3 ms·
>Why people continue to allow this is beyond me. If, in the end, the patient recovers, what a happy ending that would be! And we might learn how to better assi
by D_Alex 7y ago
>Why people continue to allow this is beyond me.
If, in the end, the patient recovers, what a happy ending that would be! And we might learn how to better assist others in this condition.
The alternative is giving up forever on such cases. This is also partly why I lean "against" on euthanasia.
- gekkeboom 7y agoAnd I'm so happy I live in a country that permits Euthanasia. And the rules for it are clear: (some of them) 1. Intolerable suffering 2. No outlook on any improvement There are cases where people recover after years being in coma. However, there are many, many, many more people in the same state who never recover, who are just plants. Life is not sacred. Quality of life is.
- tremon 7y agoAnd the rules for it are clear 3. Patient's affirmative consent (antedated if need be) I too am happy to live in a country with a humane policy towards voluntary end-of-life, but this is not a clear cut case where euthanasia would apply: this is a patient with at least some consciousness left, but that no court would find competent to make decisions, and with no known relatives (up until the reporter found one). The question then becomes not only whether the required conditions for euthanasia apply, but also whether the state-appointed legal guardian has the mandate to make such a fundamental decision on behalf of the patient. Personally speaking, granting that kind of power to a government representative is not something I'm comfortable with.
- sysbin 7y agoYour happy ending is subjective as mine in the end. I know if this happened to me, I would be dead because I have my AMD on file and everything can move on. Btw, what you wrote shouldn’t be against assistance in death but personally for your own situation.