Anonymous #1 10w

Not everywhere. Usually under the term “medically assisted suicide” or “physician assisted dying”. Legal in 10 states and even more so in Canada

1

Anonymous #3 8w

Yes. No one who is in their right state of mind would willingly take their own life/ask for it to be taken. Ie someone dying of cancer isnt thinking clearly because there are other factors. Not that consent is the only thing that matters, it’d be wrong even with proper consent, but there isn’t really a case where proper consent can even be given

1

Anonymous #4 8w

I will say there’s a difference between refusing unnecessary/overburdensome treatment (ie chemo if it doesn’t really extend life but actually worsens the quality of life) and actively killing somebody. My argument is against the latter, not the former. Only the intentional killing of someone else, ie assisted suicide, is wrong

1

Anonymous #4 8w

This same argument you give here could justify helping a teenager with an abusive household kill himself (a real suicide case I know of, unfortunately; he killed himself just before his mom could get him out). How would you draw the line between these two?

1

Anonymous OP 8w

I understand the moral argument, and while I disagree the religious. But “right state of mind”? States and countries that allow this typically require mental screenings. I don’t think you understand the wear of a terminal illness. The pain. The suffering. Beyond their own pain, they often are aware what it causes to their family. They literally are waiting for death. Stuck in hospice counting down days. Have you ever visited there? For some, being bedridden in pain isn’t worth it.

1

Anonymous #3 8w

Also, older adults without dementia are in their right mind. Once you reach a certain age, you come to terms with death. I’ve had many conversations with my grandmothers. One still has a lot they want to do. Another is really tired, has lost all their friends, husband, child…she isn’t suicidal. But has a DNR and as resilient as she is, I doubt will be up for another loss or medical battle.

1

Anonymous OP 8w

There are often limits to the specific circumstances (legally anyway). And that (while tragic) is suicide, not euthanasia. But morally, low to no quality of life with no reasonable expectation of prolonged life expectancy.

1

Anonymous #3 8w

I hear you, and I understand that there is pain. However, where would you draw the line? Just old folks or cancer patients? What about those living with chronic conditions that cause extreme pain? What about the disabled? People with Down syndrome? The impoverished? All of these face pain and discomfort. And there are cases in canada where people are requesting “medically assisted dying” because of financial reasons, there’s several articles about it.

1

Anonymous #3 8w

That said, DNR can be acceptable because you’re denying extraordinary intervention to keep you alive. No one is directly killing you, they’re just not taking action to prevent you from dying a natural death because it would be too invasive (ie, an elderly woman whose body probably wouldn’t hold up well to CPR, which would break at least a few ribs on a young person, much less an elderly woman, or a man with lung cancer who refuses chemo because it wouldn’t extend his life but for a few months)

1

Anonymous #3 8w

Also I have yet to use a religious argument so I’m not sure what you mean by that. I’d be curious to hear your thoughts though

1

Anonymous #3 8w

Assisted suicide is the logical conclusion of euthanasia. Once you accept that you can take someone else’s life to relieve their pain (even with their consent) it becomes hard (I’d argue impossible) to draw an effective moral line because “low to no quality of life with no reasonable expectation of prolonged life” is incredibly subjective. My example of the teenager can fit this description; a teen in a physically abusive household may well fear for his life, and the quality of life is low

1

Anonymous OP 8w

First, to clarify, I know you’re not using a religious argument, but I’ve heard those points. This actually was a topic discussed during a medical ethics class I took (really fascinating discussion). Typically, that involves damnation/hell, same thing as “typical” suicide. Yours was a point I hadn’t heard before which was what I was trying to get across, sorry for the confusion.

1

Anonymous OP 8w

As for the pain part, this is really interesting as to me it is up to the person but with a lot of careful guidance and I’d emphasize terminal cases. I’m not sure totally. I have family members who are disabled and with severe chronic pain, in addition to terminal illness, and I myself am disabled with chronic pain. I’d never consider it myself as for me- this is my life. My only life. Pain sucks and I wish it was different, but I have no other choice.

1

Anonymous #3 8w

My uncle has spent 50 years in the most severe pain. He hasn’t given up, but at the same time, his quality of life has rapidly declined the last couple years. I know mine is not as bad as him and I understand if he reaches a point where it’s too much. There is no cure for him. My aunt was terminal and had severe pain. She suffered and declined. She died from it - which was inevitable. I can’t speak for them, but… I think there are reasons.

1