California To Permit Medically Assisted Suicide As Of June 9 - Polidicks

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49914943]Sorry if it seems like i'm arguing with you like you're the opposition, i'm just highly passionate about topics like this.[/QUOTE] I can certainly understand being passionate about things, maybe I was a bit unclear anyway. Sorry if I was.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49914754]That's basically saying everything we know now about how our brains function, how we work, is wrong, and is a misleading pile of garbage. Look, we know [B]so fucking much[/B] about how our brains and bodies work, there's obviously more to learn, monumentally more, but the basics are there, and they're not going to change realistically. You are neurons and chemicals being exchanged in your brain. When you die, that's lost. We know this for a fact because we've watched brains die. So, if souls, or reincarnation happens, then those elements of the personality, didn't matter. Your brain didn't matter, so all the science we have on it is garbage because of the "soul". [/quote] i suggest reading up on the hard problem of consciousness, i find [URL="http://consc.net/papers/facing.html"]this[/URL] to be a good paper. the physical processes of our mind do not necessarily explain why we experience things the way we do. [quote] Phineas Gage was a railroad worker who was a really nice man. Then, a rod was ejected through his skull and brain matter. Gage didn't die. Gage, a soft spoken and nice man, became a rude royal dick after his brain injury because it turns out, that section of his brain that governed his personality was damaged. So his personality changed in relation to a physical change to the brain.[/quote] this is actually false [quote]Gage's supposed personality and cognitive transformation happened in 1848, when the 25-year-old railroad company foreman was blasting away rock to clear the way for a railroad. He drilled a hole into a rock and, as usual, pushed the explosive powder into the hole with a three-and-a-half-foot-long iron. The powder exploded unexpectedly, driving the iron below his left cheekbone and out through the crown of his head with such force that the rod landed some 70 feet away. Gage not only survived, but, according to witnesses, talked coherently and walked just minutes after the injury. This much of the story is undoubtedly true, Macmillan says. At this point, however, myth diverges from contemporary sources. Textbooks tell how the gaping, bleeding injury — probably to one or both frontal lobes — turned the popular, temperate Gage into an angry, unstable drunk. But Gage's closer associates reported that while he was recuperating on his parents' farm, he amused his nieces and nephews by making up adventurous stories. He also showed a particular fondness for animals, especially horses. His previous employer refused to take him back after he recovered, so he earned money appearing with his tamping iron in P.T. Barnum's American Museum, a freak show in New York. Later, he worked for a New Hampshire livery stable and stagecoach company. About four years after the accident, Gage went to Chile, where he drove a stagecoach on the 60-mile route between Valparaiso and Santiago. Succeeding in this type of work in a foreign country would require adaptability, discipline and interpersonal skills, which contradicts the popular belief that Gage was intellectually and emotionally impaired, argues Macmillan. A doctor who knew him during this period observed "no impairment whatever," Macmillan adds. Nonetheless, Gage's health began to deteriorate, and in 1860 he returned to his family, now living in California. There he suffered several seizures but continued to work. He died of a seizure in 1861. "There was nothing psychopathic in Gage's behavior and … the changes in his life are more coherently explained … as his way of dealing with disfigurement that he suffered after the accident," argues Zbigniew Kotowicz, PhD, of London University in a 2007 article in the History of the Human Sciences. "Although … Phineas may not have been the Gage he once had been, he seems to have come much closer than is commonly believed," adds Macmillan in a 2010 article in Neuropsychological Rehabilitation. The myth persists "partly because a small number of writers deliberately distort the facts in order to fit Phineas into a theoretical framework of their own," says Macmillan. However, as a graduate student instructor, you can right the record, he says, by telling the true story of Gage. Or even better — encourage students to read primary-source accounts of Gage's life and draw their own conclusions. "It's a great story for illustrating the need to go back to original sources," Macmillan says.[/quote] [URL="http://www.apa.org/gradpsych/2012/09/tall-tales.aspx"]source[/URL] [quote]4) Is the brain the seat of personality or is it the soul? 5) if the soul is the actual seat of the personality, and "You", why the fuck do we have brains?[/quote] i personally believe the brain is a filter for consciousness, giving our consciousness or "souls" a machine that allows them to interact with this physical world. with each incarnation comes another filter with different inputs that have a hand in personality development while very base traits are seeded by the soul. without the brain, the soul survives but has no way of interacting with physical reality.

You're version only has more problems and is one I've encountered numerous times. Gage is one example, there's many more examples of brain trauma changing personality If you have a soul as you described, then there's information sent back and forth between the two. Information is something which must have physical traits in someway. It WOULD be detectable.

