Quote:

---

Under euthanasia laws, a person must be in a state of intolerable suffering with no realistic hope of relief and it should only be applied in exceptional and extreme circumstances.

---

Who decides such things? For a "person" of faith the answer is God.

Seamaster said:

---

It's like the difference between abortion and miscarriage.

---

Using this analogy, it would be like abortion in the case where the fetus has a zero chance of survival, but a continued pregnancy would likely cause harm to the mother.

The ultimate slippery slope as Canada is proving. Tough topic.

"In this situation, the doctor may decide, together with the parents, to terminate the child's life. This decision is always made in consultation with the parents and, if possible, also with the child."

This makes it seem like they may allow cases where they do not, but the article is pretty vague all around.

Yet some of you are missing that it oftentimes isn't that clear of a process where we gather around the bedside, pull the plug, and they drift away

We already have 13 states doing this with some clear requirements (typically patient requesting multiple times over a period of time, two docs have to sign off as terminal with < 6 months, patient administers), many of which have been in place for over a decade. We haven't seen that slippery slope. It's unfortunate that Texas isn't one of them. You get one option and it can be about a week of withering away in a diaper, coughing up secretions.

Ag with kids said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Euthanasia is a weird topic. We consider it the humane thing to do for our pets when they are terminal and in severe pain. But it's considered evil and barbaric to do to our loved ones.

---

As someone who had to tell the doctors to pull the plug on my late wife, it is not an easy decision to make.

I wish that pain on absolutely no one....

---

Same with me dad. It still haunts me.

doubledog said:

---

Quote:

---

Under euthanasia laws, a person must be in a state of intolerable suffering with no realistic hope of relief and it should only be applied in exceptional and extreme circumstances.

---

Who decides such things? For a "person" of faith the answer is God.

---

If I know its time for me to go, and I'm physically and mentally capable, would you rather I:
A. Hike to a ledge and step off, hoping its enough to end me, and forcing the S&R team to scrape me off the rocks and deal with that trauma
B. Go to a medical professional who is prepared to help me end it in a humane way.

Please, let me know how YOU would like me to handle it.

Enrico Pallazzo said:

---

Is there though? Hospice at the end is providing no water, no food, only morphine droplets inside the cheek. Which it can involve days and days of that. I'd say we are absolutely splitting hairs on what is "willingly killing" just to feel better about ourselves, and quite frankly, we are picking the more stomach-turning, undignified manner

---

In my father's case while in hospice it was definitely the morphine that allowed him to pass. We managed the situation for several weeks without resorting to using morphine it finally got to the point that it was unanimous that giving morphine was absolutely the right thing to do and he passed within a few days of being given morphine regularly

My best friends father passed later that summer and he had a similar experience with morphine

Whether it is insurance companies or government controlled healthcare in other areas, I do not want them to be tempted for the easy/cheaper way out instead of offering what could be life saving care.

I will try to find it but there was a Canadian woman battling treatable cancer and they started having "end of life" discussions with her. The husband moved to the US and she is doing well with the treatments offered. The people with the purse strings should not have any ability to be involved in ending someone's life.

Sepsis or pneumonia is not the worst outcome for many people

Yes, sometimes it's a few days, sometimes it is much longer. I just think it's somewhat twisted thinking that giving them drugs to try to manage breathlessness, anxiety, and secretions while providing no nourishment is somehow superior to letting a truly short-term terminal patient (<6 months, multiple doc verified) make a choice not to subject themselves to that.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

What is the dividing line between compassion for the suffering and selfish convenience to not have to deal with the process play out on the part of others? Even if that is only emotional relief?

---

If the one who is wishing to move on desires to do so posthaste. The minor in the OP presents a tougher case. If the child is old enough or aware enough to voice opposition, that presents an issue.

I have rarely seen stories of someone who wanted the patient to die soon for their personal convenience, though some may say earlier the lingering death of a loved one takes an incredibly toll no doubt.

Went through hospice this time last year with my mother. My father had committed suicide 25 years prior and in no way did was she going to check out early. But though her time in hospice was quick, it was still rather painful and unpleasant until the morphine incapacitated her the last few days.

There should be a much more dignified process even though it has improved.

Teslag said:

---

Euthanasia is a weird topic. We consider it the humane thing to do for our pets when they are terminal and in severe pain. But it's considered evil and barbaric to do to our loved ones.

---

It's definitely a difficult topic. It's not necessary to let people suffer with no hope of getting better, but also it's a slippery slope and when the left is in charge of it the slope becomes much more slippery.

dmart90 said:

---

doubledog said:

---

Quote:

---

Under euthanasia laws, a person must be in a state of intolerable suffering with no realistic hope of relief and it should only be applied in exceptional and extreme circumstances.

---

Who decides such things? For a "person" of faith the answer is God.

---

If I know its time for me to go, and I'm physically and mentally capable, would you rather I:
A. Hike to a ledge and step off, hoping its enough to end me, and forcing the S&R team to scrape me off the rocks and deal with that trauma
B. Go to a medical professional who is prepared to help me end it in a humane way.

Please, let me know how YOU would like me to handle it.

