4 ms·

> at the same time they slowly killed him with the morphine stopping his breathing, thankfully. Yeah, some places have two forms of assisted death available. F

> at the same time they slowly killed him with the morphine stopping his breathing, thankfully. Yeah, some places have two forms of assisted death available. Fast assisted death, or slow assisted death. Either way, you're getting medical assistance through the dying process. Not sure why some people feel like slow assisted death should be the only option.

otabdeveloper4 1y ago
> Not sure why some people feel like slow assisted death should be the only option. To reduce potential for abuse, obviously. I wouldn't trust the average doctor with proper antibiotic dosing, much less a literal killswitch.
- amelius 1y ago
  Maybe a stupid thought but why not give the patient a knob to adjust the dose?
  - otabdeveloper4 1y ago
    It's not that hard to kill yourself actually. "Assisted suicide" is for the grey area of mentally/physically incapable people.
seventhtiger 1y ago
For the same reason I'm against capital punishment. I don't trust the state with the due dilegence to have direct power over life and death. What happens when care is available but insurance figures assisted death is cheaper? The fact that someone could look at the healthcare system and say "give them the option to kill people" is wild. You can say whatever you want about criteria and process, then I want you to think of the million ways things go wrong when lofty goals are transformed into bureaucracy.
- tejohnso 1y ago
  > I don't trust the state with the due dilegence Me neither. That's why I'm glad that in any jurisdiction I've seen it available, it always comes down to the patient's choice. > I want you to think of the million ways things go wrong Nothing is perfect but if someone is suffering months or potentially years of pain I'm glad that they have the option to choose to end it legally. > The fact that someone could look at the healthcare system and say "give them the option to kill people" is wild. Nobody says that, maybe that's why it seems so wild. It's the patient that has the option, not the system. "Give patients the choice of end of life treatment that they prefer" is more like it. > due dilegence to have direct power over life and death How do you feel about police carrying firearms with authority to kill base on high pressure, low time, individual decision making?
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- squigz 1y ago
  What happens when care is available but insurance decides you don't get it, and you die anyway?
  - Thorrez 1y ago
    Assisted death is sometimes used by people who don't have a terminal illness. And there's the worry that insurance is more likely to deny treatment coverage now that a cheaper alternative (assisted death) is available. >The nonprofit organization Inclusion Canada regularly hears from people with disabilities who are offered euthanasia, including one disabled woman whose physiotherapist suggested it when she sought help for a bruised hip, said executive vice president Krista Carr. >“Our response to the intolerable suffering of people with disabilities is: ‘Your life is not worth living,'” she said. “We’ll just offer them the lethal injection, and we’ll offer it readily.” https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/some-health-care-workers-in-canada-grappling-with-patients-requesting-euthanasia https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/some-health-care-workers-... https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2024/09/16/should-euthanasia-be-allowed-for-those-with-mental-illnesses https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2024/09/16/should-e...
pjc50 1y ago
The taboo against suicide is necessary in order to maintain the taboo against suggesting other people kill themselves when they have become inconvenient to you, unfortunately. Like elderly relatives and difficult patients.
- Yeul 1y ago
  And yet people are supposed to charge enemy machine gun nests for king and country.
  - octopoc 1y ago
    The difference is, is it pro-social or not? Not whether it's good for the individual. Charging enemy machine gun nests is pro-social behavior, arguably. Killing yourself because you're in constant pain is anti-social. I'm just saying that social mores line up more with what is pro-social vs. anti-social, not what is good for the individual (which is more ambiguous anyway).
    - immibis 1y ago
      This is just a way of saying "is it good or not"? Pro-social is defined as "things I think are good", and anti-social is defined as "things I think are bad". Surely you agree that charging enemy American machine guns, if you're the Taliban, is antisocial.

otabdeveloper4 1y ago

> Not sure why some people feel like slow assisted death should be the only option. To reduce potential for abuse, obviously. I wouldn't trust the average doctor with proper antibiotic dosing, much less a literal killswitch.

amelius 1y ago
Maybe a stupid thought but why not give the patient a knob to adjust the dose?
- otabdeveloper4 1y ago
  It's not that hard to kill yourself actually. "Assisted suicide" is for the grey area of mentally/physically incapable people.

seventhtiger 1y ago

For the same reason I'm against capital punishment. I don't trust the state with the due dilegence to have direct power over life and death. What happens when care is available but insurance figures assisted death is cheaper? The fact that someone could look at the healthcare system and say "give them the option to kill people" is wild. You can say whatever you want about criteria and process, then I want you to think of the million ways things go wrong when lofty goals are transformed into bureaucracy.

tejohnso 1y ago
> I don't trust the state with the due dilegence Me neither. That's why I'm glad that in any jurisdiction I've seen it available, it always comes down to the patient's choice. > I want you to think of the million ways things go wrong Nothing is perfect but if someone is suffering months or potentially years of pain I'm glad that they have the option to choose to end it legally. > The fact that someone could look at the healthcare system and say "give them the option to kill people" is wild. Nobody says that, maybe that's why it seems so wild. It's the patient that has the option, not the system. "Give patients the choice of end of life treatment that they prefer" is more like it. > due dilegence to have direct power over life and death How do you feel about police carrying firearms with authority to kill base on high pressure, low time, individual decision making?
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
squigz 1y ago
What happens when care is available but insurance decides you don't get it, and you die anyway?
- Thorrez 1y ago
  Assisted death is sometimes used by people who don't have a terminal illness. And there's the worry that insurance is more likely to deny treatment coverage now that a cheaper alternative (assisted death) is available. >The nonprofit organization Inclusion Canada regularly hears from people with disabilities who are offered euthanasia, including one disabled woman whose physiotherapist suggested it when she sought help for a bruised hip, said executive vice president Krista Carr. >“Our response to the intolerable suffering of people with disabilities is: ‘Your life is not worth living,'” she said. “We’ll just offer them the lethal injection, and we’ll offer it readily.” https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/some-health-care-workers-in-canada-grappling-with-patients-requesting-euthanasia https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/some-health-care-workers-... https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2024/09/16/should-euthanasia-be-allowed-for-those-with-mental-illnesses https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2024/09/16/should-e...

pjc50 1y ago

The taboo against suicide is necessary in order to maintain the taboo against suggesting other people kill themselves when they have become inconvenient to you, unfortunately. Like elderly relatives and difficult patients.

Yeul 1y ago
And yet people are supposed to charge enemy machine gun nests for king and country.
- octopoc 1y ago
  The difference is, is it pro-social or not? Not whether it's good for the individual. Charging enemy machine gun nests is pro-social behavior, arguably. Killing yourself because you're in constant pain is anti-social. I'm just saying that social mores line up more with what is pro-social vs. anti-social, not what is good for the individual (which is more ambiguous anyway).
  - immibis 1y ago
    This is just a way of saying "is it good or not"? Pro-social is defined as "things I think are good", and anti-social is defined as "things I think are bad". Surely you agree that charging enemy American machine guns, if you're the Taliban, is antisocial.