[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;49915340]i personally believe the brain is a filter for consciousness, giving our consciousness or "souls" a machine that allows them to interact with this physical world. with each incarnation comes another filter with different inputs that have a hand in personality development while very base traits are seeded by the soul. without the brain, the soul survives but has no way of interacting with physical reality.[/QUOTE] what in the hell are you talking about? reincarnation is basically trash without empirical grounding also you're ignoring the literal thousands of cases of people who have had some form of brain damage or surgery that has resulted in numerous personality and behavioural changes, not to mention that our brains resemble the brains from other species and we have pinned down a lot of what each part of the brain does and its function

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49915470]You're version only has more problems and is one I've encountered numerous times. Gage is one example, there's many more examples of brain trauma changing personality If you have a soul as you described, then there's information sent back and forth between the two. Information is something which must have physical traits in someway. It WOULD be detectable.[/QUOTE] i am not saying it will always be undetectable, rather we do not have the means to detect it at this moment. [QUOTE=Sobotnik;49915874]what in the hell are you talking about? reincarnation is basically trash without empirical grounding also you're ignoring the literal thousands of cases of people who have had some form of brain damage or surgery that has resulted in numerous personality and behavioural changes, not to mention that our brains resemble the brains from other species and we have pinned down a lot of what each part of the brain does and its function[/QUOTE] i do not disagree that changing the brain changes parts of the personality, i was rather pointing out that the case of Gage is not one of these cases. a change in how the brain processes information, usually though damage, changes the experience we go through. as i said before, i believe personality comes from the interplay between our physical brain, which synthesizes all inputs and reacts through the production of neurotransmitters and firing of neurons, and the more ethereal mind, which experiences the product of the brain and more or less makes executive decisions based upon it. yes, other species have similar brain structures to ours. they're subject to this as well, although i would say they probably experience a lower level of consciousness than we do. i ascribe to panpsychism in many ways, that sufficiently complex systems are conscious, although i believe consciousness is attracted to these systems rather than it arising from the systems themselves.

I compel everybody to watch "How to Die in Oregon". It follows people who use assisted suicide instead of suffering. It is probably the most powerful documentary I have seen. I'm glad more states are doing it. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_F-525sCzhE[/media]

i generally agree with allowing this except for the cases of depression

[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;49916208]i am not saying it will always be undetectable, rather we do not have the means to detect it at this moment. i do not disagree that changing the brain changes parts of the personality, i was rather pointing out that the case of Gage is not one of these cases. a change in how the brain processes information, usually though damage, changes the experience we go through. as i said before, i believe personality comes from the interplay between our physical brain, which synthesizes all inputs and reacts through the production of neurotransmitters and firing of neurons, and the more ethereal mind, which experiences the product of the brain and more or less makes executive decisions based upon it. yes, other species have similar brain structures to ours. they're subject to this as well, although i would say they probably experience a lower level of consciousness than we do. i ascribe to panpsychism in many ways, that sufficiently complex systems are conscious, although i believe consciousness is attracted to these systems rather than it arising from the systems themselves.[/QUOTE] Then there's information travelling between. Information is not something that would be intangible, it would be detectable. If the real world interacts with the spiritual and ephemeral world, then that interaction would be trackable. There would be tests to see it. If your "decisions" come from the ethereal world, then are people with serious brain damage that are "brain dead" just missing that part of their brain? Here's the issue, if you have this "extant" self that resides in the ethereal world, information is going back and forth, information is always quantifiable in our universe. Now, if everything is capable of conciousness, at what point do they get the "soul" as it were? When does sentience attach itself from the outside? How does that work? For me, you raise more questions than you answer, you've admitted this is more preferable belief structure, so I'm not really sure anything I say will matter. There's a lot of logical issues that you will have to bend around to explain, it doesn't seem simple, it doesn't seem like the way our universe operates. I understand we don't have all the answers right now, but there's somethings, like this kind of idea, that just don't line up with reality as far as anything I can tell.

Atleast this is a step forward in the correct direction

I think allowing assisted suicide for patients with mental illness is a very bad idea. But I'm not trying to say the state has more control over your life than you do. I suffer from Major Depression Disorder and social anxiety. I've been suicidal, I've attempted it. I was lucky enough that I had a loving, caring, and understanding family, who got me the help I needed from an unusually good state funded counseling center. I take medication for my depression and anxiety, and I see a therapist every two weeks. I go to support groups too. My life may not be all that good (never had a girlfriend, at least I went on a single date so I'm making progress lol), but I made it through college, I have a lot of friends now, and I'm generally feeling okay. I'm not feeling great, I'm very low energy, and I do get depressed throughout the month, but I'm functioning and I'm glad I'm alive. Imagine if I had a family that didn't care, or didn't understand, who told me to "Get over it." Or I didn't have access to quality mental health facilities, or I was dumped into a hospital that treated me like an animal. Maybe I couldn't afford medication. With all of those factors against me, I'd have died a long time ago, and it could have been prevented. Now, imagine there was medically assisted suicide. There'd obviously be a lot of red tape surrounding it. My parents, who had legal custody over me, would not allow for it to go through. So I'd have to be 18. I'd also have to get evaluated by a psychologist, who, knowing the basic principles of psychology, psychiatry, and methods of therapy, would flat out state that if I had access to help I could live a fulfilling life, and would recommend alternatives and not clear me for death. I also don't think you'd find a proper doctor who would betray the Hippocratic Oath: [quote=A section of the Hippocratic Oath] With regard to healing the sick, I will devise and order for them the [B]best diet, according to my judgment and means[/B] [I](i.e if there's better treatment options available I will use that instead)[/I]; and [B]I will take care that they suffer no hurt or damage.[/B] [I](I won't let them do something to hurt themselves) [/I] Nor shall any man's entreaty prevail upon me to administer poison to anyone [I](I'm not gonna kill someone when I can save a life instead)[/I]; neither will I counsel any man to do so [I](I'm not gonna let someone die needlessly, even if I'm not participating)[/I]...[/quote] So you're not gonna find a Psychiatrist or Psychologist who would approve of medically assisted suicide for mental illness. Terminal illnesses are different: the patient is going to die [I]soon[/I] and [I]we have no way to cure them or ease their symptoms so they can continue to live for a good period of time and thrive somewhat[/I]. Various mental illnesses aren't curable, but they're manageable. You don't kill people with Cystic Fibrosis if they ask for it because they can continue to live with the disease, even if it will claim their life in the future. Depression can be managed, help can be offered, lives can be saved. The depression may possibly become fatal, and a person takes their own life. If all help is given that is possible, and the patient still wants to die, and he's not in the custody of the state or a danger to the public, then he can take his own life. Without the legal or medical system present, because it won't be quick and you're dragging other people into the process that shouldn't and don't want to be there, and there will be red tape and paperwork to keep you from making a fatal mistake.

