5 ms·
Before you jump the gun like that again: The context is most likely about the suffering of the patient in question from simply existing in that state, and there
by nativecoinc 4y ago
Before you jump the gun like that again: The context is most likely about the suffering of the patient in question from simply existing in that state, and there being no way to alleviate the suffering (only prolonging the life). Not about saving money.
So it’s a lose-lose: the patient suffers and society has to pay for their privilege to suffer (without recourse, most likely).
And maybe you disagree fundamentally with things like assisted suicide. But someone who posts something like what you replied to most likely do not.
- notacoward 4y agoBefore you jump the gun again... > Not about saving money Then why even bring it up, let alone cite it as something that change[ds] one's views? > maybe you disagree fundamentally with things like assisted suicide In fact I do not. There was a time when my mother wanted to end it, and I wasn't the one who stopped her. I respected her right to make her own choice. Her condition subsequently improved to the point where she no longer wished that, leading to the current status quo, but that's already far more than any of the pissants in this thread deserved to hear about it. Expressing one's own wish for a supposedly-loved one to die is indefensible, even if they also wish it for themselves.
- gopher_space 4y agoI think the part you’re missing is that the loved one died years ago but the body is being kept alive. There’s no personality left. Everything’s gone. Alzheimer’s and dementia are incredibly cruel experiences for everyone involved. There’s no reason to prolong the situation.