to an age where it is unlikely you are going to live to be too much older, it is good to have the option to simply let nature take its course. This is much different than euthanasia or assisted suicide where there are actions being taken that are intended to cause the death of a person.
If I was to have a terrible car accident tomorrow, and have to go into the hospital, I would certainly want my family to have the doctors try everything possible to save me, including feeding tubes and all the rest. However, if it became obvious that the machines were the only thing keeping me alive, no brain activity etc, then I would want to let nature take its course. I don't think choosing a DNR indicates that a person has given up all hope in any case, but especially when it is an elderly person choosing it. It is a simple facing of reality. We only get so many years on this planet and then we will die. We should have some choice about what kind of artificial means are used to keep us alive.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
I realize I'm taking a statement out of context here, but...
[lecture]
The phrase is "Give me liberty, or give me death."
It is as concise a statement as there could possibly be about what it means to have a country like America. It's why struggles like emancipation, universal suffrage, civil rights, equal rights, and a whole host of other issues are inevitably solved in a particular direction in this country -- the direction that holds individual freedom and self-determination as core values.
It figures LARGELY into the great social issue debates in our modern times: abortion, gay rights, non-traditional marriage, euthanasia, and more.
Granted, we sometimes take way too long getting to the right decision, but, bottom line is that we eventually (I would say inevitably) get there.
People have offered up their lives to that principle so that those coming after them could enjoy the liberties thus gained.
If we lose sight of that, America loses its very soul.
[/lecture]
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
Hey Bob! Nice to see you!
That's an interesting way of looking at the "give me liberty or give me death" statement. Similarly, we view giving our lives for our country by serving in the military as a sign of patriotism, yet the decision to end your life when facing a much more certain enemy, such as disease or merely old age, is somehow considered wrong.
One of the greatest gifts my grandmother gave to me was to explain with great certainty that she wanted to die before she had to endure the mental and physical suffering of old age. She lived her worst nightmare in that she lived to be 91 and died of emphysema. She would have preferred a nice quick heart attack at 75. But when she did die, my grief was limited to the fact that I missed her. I was not sorry she was dead, and in fact, I was relieved, because I knew without doubt that it's what she wanted.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
Great post Bob!
Tara: There's no point clawing for every last breath of life when all the joy has been sucked out, never to return. This is especially true of catastrophic disabilities and old age.
And Hope is just a lie we tell ourselves to feel better about reality.
Posted by Tara (Member # 10030) on :
Why should life only be about joy? Pain is a kind of experience too. You won't feel ANYTHING when you're dead. Personally, I kind of prefer pain. You can always find something to be happy about, if you abandon the idea that life should be at a certain level of goodness and happiness. The pain you're describing about old age -- what if you were born feeling that pain, and were accustomed to it? Then you would not feel sorry for yourself over it, and you would be happy in spite of it.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
I would like to point out that I am not an enthusiastic supporter of euthanasia. I do believe that the individual has the right to choose. The problem I have in how things are implemented here in the US is that "assistance" starts to look a lot like murder in some cases.
It is also a problem that in some areas we already see slippage from "individual choices" to "we know _____ would not want to have to live this way."
The Not Dead Yet organization is a great resource for folks who wish to see the issue from another perspective, by the way. I think Diane, Stephen & crew are the most articulate folks on the web, period.
Anyway, Glenn, I think the US has a history of coming to terms with difficult social issues, but that it takes us a long time -- sometimes generations. We get there, eventually, and, it seems to me, get to the point of siding with individual freedom -- sometimes even to the detriment of society in general. But that's us. That's who we are.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
Tara dear, it's fine if you're only happy when it rains. But realize some people are not. And it's their choice, not yours.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tara: I would never write a DNR for myself, nor would I ever perform it for someone else. (I suppose it's more complicated if the person is 100% brain dead). Everyone should take every pain-filled, terrible, rotten day they are given because those days are all among only a handful of alive days you will get, while the other million trillon days of eternity, you will be dead. This belief is so important to me that I would do everything possible to make other people believe it as well, even if it means going against someone's expressed wish to be euthanized.
[NB: as noted above, DNR != euthanasia]
Tara, I think the genuine experiences of many, many people considering DNRs in the real world are much more complicated and complex than you give them credit for. I think it is a failing in us when we talk about such things as if there were cavalier, obviously correct choices that other people should just buck up and recognize (if they'd only be as positive as we are: just turn that frown upside down, Chuck!). For example, take what resuscitation really means: even in hospitals with trained personnel and appropriate life-saving instruments, it fails more than it succeeds for adults. The average figure is 5-10% success rate, and for those with longstanding multiple medical problems, that success rate drops well below 2%. It is also not a benign procedure.
The American Heart Association recommends using sufficient force in performing CPR to exert 100-125 pounds of pressure on the chests of adults who have no heartbeat. Most people considering DNRs are frail, elderly people prone to osteoporosis and other illnesses that make broken hips a real risk with simple falls. To have someone pushing with a force of 125 pounds straight on the chest means breaking the ribs are likely. Even children may show up with rib fractures after properly-performed CPR. The first time I was present at a Code Blue in the hospital, I was trying to find a vein in the neck to get in an IV line. I felt the elderly man's ribs break -- the vibrations shuddered through his body, and the guy who was doing chest compressions sunk his clasped hands deeper into the chest. It was unsuccessful. Neither the fractures nor the lack of success surprised anyone.
At the autopsy, the guy who'd broken the ribs turned ashen as the chest cavity was revealed -- three broken rib bones had punctured the lungs, 2 on one side and 1 on the other. The pathologist assured us that the man was already dead before the ribs broke. Thank God.
But, too, we were reassured that nothing had been done incorrectly, and this was just what happens. This gentleman had prostate cancer which had seeded to his bones, and his sternum (chestbone) was riddled with holes from it.
Now, if he'd survived, he would have been a man in his eighties with two punctured lungs, a body full of untreatable prostate cancer, exacerbated heart failure, on a ventilator, and on sufficient pain medication he'd have been quite unlikely to ever regain full consciousness. For whatever reason, he did not have a DNR order on his chart. The people involved were happy to provide him with the chance to make it through this sort of event, given that those were his presumed wishes.
