4 ms·

I'll never understand how in this day and age we still allow people to die suffering this way. How come we are ok with euthanasia for pets but not people?

samus 3y ago
It is allowed in some places. The problem is it's a terrible slippery slope which has been used to get rid of people whose lives were considered to not be worth living.
Mo3 3y ago
"We" don't. Here in NL euthanasia is freely available if needed.
nicoburns 3y ago
> How come we are ok with euthanasia for pets but not people? I think because: - It mostly wasn't an issue we had to deal with until recently because we didn't have the medical techniques to preserve people's lives so long anyway. - There are some concerns around people being forced into it that require any laws enabling it to be carefully designed. - Religion providing it's usual function of inertia around societal customs slowing the change. Pretty much everyone I know under the age of 60 (and many older) support euthanasia for people who have dementia or some other unpleasant condition that affects their quality of life (self-determined, not forced on people), so I'm quietly confident that it will be happen soon. I'll be pretty mad if it's not available for me if/when I get to the point that I want it!
lr4444lr 3y ago
Because pets are property. There is no concept of consent. Human consent to die vs. pathological suicidal ideation is a very tricky thing.
gosub100 3y ago
It doesn't need to be legal to do it. People commit suicide all the time. The government doesn't need to be involved in each and every section of our lives, from cradle to grave.
- samus 3y ago
  Those attempts sometimes fail, and then people might be in an even worse condition than they were before. Maybe quadriplegic and/or in a psych ward. The government is involved in every section of our lives. Births are registered, deaths are tracked, and mysterious deaths are investigated. But in this case, the government is asked to exactly not be involved; just giving licensed professionals* the permission to perform euthanasia under certain conditions. *: not necessarily doctors if they want to stick to a strict interpretation of the Hippocratic oath

samus 3y ago

It is allowed in some places. The problem is it's a terrible slippery slope which has been used to get rid of people whose lives were considered to not be worth living.

Mo3 3y ago

"We" don't. Here in NL euthanasia is freely available if needed.

nicoburns 3y ago

> How come we are ok with euthanasia for pets but not people? I think because: - It mostly wasn't an issue we had to deal with until recently because we didn't have the medical techniques to preserve people's lives so long anyway. - There are some concerns around people being forced into it that require any laws enabling it to be carefully designed. - Religion providing it's usual function of inertia around societal customs slowing the change. Pretty much everyone I know under the age of 60 (and many older) support euthanasia for people who have dementia or some other unpleasant condition that affects their quality of life (self-determined, not forced on people), so I'm quietly confident that it will be happen soon. I'll be pretty mad if it's not available for me if/when I get to the point that I want it!

lr4444lr 3y ago

Because pets are property. There is no concept of consent. Human consent to die vs. pathological suicidal ideation is a very tricky thing.

gosub100 3y ago

It doesn't need to be legal to do it. People commit suicide all the time. The government doesn't need to be involved in each and every section of our lives, from cradle to grave.

samus 3y ago
Those attempts sometimes fail, and then people might be in an even worse condition than they were before. Maybe quadriplegic and/or in a psych ward. The government is involved in every section of our lives. Births are registered, deaths are tracked, and mysterious deaths are investigated. But in this case, the government is asked to exactly not be involved; just giving licensed professionals* the permission to perform euthanasia under certain conditions. *: not necessarily doctors if they want to stick to a strict interpretation of the Hippocratic oath