6 ms·

From personal experience, I can very much relate to and agree with this piece. My father went through a similar process: cancer (melanoma) – two years of treatm

From personal experience, I can very much relate to and agree with this piece. My father went through a similar process: cancer (melanoma) – two years of treatment and coming to terms with the facts – euthanasia. As a family, we have been very matter-of-fact about it, which was definitely something he encouraged and participated in. We frequently talked about all aspects of his disease, the future, how it affected him and us. Sometimes one of us sighed that it would have been so much better if he would have suddenly died in his sleep but I always disagreed with that, it would just have come with a different set of emotions and grieving. I am actually very happy that we were able to share parts of this process with each other while he was still around. The weekend before his death, our house was filled with people who worked up the courage to come say goodbye, he sat among them in the living room and took a few minutes in person with everyone as much as his state allowed. I sat on his bed as he was treated with euthanasia, which was one of the most intense experiences of my life. I still miss the man every day, but because of the process we had together, I have nothing but fond memories of the times he was still there, including the very hard periods of time that come with a disease like this. This turned into a bit more text than I intended but my point is this: If you ever have a choice in the way you are to die, take heed of the points in this story. It may seem brutal at times to be as honest and open as you can about such an intimate process, but having gone through it once, I have absolutely no regrets. I wish Pieter and his loved ones all the best in the coming times.

jawilson2 10y ago
Out of curiosity do you live in the US?
- sp332 10y ago
  The twitter account in bsander's profile says Amsterdam.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- bsandert 10y ago
  I am from the Netherlands. Euthanasia is legal here, although strictly regulated (as I think it should be by the way, this is not the sort of choice that should be taken or approved lightly by anyone involved). Several doctors had to sign off on it, and they were thorough in making sure that this was his decision alone and that nobody around him was "pushing" him into it. Fortunately (if you can call it that), his medical situation was a textbook case of unbearable and hopeless suffering, and also he still had a clear enough mind to express his wishes. That made the approval process fairly straightforward in his case.
  - throwaway324324 10y ago
    For those wondering what the typical regulations consist of, I found the following article doing a quick google search: >> In all jurisdictions, the request for euthanasia or pas has to be voluntary, well-considered, informed, and persistent over time. The requesting person must provide explicit written consent and must be competent at the time the request is made. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3070710/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3070710/ This is fairly comprehensive, which is reassuring. However, the article goes on to say: >> Despite those safeguards, more than 500 people in the Netherlands are euthanized involuntarily every year. In 2005, a total of 2410 deaths by euthanasia or pas [physician assisted suicide] were reported, representing 1.7% of all deaths in the Netherlands. More than 560 people (0.4% of all deaths) were administered lethal substances without having given explicit consent. For every 5 people euthanized, 1 is euthanized without having given explicit consent. Just because regulations are strict, does not mean that they are strictly followed, or enforced.
    - mjevans 10y ago
      It would be relevant to know, of the 'involuntary' numbers, how many of those were statutory involuntary and for what reasons. My hope is that in the majority of those cases the paperwork either just didn't get finished in time, or that the subject in some way did actually want this but started the process too late to be clearly of their own decision.
      - 10y ago
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
nihonde 10y ago
I just spent over a year with someone who died of cancer on Tuesday. I don't know if she would have opted for suicide if it had been legal here, but I do know that the last few weeks were extremely difficult for everyone involved. I have a very clear image of how cancer kills a person now. We did our best to maintain her dignity, but the body is not on your side. It's humbling, to say the least, which is a profound lesson in and of itself.
- entilzha 10y ago
  I think that euthanasia is very different from suicide. Euthanasia is an acceptance of very probable death in a way that reduces both the person's suffering, but also the suffering of those who love them (much as the beautifully written articles talks about). Suicide in contrast can devastate the lives of the people who loved them.
  - throwaway324324 10y ago
    No, that's not euthanasia. On that account, sedation without death would count. Euthanasia is when you ask (or in some cases, force, against their conscience) someone to kill you. Compare with "suicide by cop". We are going to die. Some of us are going to die on the street after decades of physical pain, alienation, emotional abandonment, mental illness, and alcoholism/drug abuse. Many of these have less true hope for a good life than a cancer patient like Pieter, but it would be insane if there were dozens of comments lamenting the lack of voluntary suicide services in homeless shelters (though maybe we're a bit sensitive about that sort of thing not working out too well the last time we tried it). Humans have something that puts us above being put down like an animal. And we have to suffer for it - like we do for many of the other things that make us human.
    - PieterH 10y ago
      This is not accurate. Euthanasia in Belgium (as in all countries where it's a legal act) has nothing to do with suicide and everything to do with removing pain and criminality from what is a fairly widespread act. * Doctors who wish to help their suffering patients can do so without fear of criminal prosecution. * Terminal patients can control their own deaths without family demanding expensive, painful treatments that have little or no chance of success. * Such patients are protected from punishments such as loss of insurance. * Family and friends can be shielded from extended stress and trauma. Given that cancer is a majority cause of death in the West, and tends to be incurable in most cases, and tends to lead to massive suffering, euthanasia is IMO one of the most fundamental human rights. You are of course free to reject such a course based on your own beliefs. However to argue that suffering and pain are the cost of being human is... invalid.
paxcoder 10y ago
Revolting. I protest against suicide, the "assistance", the approval, and the very idea that it could somehow be eu (good).
- admnor 10y ago
  Luckily, nobody cares what you think.
- Retric 10y ago
  I suspect you vastly underestimate the suffering in the last few weeks of cancer. you are literally being slowly eaten alive until there is not enough left to keep up basic bodily functions and pain medications generally stop being effective. You can be in chemical induced sleep or unimaginable pain.
- Ironchefpython 10y ago
  That's an opinion that is perfectly valid for an individual to have. However, when you express this opinion in an expressly negative way, it makes it sound like you are attempting to invalidate the opinions of people who might hold contrasting beliefs. And history has shown this to be one of the top 10 causes for conflict and wars. Perhaps you might find a more positive way to express your personal beliefs? Perhaps you could say, "I wish we lived in a world without pain or terminal illness, so nobody would have to make the choice between pointless suffering and death". If you find some way to contribute to the conversation without calling a man dying of cancer "revolting", you would have a better chance of finding common ground and reaching consensus.
  - throwaway324324 10y ago
    To disagree is to try to invalidate contrasting beliefs. They aren't saying "people who commit suicide are revolting", nor "I wish we never had to make tough choices that tested our moral constitution" (like you suggest). They're saying "saccharine suicide-endorsement is revolting". There's no consensus arising from softening and "adjusting" each other's views. We're better off describing things clearly. What is euthanasia, except killing yourself because you have no hope for your remaining life, like every other suicide? Is it justified because you had your family and your doctor agree with you?