However. However. I'm fine with people believing they would make a different choice in the same situation. I am not fine with people belittling the choices made by others actually facing very harsh realities. It's true that individuals facing DNR decisions must be presented with accurate, thorough information on both sides: both what resuscitation would likely entail in their particular circumstances and how much help and support there is for recovery and maintaining joy in life afterward. But those balances can tip either way, given the particular circumstances, and we owe it to people having to make these choices not to belittle or make light of where their options lead them, given a fully-informed and accurate understanding for themselves of what those options are.
---
Edited to add: Obviously, there is a wide range of circumstance. The uncle with diabetes referenced above would not be in the same position as someone with a terminal diagnosis who couldn't even lie flat because of his heart failure. *** And there is much to be said for screening for and treating depression, providing better social supports, and lifting the weight of obligations to others from the shoulders of those already in pain.
Just don't assume that is always going to address the deepest concerns of those making these decisions. When we do that, we make light of what can be real, heart-wrenching, incomparable tragedy.
-
***I watched a man die this way. He was too sick to be operated on, and he couldn't tolerate any higher levels of medication. After three heart attacks, only one wall of his heart was still beating. If he lay flat, he drowned in his own lungs. He was so fragile that the physicians involved were sure trying to paralyze him and put him on a ventilator would kill him. (And he didn't want that, anyway.)
He took close to two weeks to die. Two weeks of sitting up in a hospital bed, leaning over the bedtable that stretched across his lap, gray-faced and constantly gasping for breath. It was horrible to watch.
If he preferred not to have his lungs punctured by his own broken bones in order to have a measly chance at having an extra day to gasp for breath, well, I am not going to fault him for not being mentally perky enough.
---
Edited again to add: I also wouldn't fault you for believing you would chose the CPR anyway, and I wouldn't fault you for actually making that choice in that circumstance, if you did. Rather, I'm merely saying that others who make a different choice in that sort of circumstance don't need to have their decisions discussed as if they are misguided confetti decisions that could be improved by a positive-thinking course.
[ June 06, 2009, 07:03 PM: Message edited by: ClaudiaTherese ]
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tara: The pain you're describing about old age -- what if you were born feeling that pain, and were accustomed to it? Then you would not feel sorry for yourself over it, and you would be happy in spite of it.
This is not actually true. One's ability to be happy is not entirely relative to what you are accustomed to. Pain is pain. Children who have grown up with chronic pain are usually not happy even if they have been 'used to' this pain.
They're in pain.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by andi330: Tara, you referred to a DNR as assisted suicide. I have to say that I disagree with that statement EXTREMELY strongly.
Agreed.
quote:Originally posted by andi330: But if 10 years from now, I find that I've been battling a fatal illness and it has come to the point where my quality of life is minimal and there is little to no hope for recuperation, I am glad that I live in a country where it is perfectly legal for me (being of sound mind) or my family (whom I will be sure to let know of my wishes) to tell the doctors, enough. No more treatments.
Agreed, and I am strongly against euthanasia.
Agreed on all counts here as well.
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
Apologies if I conflated euthanasia or assisted suicide with DNR.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tara: Personally, I kind of prefer pain. You can always find something to be happy about, if you abandon the idea that life should be at a certain level of goodness and happiness. The pain you're describing about old age -- what if you were born feeling that pain, and were accustomed to it? Then you would not feel sorry for yourself over it, and you would be happy in spite of it.
I have to wonder if you've ever been in a situation of severe, debilitating, chronic pain. Maybe you have, and I'm being out of line, but I kind of doubt it. Having had several times in my life where I was in extreme, constant, curl up and hope the drugs help pain, the "just grin and bear it" attitude really doesn't apply.
I didn't want to die, because I had a good prognosis for recovery, and am thankfully quite healthy now, but if I had known that I would spend the rest of my life in that kind of pain, I can certainly understand giving up hope and wanting it to be over.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
What I am learning from this discussion is that personal decisions are indeed personal. No one can decide what is "right" for someone else. The range of human experience often exceeds our ability to imagine ourselves in another's place and we all have the right to our individual response to our unique experience whether or not someone else can imagine having that response to that experience.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Chronic pain sufferers also frequently suffer from depression. Because pain sucks.
It's even worse when you are in pain as a child and you think everyone else is in the same amount of pain, because it is "normal". Nope it isn't. It still sucks. And then it still gets worse as you get older.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I am very opposed to euthanasia. I am not at all opposed to DNRs.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
Count me as another person who is against euthanasia but all right with DNR's. As the wife of a paramedic, I know all too well how low the success rate for CPR is. The success rate for survival to discharge is depressingly low. Except in rare cases, like drownings or electrocutions, most people who have fatal heart rhythms die - even if they're brought back with CPR to a more normal rhythm, they seldom make it home from the hospital.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
quote:Originally posted by BannaOj: Chronic pain sufferers also frequently suffer from depression. Because pain sucks.
It's even worse when you are in pain as a child and you think everyone else is in the same amount of pain, because it is "normal". Nope it isn't. It still sucks. And then it still gets worse as you get older.
wait... being in pain all the time isn't normal?
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
My first question is: Who had power of attorney? Along with a DNR order, the key is to have given power of attorney to someone who you trust and who understands your wishes. My father has gone over this with me many times...if the doctors think there is a reasonable chance that he can pull through (as in the case of your uncle) than he wants the chance. If there is basically no chance that he will recover, then he wants to be allowed to die. It seems pretty straightforward and I have the same philosophy, which I shared with my husband (who would have the final say in the mater). I really think the key is making sure that the people who get to decide are people you trust, and not people who refused to let their children come visit you because you're gay.
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
As far as euthanasia goes, I'm all for it. Why shouldn't a person get to choose when he or she dies? In the end, it seems to be the most logical thing in the world to be able to choose for yourself. Why should I force a person to go on living? What value is there in that? It seems like a completely selfish thing for me to do.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
So you're in favor of suicide being legal, then?
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
rivka: Why would it be ethical to force someone to live against their wishes? The right to quit, whether it be one's job or their life, is an important one.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
I disagree.
And I'll ask you the same question: do you think suicide should be legal? What about if the person is clinically depressed?
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
rivka: the knowledge that I can quit anytime is of *great* comfort to me.