---

Does option A still count if I borrow a Subaru Outback and yell "viva lesbianos" whilst driving off a cliff in Montana? Cause that is my current consideration for if that time ever comes…

ts5641 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Euthanasia is a weird topic. We consider it the humane thing to do for our pets when they are terminal and in severe pain. But it's considered evil and barbaric to do to our loved ones.

---

It's definitely a difficult topic. It's not necessary to let people suffer with no hope of getting better, but also it's a slippery slope and when the left is in charge of it the slope becomes much more slippery.

---

Passing over the rainbow bridge for pets and humans is a personal one, with the advice and assistance of a medical professional where and if required, which it should not be required.

Whether you seek a guru, shaman, psychiatrist or Bible thumpin Pentecostal to guide you, that should be your decision.

On an individual level, the government should never be involved in these decisions.

Old Gorm said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BTW, while I made my personal comment earlier, I am very concerned about laws like the MAID law in Canada combined with government run healthcare.

---

One reason why the state should never have control over healthcare. For Canada, MAID is a way to eliminate those pesky old people who had the gall to pay into their worthless government health system expecting it to treat them when they need it for non life-threatening issues.

Bad knee? Shoulder pain? Boil on the ass? Go Kevorkian. That is the nature of government run healthcare under the Complete Lives System.

---

You mean...Death Panels???

Some of yall have never seen the worst of the worst. Watching my Mom and Grandmother pass away with Alzheimers was horrible. I never wish myself to live with Alzheimers. My brother and I even thought about taking my Mom to Oregon euthanize her because the laws her in Texas would put us in jail. Watche both of them whither away and my Grandmother became feral and would crawl on the floor trying to bite and scratch us.

Right, this vision some have is unplugging and drifting away while the family surrounds the bedside. In many many many cases, it is far more disturbing and much less dignified even with best care and hospice efforts

The Fall Guy said:

---

Some of yall have never seen the worst of the worst. Watching my Mom and Grandmother pass away with Alzheimers was horrible. I never wish myself to live with Alzheimers. My brother and I even thought about taking my Mom to Oregon euthanize her because the laws her in Texas would put us in jail. Watche both of them whither away and my Grandmother became feral and would crawl on the floor trying to bite and scratch us.

---

We treat violent illegal gang banger murderous child rapists orders of magnitude better than we treat end of life dementia patients. That is a fact.

We treated them like holocaust candidates during COVID. People better pray to Jesus that those folks were truly absent of mind or there may be some questions to answer for in the great beyond.

Seeing the comments here, I think there is a line being drawn that is going in different directions. 2 things can be true at the same time:

- One can see that end of life care can be the most empathetic option in extreme cases.
- One can also see that the trust in our medical insurance companies and/or government is very low and there is a concern that the end of life care would be abused for the sake of cost.

It is not a black or white issue. A for profit company or government run healthcare (i.e. VA) making decisions on death is not a good option.

I did watch my grandmother go through Alzheimer's and get to the point where her brain had forgotten how to eat, how to breath, etc. I also watched my dad (Aggie class of 67) get diagnosed with stage four pancreatic cancer. First doctor in San Antonio said that he had 6 months to live and go be with family (end of life care if an option would have been discussed). MD Anderson extended his life for 8 years!

doubledog said:

---

Quote:

---

Under euthanasia laws, a person must be in a state of intolerable suffering with no realistic hope of relief and it should only be applied in exceptional and extreme circumstances.

---

Who decides such things? For a "person" of faith the answer is God.

---

I too had to tell Dr's and nursing home folks to take my mother off all food and liquids when she was in the final stages of Alzheimer's. She couldn't eat nor drink nor swallow and was unconscious. Her doctor told me that there was a very likely chance she would aspirate food into her lungs from her feeding tube and that would lead to a very painful death. He followed up with "dehydration is a painless way to die" I asked him what he was telling me and he repeated himself. She had a directive to physicians and a DNR and I was the POA for her. I talked to my brother and we agreed on what needed to be done. I told them to take her off all food and liquids and three days later she was gone. It was her decision and I followed her directives.

Does that make me a "nonperson" of faith for following her wishes?

dmart90 said:

---

doubledog said:

---

Quote:

---

Under euthanasia laws, a person must be in a state of intolerable suffering with no realistic hope of relief and it should only be applied in exceptional and extreme circumstances.

---

Who decides such things? For a "person" of faith the answer is God.

---

If I know its time for me to go, and I'm physically and mentally capable, would you rather I:
A. Hike to a ledge and step off, hoping its enough to end me, and forcing the S&R team to scrape me off the rocks and deal with that trauma
B. Go to a medical professional who is prepared to help me end it in a humane way.

Please, let me know how YOU would like me to handle it.

---

Driving a vintage mustang over a cliff into the Grand Canyon. However this would be suicide.
A person of faith would tell you: "We do not own our life, it belongs to God and God's alone."

It took my father two weeks to die from terminal cancer. He was never alone. One of us stayed with him at all times, he was not in pain (morphine) and his eyes and smile told us all we needed to know. God decided when and where it would end.

We did not pull the plug, but we allowed him to die naturally as he wanted to do.

