• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Featured Serious attack on people soul : now they want to legalise Euthanasia

Discussion in 'Christian Philosophy & Ethics' started by mikeforjesus, Nov 23, 2017.

  1. JackRT

    JackRT "Karma" can bite you in the butt

    +6,949
    Canada
    Christian
    Married
    As of 2016 medically assisted suicide is legal in Canada under very strict legal and medical conditions.
    Euthanasia in Canada - Wikipedia
    I believe this to be a good law.
     
  2. Archie Dupont

    Archie Dupont New Member

    80
    +25
    United States
    Protestant
    In Relationship
    This does not sound at all as seeing this case as an incident. For one your are talking in plural (and I have not heard of similar cases to date). You talk about 'kicking and screaming'. I would advice to read the report: that did not happen. Furthermore you don't acknowledge the fact it is an excess for which the doctor was reprimanded. The doctor was cleared yes, by criminal law, as doctors are almost never punished via the justice system (like aviation controllers, as a suspect in that sense they would have right of silence, what would hinder the finding of the truth). A reprimand by the commission is in the Netherlands a very severe punishment for a doctor, it can destroy a career. So the fact that this case was an exception, that disciplinary action was taken and that this is not at all Dutch policy, doesn't really resonate in your original post I quote above.

    For the last part I think you are correct. We will not gain anything with further discussion. Our viewpoints are too far apart. We will not agree on the role doctors play in helping their patients. You seem to believe that the sole purpose of the doctor is to extend life at all cost. In my opinion the doctors role is to extend life as far as possible up to the point where there isn't any quality in living that life. And if so, the doctor is the right (and only) person to interfere with life. He is the only one with sufficient medical expertise to act responsibly in this regard.

    I have however enjoyed a fruitful discussion with substance and I thank you for that!
     
  3. Quid est Veritas?

    Quid est Veritas? In Memoriam to CS Lewis

    +3,739
    Protestant
    Married
    Yes, my wording was perhaps a bit misleading and emotive. I do however find it egregious and know from personal experience that for every reported case there are many that go unreported. I do think Euthanising dementia sufferers on these grounds unacceptable, as did 220 Dutch doctors as mentioned in one of the newspaper reports I attached.
    No, I think doctors should treat their patients. We should extend life as far as possible with as good quality as possible. However, when prognosis becomes too poor or further intervention deleterious to quality of life - such as certain regimes of chemotherapy - then we should step back and let nature run its course, with agreement from the patient of course. I don't think we should extend life at all costs nor that doctors are supposed to treat patients with the sole goal of extending the organism's existence.
    I object to actively ending life. There comes a point where we should stop our interventions beyond palliative care like opiates and multimodal pain regimens, but I don't think we should go kill the patient when this point is reached.
    My pleasure. Perhaps I spoke too hasty, but yes, we shall have to agree to disagree.
     
  4. Quid est Veritas?

    Quid est Veritas? In Memoriam to CS Lewis

    +3,739
    Protestant
    Married
    Another point worth considering, is that if we Euthanise the terminally ill, we lose incentive to research and actively combat those illnesses. If there aren't many terminally ill, why would limited research grants be used trying to stop the illnesses involved? Without institutions with such patients, they will be somewhat forgotten about or loom less large in our research efforts. There would also be a far smaller pool of people available for studies on the conditions.

    To illustrate what I am saying, there is very little research being done on Malaria outside the third world, as it has been largely eradicated there. American Universities aren't studying TB as much, more diabetes and cardiovascular diseases. We study what morbidities we find in our populations, so if we artificially lower the disease burden in the population by Euthanasia, the incentive to address and treat that burden is also lowered.
     
  5. Archie Dupont

    Archie Dupont New Member

    80
    +25
    United States
    Protestant
    In Relationship
    I understand your view as it would seem logical that if killing the patient is a viable option, that would stop the necessity to go to every length to save the patient. So far however, in the countries where euthanasia is legal, that is only so if all possible cures or pain lifting treatment is exhausted. Only if the patient is in unbearable agony without prospect of improvement, euthanasia is possible. I am glad to observe that we have not (yet) come to the crossroads where in other circumstances than the above, euthanasia is allowed.

    Just for informational purposes (not to spike further debate), 2 months ago the Dutch justice system started the first criminal investigation since the adoption of the euthanasia law, in the very case that we were debating about! It is probable that even in the Netherlands, such careless wrongdoing can result in penile punishment.. Doctors are almost never criminally punished, so the gravity of this decision is actually astounding for Dutch standards:

    Dutch:
    Eerste strafrechtelijk onderzoek naar arts na euthanasie

    English:
    Google Translate
     
  6. Quid est Veritas?

    Quid est Veritas? In Memoriam to CS Lewis

    +3,739
    Protestant
    Married
    For completeness, Belgium has been putting to death people suffering from Mental Illness for years, who are not terminally ill, and on occasion generally healthy otherwise. Some of these that were accepted for Euthanasia were in their 20s and 30s for mood disorders. A good review article is quoted below:

    Euthanasia for people with psychiatric disorders or dementia in Belgium: analysis of officially reported cases

    I do not consider Euthanasia a viable treatment for mental illness or depression, but advocates for Euthanasia on occasion support it for "mental anguish". @Archie Dupont , "Unbearable suffering with no prospect of improvement" is a highly subjective term therefore.
     