If a person is clinically depressed, hopefully they'll get help before actually offing themselves. However, since suicide is an common side effect of the treatment to clinical depression, I'm not sure the cure is any better than the disease. At least in that it gives people the get up and go to finally do what they've wanted to do all along.
Besides, how often do happy pills actually fix clinical depression? From anecdotal evidence I've gathered from friends who were on it, it turns you into an appititeless, sexless zombie. Who still gets depressed a lot.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
You're talking to the wrong people.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
rivka: I live in the bay area. Almost everyone I know is on some kind of anti-depressant.
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: So you're in favor of suicide being legal, then?
This doesn't even make sense to me. Whyever should it be illegal? How would you enforce such a thing? Put my soul in prison for all eternity? Well, some religious people believe that's exactly what happens. What might be the penalty for an attempted suicide? 10-15 years maximum security?
Depression is a disease that carries with it a chance of death. Certainly, this is not the ideal solution, nevertheless when the pain of this disease becomes overwhelming then just as with any other disease (which is given more credit because it isn't "just in the mind") a person has the right to end it. In that case, I would mourn their death as being the result of a terrible disease, rather than accuse that person (as I have so often heard) of being selfish or cowardly.
Legality doesn't even enter into it.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
So we shouldn't bother trying to prevent suicides?
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Just like with abortions, it is possible to work to prevent suicide by addressing the causes rather than making it illegal. Probably more effective, too. I can't imagine that the legality of the act is the primary concern for someone contemplating suicide.
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
quote:Originally posted by katharina: So we shouldn't bother trying to prevent suicides?
Wow, you so completely missed my point I'm not even sure where to start.
But let em try it this way: Do you think we can prevent suicide by making suicide illegal? if so, you've never been suicidally depressed. Take it from someone who has been...it won't work.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
Also, don't try to kill yourself for insurance. It doesn't work.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I'm not interested in the illegal part. It's the part where we actually help some people commit suicide and then try to get help for others that bothers me.
Like a physical disability changes a person from someone to help to someone to help along.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Pixiest: Great post Bob!
Tara: There's no point clawing for every last breath of life when all the joy has been sucked out, never to return. This is especially true of catastrophic disabilities and old age.
And Hope is just a lie we tell ourselves to feel better about reality.
I disagree as strongly as possible with the second half of that. Hope IS this reality for a lot of us, and realistic hope is not only worth living for, it makes all the rest of it worth the bad times.
I have hoped for a lot of things....and without hope I would not have achieved any of it. Hope gave me the strength to make at least some of my dreams a reality.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
I've no problem with assisted suicide or pulling feeding tubes either.
One of the worst things I can imagine is being in a PVS, yet being fully conscious and unable to move or communicate. Imagine laying there for decades... unable to scratch an itch, cover yourself when you're cold, uncover when you're hot, in pain and unable to tell anyone, express a thought, or even move your head to stop staring at the same boring spot on the ceiling... and not even knowing how many more decades you've got to lay there before sweet death carries you away.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kwea: I disagree as strongly as possible with the second half of that. Hope IS this reality for a lot of us, and realistic hope is not only worth living for, it makes all the rest of it worth the bad times.
I have hoped for a lot of things....and without hope I would not have achieved any of it. Hope gave me the strength to make at least some of my dreams a reality.
True. Hope builds great things. Las Vegas is built entirely on Hope.
And if you can use it as a psychological trick to help motivate you, great. Just recognize that most of the time, for the big and important things, it's a lie.
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
quote:Originally posted by katharina: I'm not interested in the illegal part. It's the part where we actually help some people commit suicide and then try to get help for others that bothers me.
Like a physical disability changes a person from someone to help to someone to help along.
Yeah, if they choose it, it does.
I'm not afraid of growing old. I'm not like most women who seem to stop aging after 29 and won't admit their age. (I'll be 32 tomorrow, for the record.) I understand that there will be discomfort and that things won't be as easy as they are now. But the thing I fear the most, in my case, is losing my mind. If I develop Alzheimer's, for example, I would want to die before I got too far along. Since it is illegal for others to help me with this, should I get this diagnosis, I will probably kill myself (unassisted) before I get far enough along to completely lose myself. I see no value in additional life at that point. And it doesn't matter if you do. YOU can choose to live as long as you like and if that's your wish, no one should assist you to the grave. But *I* want that right. *I* want that choice. I believe strongly in mercy killing and do not see it as the same thing as murder. Then again, I don't see life as an ultimate virtue or death as an ultimate evil.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
So a physical disability makes a person not as worthy of being helped.
Nice. That's exactly what I want to avoid - that's eugenics. That's extremely unethical.
In both cases the person is choosing it. But for one, you decide that should get help, and for the other, you agree that they are better off dead. That's definitely eugenics.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
Oh you wacky Kath! Everything is Eugenics to you! It's like your own personal Godwin!
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
quote:Originally posted by katharina: So a physical disability makes a person not as worthy of being helped.
Nice. That's exactly what I want to avoid - that's eugenics. That's extremely unethical.
In both cases the person is choosing it. But for one, you decide that should get help, and for the other, you agree that they are better off dead. That's definitely eugenics.
I'm not sure you know what eugenics is.
I'd also appreciate it if you'd not put words in my mouth, something that you have flown off the handle about others doing to you. I said nothing like this.
BTW, I believe that clinical depression IS a physical disability, so I don't distinguish between the two the way you seem to do.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
If someone is less worthy of living or less in need of help to want to live because of their physical disability, then that is discrimination based on a physical disability.
I don't think that only physical mostly perfect human beings are worthy of life, and assisted suicide just for the sick people is a step in the absolute wrong direction.
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
quote:Originally posted by katharina: If someone is less worthy of living or less in need of help to want to live because of their physical disability, then that is discrimination based on a physical disability.
I don't think that only physical mostly perfect human beings are worthy of life, and assisted suicide just for the sick people is a step in the absolute wrong direction.
Who in the world said anything about not helping people? Who in the world suggested that we're going to go around killing people with disabilities? Who in the world said we shouldn't do everything in our power to improve people's quality of life, try to ease their pain, and help them feel better about themselves?
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
In all cases where a person is contemplating suicide for any reason, you should do everything in their power to help them. But for some people, no matter how hard you try to fix it, life will continue to not be worth living. Forcing those people to stay alive for years and years in pain is not kind and is not good.
