unless someone is seriously ill/sick with a disease to something that is terminal or something that seriously hinder's their life I'm not in favor of this.. if it can be proven someone's quality of life is SO POOR they can barely function then I'm in favor.
Nobody should have to prove that they are miserable or suffering. To anyone. I understand suicide is a horrific tragedy that can be avoided in many cases. I know the pain it brings to the family and friends left behind. But ultimately, its an individuals choice to die if he/she feels they can't live thru whatever it is they are dealing with.
Cowardly move, in my opinion, sorry. I don't feel sorry for anyone who commits suicide if they are not sick.
I think quality of life is subjective, though. And it sort of ties in to JP's question up there as well...
I wonder...we treat our our animals with kindness and humaneness by determining their life has become more painful than pleasurable for them, and then do what we feel is right for them.
How can we not afford OURSELVES that option, by our own choice? Even if not by our own hand?
But these guys weren't blind yet. They weren't suffering. And who knows what their health was like. They could have had no other health problems. I don't know, but it seems unethical.
We also put our beloved animals down for a final rest when they are sick or badly injured. My grandparents actually had a dog that was blind and deaf and continued to live for 2 years before dying.
Maybe this is a bad analogy, but a family member of mine is going in for a double-mastectomy later this month due to her family history and a recent doctor's visit. Some might say she should wait to see what happens further before taking such a drastic step, but it's her prerogative to not take that chance.
Again, not the best comparison, but maybe these men didn't want to wait until they were fully blind (I too don't know what their health was like or how far along their sight failure was). If I were diagnosed with ALS or Alzheimers, I wouldn't want to reach a certain point on that awful road; I would want the ability to choose not to live that way.
(that said, I've seen through your posts & your experiences how you value life )
I think quality of life is subjective, though. And it sort of ties in to JP's question up there as well...
I wonder...we treat our our animals with kindness and humaneness by determining their life has become more painful than pleasurable for them, and then do what we feel is right for them.
How can we not afford OURSELVES that option, by our own choice? Even if not by our own hand?
But these guys weren't blind yet. They weren't suffering. And who knows what their health was like. They could have had no other health problems. I don't know, but it seems unethical.
We also put our beloved animals down for a final rest when they are sick or badly injured. My grandparents actually had a dog that was blind and deaf and continued to live for 2 years before dying.
Maybe this is a bad analogy, but a family member of mine is going in for a double-mastectomy later this month due to her family history and a recent doctor's visit. Some might say she should wait to see what happens further before taking such a drastic step, but it's her prerogative to not take that chance.
Again, not the best comparison, but maybe these men didn't want to wait until they were fully blind (I too don't know what their health was like or how far along their sight failure was). If I were diagnosed with ALS or Alzheimers, I wouldn't want to reach a certain point on that awful road; I would want the ability to choose not to live that way.
(that said, I've seen through your posts & your experiences how you value life )
but these two aren't in any physical pain or discomfort. there are many people out there that are deaf and blind.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
What an unusual case. Makes me wonder - If they were determined to die, would they have done it themselves if the doctor option wasnt available?
If they are set on ending their lives, (If I were a friend or family member) i'd rather they had the option to do it medically as opposed to a gun, noose, pills, or bridge. (Im not saying I agree with it, btw, just trying to imagine if it had a more immediate impact on me how I'd react)
but these two aren't in any physical pain or discomfort. there are many people out there that are deaf and blind.
And I'd say kudos to those people if they're happy in their lives. Who knows what kind of discomfort these two would live with upon losing their sight?
I just think it's their right to make that choice for themselves.
but these two aren't in any physical pain or discomfort. there are many people out there that are deaf and blind.
And I'd say kudos to those people if they're happy in their lives. Who knows what kind of discomfort these two would live with upon losing their sight?
I just think it's their right to make that choice for themselves.
I think quality of life is subjective, though. And it sort of ties in to JP's question up there as well...
I wonder...we treat our our animals with kindness and humaneness by determining their life has become more painful than pleasurable for them, and then do what we feel is right for them.
How can we not afford OURSELVES that option, by our own choice? Even if not by our own hand?