jawilson2 10y ago

Out of curiosity do you live in the US?

sp332 10y ago
The twitter account in bsander's profile says Amsterdam.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
bsandert 10y ago
I am from the Netherlands. Euthanasia is legal here, although strictly regulated (as I think it should be by the way, this is not the sort of choice that should be taken or approved lightly by anyone involved). Several doctors had to sign off on it, and they were thorough in making sure that this was his decision alone and that nobody around him was "pushing" him into it. Fortunately (if you can call it that), his medical situation was a textbook case of unbearable and hopeless suffering, and also he still had a clear enough mind to express his wishes. That made the approval process fairly straightforward in his case.
- throwaway324324 10y ago
  For those wondering what the typical regulations consist of, I found the following article doing a quick google search: >> In all jurisdictions, the request for euthanasia or pas has to be voluntary, well-considered, informed, and persistent over time. The requesting person must provide explicit written consent and must be competent at the time the request is made. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3070710/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3070710/ This is fairly comprehensive, which is reassuring. However, the article goes on to say: >> Despite those safeguards, more than 500 people in the Netherlands are euthanized involuntarily every year. In 2005, a total of 2410 deaths by euthanasia or pas [physician assisted suicide] were reported, representing 1.7% of all deaths in the Netherlands. More than 560 people (0.4% of all deaths) were administered lethal substances without having given explicit consent. For every 5 people euthanized, 1 is euthanized without having given explicit consent. Just because regulations are strict, does not mean that they are strictly followed, or enforced.
  - mjevans 10y ago
    It would be relevant to know, of the 'involuntary' numbers, how many of those were statutory involuntary and for what reasons. My hope is that in the majority of those cases the paperwork either just didn't get finished in time, or that the subject in some way did actually want this but started the process too late to be clearly of their own decision.
    - 10y ago