And of course, those people are going to have disabilities, either physical or mental. That doesn't mean we're going out of our way to help disabled people kill themselves, it just means that a desire to kill oneself in the first place is, by definition, the product of an unhealthy person.
I do acknowledge how legalizing assisted suicide (as opposed to independent suicide, which is silly to criminalize for already discussed reasons) can lead to questionable circumstances that border on murder. And for that reason, I'm not sure where I stand on the issue. But arbitrarily deciding that "life" is more important than "living" in any meaningful sense of the word seems pointless to me.
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold: I do acknowledge how legalizing assisted suicide (as opposed to independent suicide, which is silly to criminalize for already discussed reasons) can lead to questionable circumstances that border on murder. And for that reason, I'm not sure where I stand on the issue. But arbitrarily deciding that "life" is more important than "living" in any meaningful sense of the word seems pointless to me.
This point I can agree with. It would be very difficult to legalize assisted suicide without opening the door for serious abuses and for that reason alone, I'm torn on the legal end of the issue issue. But in a general, moral sense, there are times when I think the most humane thing to do is to help someone to die.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Christine: This doesn't even make sense to me. Whyever should it be illegal?
Because otherwise there is no legal standing when you attempt to prevent it.
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by Christine: This doesn't even make sense to me. Whyever should it be illegal?
Because otherwise there is no legal standing when you attempt to prevent it.
I'm still not following this...you can't prevent something unless it's illegal?
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
On what basis would the police prevent someone from committing suicide if it were legal to do so?
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
rivka: Preventing something doesn't always require legal action. Talking someone out of it is a moral way to stop someone from committing suicide that does not resort to the use of force.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
The Straight Dope has an article on the history of the law and suicide.
Police officers intervene in many situations where nothing illegal is being done: e.g., if someone is in jeopardy from falling off a building or tree or cliff (whether intentionally there or not), if someone is deemed to be a risk to self or others (to be detained and hospitalized, with culpability to be determined by the courts), etc.
I think there is some concern I am missing here, as I don't see why illegality is necessary for assistance or even detainment -- as, for example, someone behaving bizarrely in public and considered to be a risk to him/herself can be detained while it is determined whether that person is of unsound mind, even in states where suicide is not illegal. Maybe one of our lawyers can weigh in?
---
Edited to add: a couple of rewordings and the underscoring that I have a nagging feeling I am indeed missing the thrust of the complaint
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: On what basis would the police prevent someone from committing suicide if it were legal to do so?
Well, let's take the high-drama suicide jumper. I'm thinking...humanity? It certainly beats the people driving by in their cars while a woman sits on the edge of a bridge, delaying traffic, egging her to jump. We don't need laws to make us compassionate people.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
I am heading out to take care of other things, but I did find this, an online booklet explaining the rights of those with mental health disorders under UK law. Although it is the UK and not the US, I believe similar rationale is used in the States; i.e., the focus is on assistance, not punitive.
quote:Can the police detain me for any other reason?
If you are in a public place, the police also have the power to detain you if they think you have a mental disorder (section 136) and that you are in immediate need of care and control. They must take you to a place of safety , preferably a hospital, but possibly a police station. You can be held there, until an Approved Mental Health Professional (AMHP) and either one or two doctors have assessed you, for up to 72 hours. This power cannot, at present, be used to detain you if you are on private premises. They can move you from one place to another within this period; for example, from a police station to a hospital for the assessment.
---
Added: I suspect those engaged in committing suicide (or who appear to be doing so in a serious attempt) can be assumed to have a mental health disorder until it is ruled out by a mental health professional. But this isn't something I am up to speed on anymore, and doubtlessly, things do vary by jurisdiction. I do think modern underlying rationales are generally similar, though.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Fine. Now let's talk about someone who is not going to traumatize passersby or do damage to someone else's property. They have pills and they're at home.
If suicide is legal, then what standing does "harm to self" have?
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
(Should I refer you to the post I just made, or did you already see it and find it still wanting? Just checking -- things go by fast.)
---
Added: I'm not sure why this seems to be a sensitive or charged topic, either, or if I am just misreading you, rivka. If it is a tense matter, I'm happy to leave it here -- I have no vested interest in the conversation.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Tangentially, here is a fabulous explanation of what chronic pain sufferers go through.
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Fine. Now let's talk about someone who is not going to traumatize passersby or do damage to someone else's property. They have pills and they're at home.
If suicide is legal, then what standing does "harm to self" have?
It's still a matter for human compassion. Someone is clearly hurting and whoever discovers this (be they the police or family or friend or neighbor) ought to get them to a hospital. It's a sickness, like a heart attack. Do we need to make heart attacks illegal in order to be able to call 9-1-1 and get emergency service?
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
That is, I am not sure whether it is being claimed that the police cannot intervene in cases where there is no action being taken directly against some law (which they can, though, as above), or whether they should not (presumably because it is believed that the police shouldn't have the authority to exercise in this situation that they already do have).
The latter would be a call for philosophic justification, I take it? Joel Feinberg explains John Stuart Mills' argument about voluntariness in Harm to Self, which may be a good starting point for further discussion. But I'm on my way to lunch, weeding, and the garage. Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
I saw it. I'm not assuming any sort of punitive reason (I agree that's pretty useless).
I still don't see the difference people seem to think there is between suicide (in a presumably depressed but otherwise healthy individual) and assisted suicide. I also suspect this could go round in circles for pages without any real exchange of information.
And I have better things to do with my day off. Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
Enjoy your day. I will mine, as well. And the world will keep turning here without us! Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Maybe we could license it. One could obtain a license after going through some process with various health care/psychiatric/legal/whatever personnel. Committing suicide with or without help without a license would still be illegal.
With, say, a three day waiting period. This would allow for intervention in the case of momentary desperation type suicides and yet still allow people who have made a firm decision that life is to too painful to have the right to make that choice.
ETA: Also assisting a suicide without a license would be illegal. That would form some sort of obstacle to offing sick but still kicking grandma.
[ June 09, 2009, 03:52 PM: Message edited by: kmbboots ]
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: I saw it. I'm not assuming any sort of punitive reason (I agree that's pretty useless).