But these guys weren't blind yet. They weren't suffering. And who knows what their health was like. They could have had no other health problems. I don't know, but it seems unethical.
We also put our beloved animals down for a final rest when they are sick or badly injured. My grandparents actually had a dog that was blind and deaf and continued to live for 2 years before dying.
Maybe this is a bad analogy, but a family member of mine is going in for a double-mastectomy later this month due to her family history and a recent doctor's visit. Some might say she should wait to see what happens further before taking such a drastic step, but it's her prerogative to not take that chance.
Again, not the best comparison, but maybe these men didn't want to wait until they were fully blind (I too don't know what their health was like or how far along their sight failure was). If I were diagnosed with ALS or Alzheimers, I wouldn't want to reach a certain point on that awful road; I would want the ability to choose not to live that way.
(that said, I've seen through your posts & your experiences how you value life )
A double mastectomy isn't ending her life though. It's just such a concrete end, the idea to choose euthanasia. I just think that using it as a way out, it should be used when there are no other hopeful options. I had a friend who lived for 5 years after getting a stage 4 breast cancer diagnosis. Wouldn't you know that she used that sad news to live it up while she could, knowing that time was limited.
Although yes, I do value life more than ever since I almost lost it, I also am not afraid of death because I dealt with coming so close to it. Still, to choose death over life, when one's healthy enough to live, it just doesn't make any sense to me.
but these two aren't in any physical pain or discomfort. there are many people out there that are deaf and blind.
And I'd say kudos to those people if they're happy in their lives. Who knows what kind of discomfort these two would live with upon losing their sight?
I just think it's their right to make that choice for themselves.
Because they have no idea what kind of discomfort they would have experienced, makes it all the more strange and somewhat of an easy way out. They didn't have a death sentence. For all of those who are in endless pain and are terminal, and don't have the option of euthanasia, this story just seems all the more ridiculous.
but these two aren't in any physical pain or discomfort. there are many people out there that are deaf and blind.
And I'd say kudos to those people if they're happy in their lives. Who knows what kind of discomfort these two would live with upon losing their sight?
I just think it's their right to make that choice for themselves.
yeah, and I'm not totally with that, but leaning towards it, but it just seems so extreme.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Comments
Cowardly move, in my opinion, sorry. I don't feel sorry for anyone who commits suicide if they are not sick.
this deaf/blind situation aside, being mentally ill IS sick.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
True. But I was thinking more terminal. Those who are suicidal from mental illness can be helped.
Again, not the best comparison, but maybe these men didn't want to wait until they were fully blind (I too don't know what their health was like or how far along their sight failure was). If I were diagnosed with ALS or Alzheimers, I wouldn't want to reach a certain point on that awful road; I would want the ability to choose not to live that way.
(that said, I've seen through your posts & your experiences how you value life
but these two aren't in any physical pain or discomfort. there are many people out there that are deaf and blind.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Reason I ask is a reflection on my earlier post:
If they are set on ending their lives, (If I were a friend or family member) i'd rather they had the option to do it medically as opposed to a gun, noose, pills, or bridge. (Im not saying I agree with it, btw, just trying to imagine if it had a more immediate impact on me how I'd react)
I just think it's their right to make that choice for themselves.
+1
A double mastectomy isn't ending her life though. It's just such a concrete end, the idea to choose euthanasia. I just think that using it as a way out, it should be used when there are no other hopeful options. I had a friend who lived for 5 years after getting a stage 4 breast cancer diagnosis. Wouldn't you know that she used that sad news to live it up while she could, knowing that time was limited.
Although yes, I do value life more than ever since I almost lost it, I also am not afraid of death because I dealt with coming so close to it. Still, to choose death over life, when one's healthy enough to live, it just doesn't make any sense to me.
Because they have no idea what kind of discomfort they would have experienced, makes it all the more strange and somewhat of an easy way out. They didn't have a death sentence. For all of those who are in endless pain and are terminal, and don't have the option of euthanasia, this story just seems all the more ridiculous.
yeah, and I'm not totally with that, but leaning towards it, but it just seems so extreme.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014