"God's will not mine", is the moto of a person of faith.

Where on earth are you getting your description of hospice? They do not starve or deprive you of water and only "put morphine tablets in your cheek". It is true that people dying of terminal disease often have no appetite and may not want much water, but they aren't denied it. Nobody says "No water for that guy, he is on hospice".

Rubicante said:

---

I feel like most people who are against euthanasia in all circumstances have the fortune of never having had to personally witness a loved one waste away in a 24/7 existence of agony and terror. I came very close to killing a loved one and accepting the consequences so I could release them from their torment.

---

Try having your wife ask you to kill her

"he was not in pain and his eyes and smile told us all we needed to know."

I feel like you're not appreciating the scenario being discussed. Speeding up an otherwise dignified and comfortable death is not what we're debating. We're talking about seriously considering risking a long term in prison in order to free a loved one from a living hell.

EFR said:

---

Where on earth are you getting your description of hospice? They do not starve or deprive you of water and only "put morphine tablets in your cheek". It is true that people dying of terminal disease often have no appetite and may not want much water, but they aren't denied it. Nobody says "No water for that guy, he is on hospice".

---

Didn't say they were denied it if they want it. But the one exit option we give people in Texas is oftentimes prolonged, not exactly dignified, and it isn't the disease that actually kills them

People sometimes just also see what they want to see in the "eyes and smile".

For many many others the process is decidedly less peaceful, particularly for the decision-maker(s).

It many circumstances it is the humane thing to do . It was offered to us as my mother was terminally ill at 86. She was more than ready to go and asked us to end her pain and suffering.

Teslag said:

---

Euthanasia is a weird topic. We consider it the humane thing to do for our pets when they are terminal and in severe pain. But it's considered evil and barbaric to do to our loved ones.

---

My mom passed earlier this year. She got to a point where they stopped feeding her and giving her water. How is that better?

doubledog said:

---

dmart90 said:

---

doubledog said:

---

Quote:

---

Under euthanasia laws, a person must be in a state of intolerable suffering with no realistic hope of relief and it should only be applied in exceptional and extreme circumstances.

---

Who decides such things? For a "person" of faith the answer is God.

---

If I know its time for me to go, and I'm physically and mentally capable, would you rather I:
A. Hike to a ledge and step off, hoping its enough to end me, and forcing the S&R team to scrape me off the rocks and deal with that trauma
B. Go to a medical professional who is prepared to help me end it in a humane way.

Please, let me know how YOU would like me to handle it.

---

Driving a vintage mustang over a cliff into the Grand Canyon. However this would be suicide.
A person of faith would tell you: "We do not own our life, it belongs to God and God's alone."

It took my father two weeks to die from terminal cancer. He was never alone. One of us stayed with him at all times, he was not in pain (morphine) and his eyes and smile told us all we needed to know. God decided when and where it would end.

We did not pull the plug, but we allowed him to die naturally as he wanted to do.

"God's will not mine", is the moto of a person of faith.

---

So you speak for all persons of faith? I don't believe i would ever presume that...

As a person of faith, I believe God gave us free will and the ability to exercise said free will.

dmart90 said:

---

doubledog said:

---

dmart90 said:

---

doubledog said:

---

Quote:

---

Under euthanasia laws, a person must be in a state of intolerable suffering with no realistic hope of relief and it should only be applied in exceptional and extreme circumstances.

---

Who decides such things? For a "person" of faith the answer is God.

---

If I know its time for me to go, and I'm physically and mentally capable, would you rather I:
A. Hike to a ledge and step off, hoping its enough to end me, and forcing the S&R team to scrape me off the rocks and deal with that trauma
B. Go to a medical professional who is prepared to help me end it in a humane way.

Please, let me know how YOU would like me to handle it.

---

Driving a vintage mustang over a cliff into the Grand Canyon. However this would be suicide.
A person of faith would tell you: "We do not own our life, it belongs to God and God's alone."

It took my father two weeks to die from terminal cancer. He was never alone. One of us stayed with him at all times, he was not in pain (morphine) and his eyes and smile told us all we needed to know. God decided when and where it would end.

We did not pull the plug, but we allowed him to die naturally as he wanted to do.

"God's will not mine", is the moto of a person of faith.

---

So you speak for all persons of faith? I don't believe i would ever presume that...

As a person of faith, I believe God gave us free will and the ability to exercise said free will.

---

Would that include suicide?

Is God going to consider it suicide when I choose to stop eating, drinking, and have someone dose me with opiates for a week until I pass after a stroke? The stroke didn't kill me. If not suicide, then what about getting a stronger dose of meds that makes it 5 minutes vs a week? Is that suicide? I wouldn't presume to know either, but I would pray neither condemns me to eternal damnation.

Seamaster said:

---

But it's absolutely not the same thing legally or morally.

---

Laws are written by man. It is legal according to the law in many places.

Morality is your interpretation of a divine and higher power. I would guess we believe in the same deity however I do not believe there is a moral conflict. I witnessed an uncle with dementia and cancer who was dead long before his body gave up the ghost. I would have no moral issues facing my God if I had been able to end his suffering early. As you so eloquently put it. It's not that hard.