I still don't see the difference people seem to think there is between suicide (in a presumably depressed but otherwise healthy individual) and assisted suicide. I also suspect this could go round in circles for pages without any real exchange of information.
And I have better things to do with my day off.
The only reason I would remotely suggest Assisted Suicide be illegal is because it could more easily create an environment in which people with disabilities are "encouraged" to off themselves.
I consider depression to the point of suicide to be a form of terminal illness that needs to be treated. We don't need laws saying people who die from cancer are doing something illegal. But we could certainly use laws saying that deliberately giving someone an injection of cancer-inducing-substance counts as murder.
Granted, I'm NOT that certain assisted suicide should be illegal in the first place (in fact I'm still leaning towards the opposite) but there's a pretty clear distinction in my mind.
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: I saw it. I'm not assuming any sort of punitive reason (I agree that's pretty useless).
I still don't see the difference people seem to think there is between suicide (in a presumably depressed but otherwise healthy individual) and assisted suicide. I also suspect this could go round in circles for pages without any real exchange of information.
And I have better things to do with my day off.
The difference between suicide and assisted suicide is the assistance -- and it's huge in a legal sense. If someone gets assistance committing suicide, then there is always the possibility that they did not want to die and that, in fact, the assistance was really murder. Also, the person providing the assistance may have encouraged the person to want to die. There is a lot of moral and legal ambiguity there and it is definitely not a black and white issue.
Of course, when someone kills himself there might have been someone in his life egging him on. You hear stories about that sometimes and it's part of the darker side of human nature that sometimes makes me despair that there is little good in the world.
Hmmmm....and perhaps that is one reason why suicide should be illegal? Because then egging someone on could be considered an accessory? That has possibility...I'll have to think about it.
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
Sorry to jump in on this late and rushed, but I'll try to do more tomorrow. I've been kind of busy lately, earning myself a special blog entry on the "Hating Autism" blog, verbally berating a conference audience, and belittling a follower of Lyndon LaRouche from a podium. Oh, and I said some nasty things about Randall Terry, too.
This discussion has shifted a bit, and I wanted to address some of the earlier points.
I agree with what CT said about cases in which DNR not only won't work, but in the rare instances when resuscitation occurs, only results in great suffering for a slightly (a few days) increase in how long you live.
There's a different side to the story, however.
Here are two examples:
A coworker here is a young woman with spinal cord injury. It happened about ten years ago. Her family had to fight with the staff of two different hospitals to maintain her ventilation, feeding tube and subsequent rehabilitation. She isn't on a vent or tube now. The staff even urged the young woman herself to take herself off the vent and die when she was awake. Her story should be available online soon.
Another friend has a neuromuscular condition and is currently at a long-term care facility waiting for the paperwork to get him what he needs in his own home. His mother noticed that someone put a "DNR" on his chart. Turns out it was the social worker - who said she just assumed he would have one. Please note that putting that down without the person's consent (or approved surrogate) is contrary to NYS law. It only stayed on the chart for an hour, but you have to wonder how many "I just assumed" errors don't get caught.
Relevant to the latest parts of the discussion is today's blog entry - kind of a "how I spent my weekend" kind of thing:
More tomorrow. Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Christine, you misunderstand me. I am asking why some people seem to think assisted suicide is ok, but plain old suicide is not. I suspect it has something to do with not valuing the lives of those who are old or sick.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
quote: Another friend has a neuromuscular condition and is currently at a long-term care facility waiting for the paperwork to get him what he needs in his own home. His mother noticed that someone put a "DNR" on his chart. Turns out it was the social worker - who said she just assumed he would have one. Please note that putting that down without the person's consent (or approved surrogate) is contrary to NYS law. It only stayed on the chart for an hour, but you have to wonder how many "I just assumed" errors don't get caught.
THAT is attempted murder in my book.
*insert tiring rant about social workers that bores and offends everyone*
DNR, and assisted suicide should both require WITNESSES and paperwork. No one should be allowed to assume or simply take someone's word for it.
Boots: Your solution would ruin the surprise. (I know, I know.. don't joke about suicide...)
I don't want a death license from the government. The idea gives me the willies. If there is a right to privacy, ending your life has got to be the most private and personal thing you can do.
However, the idea of a license for assisted suicide *does* strike me as a good idea, given the state's responsibility to prevent murder.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Christine, you misunderstand me. I am asking why some people seem to think assisted suicide is ok, but plain old suicide is not. I suspect it has something to do with not valuing the lives of those who are old or sick.
Not exactly. I think that people could more easily understand the desire for suicide in someone so helpless by illness that they would need assistance. That kind of helplessness is terrifying to some people and is often accompanied by great pain.
Plain old suicide is often a response to more transitory impulses - say being a teenager in many tragic cases.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
quote:Originally posted by sndrake: I agree with what CT said about cases in which DNR not only won't work, but in the rare instances when resuscitation occurs, only results in great suffering for a slightly (a few days) increase in how long you live.
How rare? *interested
The tallies I've seen of total DNRs are not in middle-aged or young people, regardless of condition; e.g., mostly 80+ yrs of age and in intensive care environment as the bulk of them.
[ June 09, 2009, 05:41 PM: Message edited by: ClaudiaTherese ]
Posted by Eaquae Legit (Member # 3063) on :
quote:Originally posted by sndrake: Sorry to jump in on this late and rushed, but I'll try to do more tomorrow. I've been kind of busy lately, earning myself a special blog entry on the "Hating Autism" blog, verbally berating a conference audience, and belittling a follower of Lyndon LaRouche from a podium. Oh, and I said some nasty things about Randall Terry, too.
The entry on you was hilarious, and sad. I can't believe how much ugliness I had to wade through to find that post, though. What a sad, angry person.
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Christine, you misunderstand me. I am asking why some people seem to think assisted suicide is ok, but plain old suicide is not. I suspect it has something to do with not valuing the lives of those who are old or sick.
In any type of suicide, a person's life is in his own hands, so value doesn't really play into the questoin for me. I'm also not sure in what sense of the word it is "ok" or "not ok" to commit any type of suicide. I don't think "ok" ever plays into it. It's an act of desperation, an expression of deepest pain. Anytime there is a way to end that pain in life, then this is the preferable solution.
