Sociopath Community

b0ring kok

You know me ;)

Edvard stated: source post

 

haart stated: source post

 It is my duty as a clinician to produce the best possible outcome for a patient.

What's "best" for the patient? Maybe a life of humiliation and suffering isn't one.

What's best for the patient might be having a loving family and a Maserati in the garage. There's only so much a doctor can do. I do think it's my responsibility to assuage the inevitability of death, where I can, but to produce it? No. That's not my job.

I dunno. If someone terminally ill or worse, imo, paralyzed and destined to a long life of misery, wants to die, they shouldn't be denied this. The only reason they are denied is because of the impact of religion on our societies.

I'm not religious. Granted, I was raised in a Catholic environment, but I'm agnostic today. I've detailed some of the reasons I'm opposed to active euthanasia. I suppose I could further speak on my discomfort at the thought that producing death might be medically sanctioned. This concerns me. State sanctioned, this further concerns me. I'm very opposed to the death penalty, and I see some parallels (on a purely legislative level, obviously they are remote circumstances in many ways). 

Forcing docs to do it is wrong, ofc. But don't make it fucking illegal and punish those who have the guts/lack the mental barriers to end a miserable life if the person is sane and says they want to die, is wrong imo. I see no argument agaisnt doing that, except religious ones. When pets are suffering, it is considered cruel not to put them down. Why would people be any different.

Because people are people. Because there are serious tangential considerations. What about inheritance? Would it be ethical to euthanise your senile grandfather to expedite your return on his estate? How might you guard against that?

haart stated: source post

I'm interested in your thoughts on this subject. I'm quite conflicted when it comes to the idea of active euthanasia.

I'll clear up some definitions in this OP, to spare us all the semiotics. 

Passive euthanasia: This would encompass giving incrementally higher doses of morphine (or X drug) that might reasonably result in patient death, where that is not the intent but, rather, a not-unexpected consequence. (I'm okay with this, and it's legal in Australia)

LMAO!  ....BWahahahaha....lol.....good lord...

Active euthanasia: This would involve giving a one-off lethal dose of morphine (or X drug), where patient death is the intended outcome. (I'm not okay with this, and it's illegal in Australia)

Passive euthanasia: This would encompass giving incrementally higher doses of morphine (or X drug) that might reasonably result in patient death, where that is not the intent but, rather, a not-unexpected consequence. (I'm okay with this, and it's legal in Australia)

Active euthanasia: This would involve giving a one-off lethal dose of morphine (or X drug), where patient death is the intended outcome. (I'm not okay with this, and it's illegal in Australia)

Active or passive are the same. It is bullshitting yourself to suggest otherwise....you don't really 'believe' there is a fundamental difference...do you?

The AMA, and other medical bodies across the world, are quite staunchly opposed to active euthanasia. I tend to be opposed also, and my reasoning is this: It is my duty as a clinician to produce the best possible outcome for a patient. It is incumbent upon me to diagnose, to treat (as best I can), and then to palliate when death becomes an inevitable consequence. It is not my duty - in my capacity as a clinician - to end life. 

I am sympathetic to the emotive arguments of pro-euthanasia activists. I can understand the enormous tragedy it must be to die an undignified, painful, protracted death. But I don't feel that active euthanasia should be the domain of the medical community.

If people wish to die, have someone else end their life. Don't ask a doctor.

Thoughts?

Legally what are the options? None. So, until such time....looks like the medical community is stuck with it. 

But how do you decide that the best possible outcome for a patient is a painful and slow death, instead of a quick and painless death?
And from this point of view, active and passive are the same.

The only difference is that one might not kill them, but is it the best possible outcome, especially when you try to avoid death?

I do not know if doctors should do active euthanasia, but someone should, but only in extreme cases, where everyday life can't even work.

Nini probably have one of the most interesting point of view about that thread. She will probably answer later if she sees it.

ThenFuckit stated: source post

And from this point of view, active and passive are the same.

Thank you. 

haart stated: source post

I do think it's my responsibility to assuage the inevitability of death, where I can, but to produce it? No.

Why not? What makes you so squirmy about death. Death is natural. Imo there is a lot of prejudice around it. If a sane patient in a shitty condition asks for death, they should have that option without people chickening out of it due to fear of being imprisoned.

I'm very opposed to the death penalty

I'm very opposed to the death penalty too. The difference is, those people don't want to fucking die. XD 

Because people are people. Because there are serious tangential considerations. What about inheritance? Would it be ethical to euthanise your senile grandfather to expedite your return on his estate? How might you guard against that?

I said it clearly. It should be done if the patient wants it, asks for it, AND his medical condition justifies it (terminally ill/in a condition that can't improve). Someone else deciding to euthanize their senile relative should be illegal ofc.

Edvard stated: source post

 

haart stated: source post

I do think it's my responsibility to assuage the inevitability of death, where I can, but to produce it? No.

Why not? What makes you so squirmy about death. Death is natural. Imo there is a lot of prejudice around it. If a sane patient in a shitty condition asks for death, they should have that option without people chickening out of it due to fear of being imprisoned.

I see death every day. I'm squirmy about being the reason someone dies, as I'd imagine most people would be.

 

I'm very opposed to the death penalty

I'm very opposed to the death penalty too. The difference is, those people don't want to fucking die. XD 

Maybe you didn't see my bit about emphasising the legislative similarities. 

 

Because people are people. Because there are serious tangential considerations. What about inheritance? Would it be ethical to euthanise your senile grandfather to expedite your return on his estate? How might you guard against that?

I said it clearly. It should be done if the patient wants it, asks for it, AND his medical condition justifies it (terminally ill/in a condition that can't improve). Someone else deciding to euthanize their senile relative should be illegal ofc.

Yeah, but how do you safeguard against that? You could fill your ailing grandfather's ears with emotionally manipulative "financial burden on the family" rhetoric to subtly sway him into euthanasia.