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

nihonde 10y ago

I just spent over a year with someone who died of cancer on Tuesday. I don't know if she would have opted for suicide if it had been legal here, but I do know that the last few weeks were extremely difficult for everyone involved. I have a very clear image of how cancer kills a person now. We did our best to maintain her dignity, but the body is not on your side. It's humbling, to say the least, which is a profound lesson in and of itself.

entilzha 10y ago
I think that euthanasia is very different from suicide. Euthanasia is an acceptance of very probable death in a way that reduces both the person's suffering, but also the suffering of those who love them (much as the beautifully written articles talks about). Suicide in contrast can devastate the lives of the people who loved them.
- throwaway324324 10y ago
  No, that's not euthanasia. On that account, sedation without death would count. Euthanasia is when you ask (or in some cases, force, against their conscience) someone to kill you. Compare with "suicide by cop". We are going to die. Some of us are going to die on the street after decades of physical pain, alienation, emotional abandonment, mental illness, and alcoholism/drug abuse. Many of these have less true hope for a good life than a cancer patient like Pieter, but it would be insane if there were dozens of comments lamenting the lack of voluntary suicide services in homeless shelters (though maybe we're a bit sensitive about that sort of thing not working out too well the last time we tried it). Humans have something that puts us above being put down like an animal. And we have to suffer for it - like we do for many of the other things that make us human.
  - PieterH 10y ago
    This is not accurate. Euthanasia in Belgium (as in all countries where it's a legal act) has nothing to do with suicide and everything to do with removing pain and criminality from what is a fairly widespread act. * Doctors who wish to help their suffering patients can do so without fear of criminal prosecution. * Terminal patients can control their own deaths without family demanding expensive, painful treatments that have little or no chance of success. * Such patients are protected from punishments such as loss of insurance. * Family and friends can be shielded from extended stress and trauma. Given that cancer is a majority cause of death in the West, and tends to be incurable in most cases, and tends to lead to massive suffering, euthanasia is IMO one of the most fundamental human rights. You are of course free to reject such a course based on your own beliefs. However to argue that suffering and pain are the cost of being human is... invalid.

paxcoder 10y ago

Revolting. I protest against suicide, the "assistance", the approval, and the very idea that it could somehow be eu (good).

admnor 10y ago
Luckily, nobody cares what you think.
Retric 10y ago
I suspect you vastly underestimate the suffering in the last few weeks of cancer. you are literally being slowly eaten alive until there is not enough left to keep up basic bodily functions and pain medications generally stop being effective. You can be in chemical induced sleep or unimaginable pain.
Ironchefpython 10y ago
That's an opinion that is perfectly valid for an individual to have. However, when you express this opinion in an expressly negative way, it makes it sound like you are attempting to invalidate the opinions of people who might hold contrasting beliefs. And history has shown this to be one of the top 10 causes for conflict and wars. Perhaps you might find a more positive way to express your personal beliefs? Perhaps you could say, "I wish we lived in a world without pain or terminal illness, so nobody would have to make the choice between pointless suffering and death". If you find some way to contribute to the conversation without calling a man dying of cancer "revolting", you would have a better chance of finding common ground and reaching consensus.
- throwaway324324 10y ago
  To disagree is to try to invalidate contrasting beliefs. They aren't saying "people who commit suicide are revolting", nor "I wish we never had to make tough choices that tested our moral constitution" (like you suggest). They're saying "saccharine suicide-endorsement is revolting". There's no consensus arising from softening and "adjusting" each other's views. We're better off describing things clearly. What is euthanasia, except killing yourself because you have no hope for your remaining life, like every other suicide? Is it justified because you had your family and your doctor agree with you?