ETA: Thinking about it a bit more, I think I may see this duality (the idea of assisted suicide being ok but regular suicide not being ok) as a problem in the exact opposite direction. It's the idea that it's not ok to commit suicide if you're clinically depressed that I see as an inability to understand that depression is a disease rather than a weakness -- something that's all in the mind. Of course, I don't think we should let anyone die if there is a way to help , but many times when people say it is not ok for a person to commit suicide, they go on to say that suicide is selfish, cowardly, or weak.
[ June 09, 2009, 07:53 PM: Message edited by: Christine ]
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
I have not said any of those things. I do think suicide is always wrong, but that is not why.
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: I have not said any of those things. I do think suicide is always wrong, but that is not why.
I know you didn't. Most of those comments were not directed at you, they were just my own mind wandering after reading what you wrote.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
to: sndrake:
Thanks for posting here.
The story of the "I just assumed" is pretty scary to me. I'm glad the mistake was caught.
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
I think that one big difference between assisted suicide and regular suicide is the "sound mind" idea. A person with cancer is presumably still able to make sound decisions for himself, but the clinically depressed person is not. (I am not actually arguing that point- but it is a distinction I have heard people make for this argument).
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
I have heard the argument as well. I do not grant that it is true.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
It seems to me (and I admit I might be wrong) that a lot of the idea behind assisted suicide has to do with the suicide being approved of or endorsed.
I find it counterintuitive that involvement of another person would increase soundness of mind -- if that's even what was being suggested.
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: I think that one big difference between assisted suicide and regular suicide is the "sound mind" idea. A person with cancer is presumably still able to make sound decisions for himself, but the clinically depressed person is not. (I am not actually arguing that point- but it is a distinction I have heard people make for this argument).
I can see why people would say this, but I don't think it's true. This argument makes it seem as if a sound mind is anything other than a legal term when in reality, we are all swayed by the pressures in our lives and our bodies. The terminally ill cancer patient's mind is filled with pain just as much as the suicidally depressed person.
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
1) We all have the terminal illness called "life". The only difference is in duration.
2) Family members are the first suspects in cases of murder. What does this say about trusting family members always to have the patient's best interest in mind in other life-and-death situations?
3) My 19 year old son had DNR put on his chart by a nurse. When I said DNR? That means Do Not Resuscitate! Don't put that on there! The nurse told me she didn't really know what it meant, she just always put it there in that spot on the form. I found that unbelievable, but it's true. I honestly think she didn't know what it meant.
4) My mom has had suicidal depression on and off for most of her life. Now she's in her 70s and still has it. She's very big on suicide (assisted or not) being okay for old people. But it's also true that she doesn't value many people's lives. She thinks only if you're strong and perfect and able to pull your own load should you be allowed to live. She thinks societies who leave the old people on the mountain to die are the wisest.
I think all that comes from her suicidal depression which is a physical ailment, plus a mistake in her understanding of life. I think we're all "profitless servants", the strongest of us no less than the weakest, and all of our lives are gifts to us which none of us deserve more than others. I definitely don't want her in charge of any of my end of life decisions, and she doesn't want me deciding for her either.
5) End of life care decisions are always hard. There are no good choices, in many cases. So I'm always grateful when it's not my decision to make. I try not to second-guess those whose decision it is. I beg forgiveness from any in the afterlife for whom I have made wrong decisions. It's an agonizing thing, either way. I'm including pets whom I consider to be fully "people" and cherished family members.
6) I've spent a good deal of time talking to people who want to die, most of them young and perfectly healthy. They all seem to have obviously mistaken ideas of themselves and their place in the world. "Everyone will be relieved when I'm dead", "nothing I ever did was good", "I've felt this way my whole life", (when you know of many times when they seemed genuinely happy, that they deny), etc. Major depressive episodes cause people's brains to lie to them in these ways. These things FEEL true, but they aren't.
7) Depression is often a side effect of chronic diseases like diabetes, heart disease, etc. Oftentimes when ill people feel like they want to die, it's because of depression rather than any objective view of their situation.
So how do you untangle these things? I think when it's your decision, you try to err on the side of life and hope. That's my answer. Thank heavens it's not often my decision to make.
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
quote: Originally posted by sndrake: I agree with what CT said about cases in which DNR not only won't work, but in the rare instances when resuscitation occurs, only results in great suffering for a slightly (a few days) increase in how long you live.
How rare? *interested
The tallies I've seen of total DNRs are not in middle-aged or young people, regardless of condition; e.g., mostly 80+ yrs of age and in intensive care environment as the bulk of them.
I mistyped. I was in a hurry. What I meant was that - in circumstances such as you describe (body riddled with cancer, etc.) - when the CPR rarely *succeeds*, it doesn't do much to prolong life but causes a lot of suffering.
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
quote:The entry on you was hilarious, and sad. I can't believe how much ugliness I had to wade through to find that post, though. What a sad, angry person.
I don't look at him quite so charitably. The guy has a history of being something of a predator in regard to people who seem vulnerable. He's been kicked off of a number of sites.
I never linked to that entry or wrote about it - they guy needs attention the way that fire needs oxygen. And what really ticked him off is that I allowed him *one* comment on my blog, to which I replied:
quote: If you'd bothered to do a little digging into the nature of my disabilities, you'd know that they are identifiable. Doctor-induced head injury at birth.
But that's not really the point with you is it? This is entertainment for you. I hope that whatever you get out of playing the bully online results in some benefits - like maybe sparing your loved ones from verbal abuse or worse.
I know that you love finding new places to play. This will not be one of them.
Your first comment on this blog is also your last one.
I don't give a flying crap what you think about it or what you say. Most of the readers of this blog have little or no interest in neurodiversity issues and aren't interested in anything you have to say.
Good luck finding other playmates (or people to bully).
Then I just cut him off. Deleted his submitted comments. Refrained from commenting on his blog attack on me (which is full of factual misinformation, among other things), and didn't post about it.
I'd like to say this was about taking the high road for me, but honestly, it is just common sense and I knew it was the most annoying, infuriating of all possible responses.
But for the record, I claim the high moral ground on this one, OK? Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
Bob said, taking my name in vain :
quote: I would like to point out that I am not an enthusiastic supporter of euthanasia. I do believe that the individual has the right to choose. The problem I have in how things are implemented here in the US is that "assistance" starts to look a lot like murder in some cases.