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2017
  7. Archie Dupont

    Archie Dupont New Member

    80
    +25
    United States
    Protestant
    In Relationship
    Of course it is. That is why patients themselves and people near them do not have the authority or expertise to decide that. If anyone can make that judgement, it is a doctor, who is most qualified and informed about a certain disease or disorder. If anyone can make a accurate judgement if someone is suffering unbearably, it is the doctor. A politician cannot make that decision, nor can he for practical reasons decide that per case. But politicians have acknowledged that there can be situations where euthanasia is the humane thing to do. Therefore they have constructed the law in a wide fashion (instead of a restricted one) where the doctor is the one making the decision. It's a system of discretional politics and it is one of the best inventions in that scene. Lets make the ones with the real expertise able to make the decisions, not the politicians themselves.
     
  8. Quid est Veritas?

    Quid est Veritas? In Memoriam to CS Lewis

    +3,739
    Protestant
    Married
    I think though that doctors are biased by being exposed to too much suffering. Bias works both ways. This is why I espouse a neutral Euthanasist, neither doctor nor politician, to decide; although I would rather no Euthanasia takes place.

    It is interesting though that psychiatric evaluation is not required and often not done, when patients sought Euthanasia in Belgium - even for those with mood disorders - as noted in the above review article. I would think this was the first thing that should be done if someone requests Euthanasia. It should be taken far more seriously in my opinion.
     
  9. Tetra

    Tetra Well-Known Member

    798
    +427
    Christian
    Married
    Euthanasia should be legalized, not even be debatable to me.
     
  10. mikeforjesus

    mikeforjesus Senior Member Supporter

    968
    +50
    Oriental Orthodox
    If it is legalised then it affects all not just those who want a quick death. Even they you should not help end their life.Euthanasia is assisted suicide.
    A person normally against suicide may be suicidal and you want to have fake/false compassion and end his life ?
     
  11. Tetra

    Tetra Well-Known Member

    798
    +427
    Christian
    Married
    Not trying to be rude, but I don't understand what you're trying to say here.

    I hunt, and I can't stand to see an animal suffering from a poorly placed shot. Not only does it break my heart, it's immoral to allow it to suffer. Anyone with an ounce of compassion would put it down. If human's are worth more than animals, how much more immoral would it be to allow them to suffer??
     
  12. RedPonyDriver

    RedPonyDriver Professional Pot Stirrer

    +2,270
    Christian
    Married
    US-Democrat
    That was my thinking as I watched my mother suffer...all I could think was that if one of my pets was in that sort of shape, the kindest thing to do would be to end it's misery and pain. I still remember taking one of my dogs to the vet....she was suffering from cancer and it wasn't good. It KILLED me to make that choice but it was the kindest thing...a quick, humane end to her suffering. Why did I have to watch my mother suffer and waste away over the course of months?
     
  13. mikeforjesus

    mikeforjesus Senior Member Supporter

    968
    +50
    Oriental Orthodox
    Her suffering led to her salvation if she accepted God the voice of Holy Spirit knocking at door of her heart

    You got to love God more than parents even if that just means love His law and change it not for yourself. But you also got to trust His judgement and also if not you bring condemnation to yourself and your family for that is like suicide not to trust His judgement and if God judgement to many is severe as it may be why then do you resist it if it is true and bring judgement to yourselves

    Revelations says whoever adds or takes away I will take His part from the holy city and from the things written in the book

    He even told the martyrs they had to endure and not deny Him in tribulation. Be faithful unto death and I will give you the crown of life
    He who overcomes I will confess His name before My Father
    If they had to overcome so do all


     
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2017
  14. RedPonyDriver

    RedPonyDriver Professional Pot Stirrer

    +2,270
    Christian
    Married
    US-Democrat
    I gave up the "suffering = holiness" thing a long time ago. If you haven't experienced what I did, do me a favor and keep your judgment and platitudes to yourself. Thank You.
     
  15. compassion 4 humanity

    compassion 4 humanity Member

    161
    +80
    United States
    Methodist
    Single
    There’s a horrific condition called locked-in syndrome. It’s where a person is fully aware of things, but they can’t move or communicate because their body is entirely paralyzed. If I ever developed such a condition, I would be un utter torment. Indeed, anyone would. I would hope to be euthanized in such an event. There is no point in living if your life is deeply miserable, you’re suffering intensely, and there’s no hope of recovery.

    Euthanasia is evil if it’s used to kill someone who is healthy but depressed. But for intractable suffering like locked-in syndrome, euthanasia can end prodigious misery and suffering. In such a case, euthanasia can be ethical.

    Consider this. Murdering someone for no reason is evil. But killing someone in war—e.g. an American soldier killing a horrible ISIS terrorist—is a good type of homicide. Likewise, there is bad euthanasia and good euthanasia. It is important to make this distinction.
     
Loading...