3 ms·

It was common in the middle of the 20th century to not tell a terminally ill patient he/she was dying. We look back at that with horror. In your example, I'd p

It was common in the middle of the 20th century to not tell a terminally ill patient he/she was dying. We look back at that with horror. In your example, I'd prefer chosing (assisted) suicide or not. Surely you're not doing me a favor by not letting me die how I want.

ZeroGravitas 4y ago
In 1972 people with horrific treatable diseases were being lied to, so that science could record exactly how they suffered and died: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Syphilis_Study https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Syphilis_Study And that's what led to ethics rules that said you can't do that. You'd think you wouldn't need to write it down, but we did and we do. > By then, 28 patients had died directly from syphilis, 100 died from complications related to syphilis, 40 of the patients' wives were infected with syphilis, and 19 children were born with congenital syphilis.[15] > The 40-year Tuskegee Study was a major violation of ethical standards,[13] and has been cited as "arguably the most infamous biomedical research study in U.S. history."[16] Its revelation led to the 1979 Belmont Report and to the establishment of the Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP)[17] and federal laws and regulations requiring institutional review boards for the protection of human subjects in studies.
- matheusmoreira 4y ago
  I know about Tuskegee. That's a clear example of what not to do. Just one of many documented cases of criminal abuse of human beings. Stuff like this is the reason why informed consent is an absolute requirement these days. What I meant to say is I'd think twice before telling a depressed patient with a history of suicide attempts about a diagnosis of terminal illness.
  - nomel 4y ago
    Assisted suicide could be a completely rational choice, at that point [1]. It would be a choice that you, or anyone else, could not dictate. 1. https://www.statista.com/statistics/792317/medical-conditions-leading-to-medically-assisted-deaths-in-canada/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/792317/medical-condition...

ZeroGravitas 4y ago

In 1972 people with horrific treatable diseases were being lied to, so that science could record exactly how they suffered and died: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Syphilis_Study https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Syphilis_Study And that's what led to ethics rules that said you can't do that. You'd think you wouldn't need to write it down, but we did and we do. > By then, 28 patients had died directly from syphilis, 100 died from complications related to syphilis, 40 of the patients' wives were infected with syphilis, and 19 children were born with congenital syphilis.[15] > The 40-year Tuskegee Study was a major violation of ethical standards,[13] and has been cited as "arguably the most infamous biomedical research study in U.S. history."[16] Its revelation led to the 1979 Belmont Report and to the establishment of the Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP)[17] and federal laws and regulations requiring institutional review boards for the protection of human subjects in studies.

matheusmoreira 4y ago
I know about Tuskegee. That's a clear example of what not to do. Just one of many documented cases of criminal abuse of human beings. Stuff like this is the reason why informed consent is an absolute requirement these days. What I meant to say is I'd think twice before telling a depressed patient with a history of suicide attempts about a diagnosis of terminal illness.
- nomel 4y ago
  Assisted suicide could be a completely rational choice, at that point [1]. It would be a choice that you, or anyone else, could not dictate. 1. https://www.statista.com/statistics/792317/medical-conditions-leading-to-medically-assisted-deaths-in-canada/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/792317/medical-condition...