It is also a problem that in some areas we already see slippage from "individual choices" to "we know _____ would not want to have to live this way."
The Not Dead Yet organization is a great resource for folks who wish to see the issue from another perspective, by the way. I think Diane, Stephen & crew are the most articulate folks on the web, period.
Anyway, Glenn, I think the US has a history of coming to terms with difficult social issues, but that it takes us a long time -- sometimes generations. We get there, eventually, and, it seems to me, get to the point of siding with individual freedom -- sometimes even to the detriment of society in general. But that's us. That's who we are.
For disability activists, this isn't quite it. It isn't really about individual freedom unless "assistance" is made available to everyone serious about wanting to kill themselves.
Here's the closing paragraph in a flyer we just used in Chicago:
quote:WHY WE CARE: People with disabilities are faced with multiple hardships in our society. Discrimination in education and employment lead to wide-scale impoverishment. The multitude of physical and attitudinal barriers that still prevent full inclusion of people with disabilities into the life of society leaves many isolated and in despair. This despair is remediable – calling for time, money and resources – to help people out of the ditch. People with disabilities deserve the same suicide prevention as everybody else. Assisted suicide, giving people a shove when they look into the abyss, takes no time, money or effort at all – and it’s the final abandonment, the ultimate discrimination.
Please notice the absence of the word "depression" - clinical depression isn't necessary for getting to the point of feeling life isn't worth living. And in many cases, neither medical intervention nor counseling is really what is needed.
The annual meeting of the Final Exit Network was there. In other years, the news surrounding this group would be a major national story, but it only gets (occasionally) front page coverage in Atlanta and Phoenix where group members face charges. At last count, I have 24 entries on the Final Exit Network on the Not Dead Yet blog. I've been the major voice used by reporters in terms of what token opposition exists in news coverage - that is, where coverage actually contains any contrary voices.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote:Originally posted by sndrake: For disability activists, this isn't quite it. It isn't really about individual freedom unless "assistance" is made available to everyone serious about wanting to kill themselves.
Why would someone who is physically capable need assistance?
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
kmbboots asked:
quote:Why would someone who is physically capable need assistance?
That's a good question, but it's almost never asked. The simple answer is - they don't "need" it, they *want* it.
Whether we're talking about Kevorkian's body count, What we know George Exoo's body count, the Final Exit Network "eligibility" criteria, the majority of people (from what limited info is available) of those who have taken legally prescribed lethal doses in Oregon - almost all have had more than enough physical ability to kill themselves in any number of ways.
It's really about access to a certain *means* to commit suicide, and access to those means are controlled by the medical profession.
FWIW, there are high-level quadriplegics who have joined NDY on occasion that say they can come up with quite a long list of creative ways to kill themselves if they wanted to do that. Ventilator users already have the right to have their vents shut off, and to be sedated when it happens.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
Actually, killing yourself is harder than it sounds. And I don't just mean the mechanics of it (though making sure you don't fail is tough too. Failure can mean extreme physical damage and an inability to try again. Or worse, Group therapy sessions.) The will power to actually off yourself has been bred out of humanity over time. That doesn't mean people can't do it (because, obviously, they do) just that you can't just pick up a gun, point it at your head and casually pull the trigger. Your lizard brain won't let you. Anyone who COULD do that suicided themselves out of the gene pool long before you were born.
For an able bodied person seeking to end their life, of their own free will, someone there to hold their hand, and help with the mechanics would be an enormous comfort in their last moments.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:People with disabilities deserve the same suicide prevention as everybody else. Assisted suicide, giving people a shove when they look into the abyss, takes no time, money or effort at all – and it’s the final abandonment, the ultimate discrimination.
Exactly, sndrake - this is why I'm so opposed to assisted suicide.
It is also terribly open to abuse, to family members choosing what would be easiest for them instead of thinking about the person who needs help.
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Pixiest: Actually, killing yourself is harder than it sounds. And I don't just mean the mechanics of it (though making sure you don't fail is tough too. Failure can mean extreme physical damage and an inability to try again. Or worse, Group therapy sessions.) The will power to actually off yourself has been bred out of humanity over time. That doesn't mean people can't do it (because, obviously, they do) just that you can't just pick up a gun, point it at your head and casually pull the trigger. Your lizard brain won't let you. Anyone who COULD do that suicided themselves out of the gene pool long before you were born.
For an able bodied person seeking to end their life, of their own free will, someone there to hold their hand, and help with the mechanics would be an enormous comfort in their last moments.
But this is exactly why assisting an able-bodied person is *not* a good idea. Unless the pain has gotten so strong that you can overcome instincts and pull the trigger, then you're probably not ready to die....there's probably still hope.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
Christine: On the other hand, if someone is there holding your hand, maybe you'll decide you want to live. And there's someone there to *ask* if you really want to do this.
Despair is most consuming when you're completely alone.
Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
Indeed (to Christine's comment), I see absolutely no reason to make suicide easy. If you really want to kill yourself, and no amount of convincing will sway you, you have the choice to do any number of things to end your own life without dragging anyone else into it.
I will say though, anecdotally, that I had a friend who attempted suicide (before I met her), who was fortunate enough that another friend intervened to save her life. She is now living very happily in a completely different and better situation. It pains me to think of how close she came to missing all of those new and better experiences, because of something that, while awful for her to go through, was temporary.
I do not support assisted suicide. I support safety nets under bridges and intervention by friends and family who actually care about the individual. I ascribe to the idea that anyone who attempts suicide is (at least temporarily) not in their right mind, and needs help.
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
quote: Actually, killing yourself is harder than it sounds. And I don't just mean the mechanics of it (though making sure you don't fail is tough too. Failure can mean extreme physical damage and an inability to try again. Or worse, Group therapy sessions.) The will power to actually off yourself has been bred out of humanity over time. That doesn't mean people can't do it (because, obviously, they do) just that you can't just pick up a gun, point it at your head and casually pull the trigger. Your lizard brain won't let you. Anyone who COULD do that suicided themselves out of the gene pool long before you were born.
Pix, do you realize that your statements here don't hang together real well? In this pdf document on suicide statistics from the CDC, it says that in 2005 alone approximately 32,000 people died by suicide. Obviously, it either isn't genetic or people are reproducing before they commit suicide.
You also said:
quote:On the other hand, if someone is there holding your hand, maybe you'll decide you want to live. And there's someone there to *ask* if you really want to do this.
It's a nice thought, but it really isn't borne out by facts. The group that's made the news the past few months - Final Exit Network - claims to have assisted about 200 people in suicides using helium-filled plastic bags. Interestingly, not ONE ever changed their mind - no one freaked out from the combination of claustrophobia and suffocation. It lends credence to the claims by Georgia Bureau of Investigation agents that part of the "help" involved holding people's hands down so they wouldn't "accidentally" take the bag off.
A suicide attempt interrupted, with "exit guides" and a person in need of immediate medical attention - could have been messy, couldn't it? Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:It lends credence to the claims by Georgia Bureau of Investigation agents that part of the "help" involved holding people's hands down so they wouldn't "accidentally" take the bag off.
Oh, that's horrifying. Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
32,000 is a pretty small number in the grand scheme of things. How many people do you reckon give serious consideration to suicide in any given year? How many people do you think have their finger on the trigger or the pills in their hand, or, in my case, hand on the ignition? Trust me. It's difficult.
As far as Final Exit goes, I wouldn't characterize the entire concept of assisted suicide by one group of people who go around helping *stranger* off themselves. Assistance should come, in ideal circumstances, from someone who cares about you and knows what you need to do, but would be much happier if you changed your mind.
(edited to add: Holding their hands down so they couldn't take off the bag = murder.)
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
Again, Pix, it's an interesting conjecture, but for this...
Most people (who are not old, ill or disabled) who tell someone they want to commit suicide get the following reaction from friends:
Your life is worthwhile; I won't help you do that; What are the ways I can help make your life better?
And similar variations on that theme. One of two broad categories of events follow from that:
The suicidal individual gets help, or suffers through, and in the end - one way or another - moves on with living.
Or they go ahead and attempt to commit suicide. There are various reasons for people failing - ambivalence, lack of planning and research, or leaving a chance factor in survival, etc.
What happens when the reaction from a friend is this?
"All that matters to me is that you want to kill yourself and you want me to do it. I'll make sure you aren't alone and you don't screw it up."
Kind of narrows the range of possibilities, doesn't it?
As for killing yourself being difficult, so is living. And supporting someone in the hard work in wanting to live is a helluva a lot harder than supporting someone to kill themselves.
I hear what you say about an ideal world, but I wasn't born on that world and I don't think you were either. I've often wondered what it would be like to live there. Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
I imagine that the conversations that justifiably convince a loved one to assist a suicide are more along the lines of:
"Please, please god, make it stop hurting." "Honey, you just had your morphine. I can't give you any more." Please, please, I am begging you to make it stop hurting."
And those conversations going on over and over again for days or weeks.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
sndrake: You've got a nice little false dichotomy going. A friend would/should try to talk them out of it before offering to help. I would also think the friend would let the person know that backing out at any time would be welcome.
quote: I hear what you say about an ideal world, but I wasn't born on that world and I don't think you were either. I've often wondered what it would be like to live there.
Yeah yeah.. sacrifice the rights of all because a few might abuse it. I hear this argument in a lot of different debates from gambling to drinking to marijuana to SSM. I don't buy it in any of them.
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Pixiest: sndrake: You've got a nice little false dichotomy going. A friend would/should try to talk them out of it before offering to help. I would also think the friend would let the person know that backing out at any time would be welcome.
What kind of friend would do anything of the sort? Wow, I'm glad I don't know any of your friends.
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
quote:I imagine that the conversations that justifiably convince a loved one to assist a suicide are more along the lines of:
"Please, please god, make it stop hurting." "Honey, you just had your morphine. I can't give you any more." Please, please, I am begging you to make it stop hurting."
And those conversations going on over and over again for days or weeks.
Again, though, this doesn't jive with information that is actually available. I'll dig out the links tomorrow (try to), but in the case of Oregon and in the case of Kevorkian, pain doesn't come any near the top of the list of reasons people want to commit suicide - it's issues like "fear of being a burden" or "fear of losing autonomy." Pain is used to sell assisted suicide as a policy, but it's not a major reason that gets reported in why people who actually go that route want to kill themselves.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
quote:Originally posted by Christine: What kind of friend would do anything of the sort? Wow, I'm glad I don't know any of your friends.
Well, fortunately I don't have any so you don't have to worry about that, thank you very much. (I'm an uncharismatic, personality-less space alien, remember?)
These are hypothetical friends who would be inclined to help with suicide if you needed it. As opposed to strangers that are, apparently, sndrake's assistants of choice.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
It seems that sndrake's position is that nobody should assist suicide, neither friend nor stranger.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote:Originally posted by sndrake:
quote:I imagine that the conversations that justifiably convince a loved one to assist a suicide are more along the lines of:
"Please, please god, make it stop hurting." "Honey, you just had your morphine. I can't give you any more." Please, please, I am begging you to make it stop hurting."
And those conversations going on over and over again for days or weeks.
Again, though, this doesn't jive with information that is actually available. I'll dig out the links tomorrow (try to), but in the case of Oregon and in the case of Kevorkian, pain doesn't come any near the top of the list of reasons people want to commit suicide - it's issues like "fear of being a burden" or "fear of losing autonomy." Pain is used to sell assisted suicide as a policy, but it's not a major reason that gets reported in why people who actually go that route want to kill themselves.
Even if it is only some or even any, it is enough for me to want that right to be available to them.
Again, make them get licenses. From qualified people who can make sure that all other options have been explored and that the person is not being pressured.
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Pixiest:
quote:Originally posted by Christine: What kind of friend would do anything of the sort? Wow, I'm glad I don't know any of your friends.
Well, fortunately I don't have any so you don't have to worry about that, thank you very much. (I'm an uncharismatic, personality-less space alien, remember?)
Well I must have missed that, because you actually seem to me to be an interesting person. Not so sure about the space alien bit, but hey, this is the Internet so theoretically you could be anyone. Would be pretty cool...I always dreamed of meeting an alien.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
Well, that's very sweet of you, Thank you. But unfortunately the space alien part is only metaphor.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)