[QUOTE=Sableye;49916262]i generally agree with allowing this except for the cases of depression[/QUOTE] I think what you don't understand, and what many people don't understand, is that allowing assisted suicide by doctor would actually decrease the amount of people that kill themselves. Sure, there the impulse suicides and not much can be done about those. But for the people who plan it out weeks or months ahead, having this as an option would give them a reason to talk to a doctor. More suicidal people would start seeing doctors instead of feeling like there are no options left.

[QUOTE=Mikenopa;49918384]I think what you don't understand, and what many people don't understand, is that allowing assisted suicide by doctor would actually decrease the amount of people that kill themselves. Sure, there the impulse suicides and not much can be done about those. But for the people who plan it out weeks or months ahead, having this as an option would give them a reason to talk to a doctor. More suicidal people would start seeing doctors instead of feeling like there are no options left.[/QUOTE] Totally disagreeing with your logic. There are many resources for people to utilize if they're feeling depressed or suicidal. Local hospitals, national suicide hotline, and the affordable care act mandates mental health care as one of its essentials. It's just when you're in the throes of crippling depression it's very hard to seek out help or see the value in it, one of the symptoms of depression IS hopelessness. Support is there for those with depression but it's up to the individual to seek and engage it if they don't have anyone to do it for them. We also absolutely DO NOT want to legitimize suicide as a viable option for depression since suicidal ideations/behaviors are a symptom of it.

[QUOTE=Zonesylvania;49912710]I think it's because as things stand, it could be very open to misuse if extended towards such individuals. What would the definition be of 'too messed up in the mind to function' ? Also a number of mental illnesses are quite treatable provided the patient presents at an appropriate timing and is open to receiving the appropriate care for the same. With terminally ill patients you at least know that you're going to bring a close to their sufferings instead of needlessly keeping them on to die a lingering, painful death. With the mentally ill, it could open up a huge can of worms with regard to the legality, the issue of patient choice, the potential for misuse, however remote it might be, and so forth. Physicians and mental health experts would have to debate the pros and cons for years before it would even be considered, and even if we were to throw in neurodegenerative disorders like parkinson's or alzheimer's, or syndromes such as ALS, under the same definition, I would only consider it acceptable if death were a humane option compared to continued existence as a shell of your former self, incapable of rational thought.[/QUOTE] Might just be from my perspective, but with how mental illnesses are treated in the United States, I would much rather have the option that I can have myself put down mercifully then suffer the stigma of having a mental illness from my peers and the law. Right now, I have schizotypal which is constantly on watch of the possibility of it degrading into schizophrenia. If it comes about that I actually have schizophrenia, either found via much more rigorous study and all,I have already told my family that I wholeheartedly intend on either being assisted with my own death(Belgium) or I'll put myself into an asylum to avoid further stigmatization of my existence by the legal system and general populace. The latter also includes me having my stuff tied off in order to prevent myself from procreating and bringing someone into the world with a 50% chance of suffering from the same mental health problems. It may seem overly-reactionary, but if you begin studying how the legal system treats people with mental health issues in the United States or how you are treated by the general population in terms of working and all... It just doesn't seem like it would be all that worth living in death.

and it is absolutely terrible our society has made you feel that way. schizophrenia shouldn't be a death sentence.

[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;49919265]and it is absolutely terrible our society has made you feel that way. schizophrenia shouldn't be a death sentence.[/QUOTE] Schizophrenia is not a death sentence anymore in 2016. The problem is that Schizophrenia is a degenerative psychotic disorder and requires aggressive treatment with anti-psychotics (which adversely affect the health of the individual) and it can be very difficult for someone with the disorder to live on their own. Schizophrenia is another example of a disorder getting in someones way to seek treatment. The reason why is because it can be very difficult for a Schizophrenic to notice when they're psychotic because the psychosis manifests itself internally (unlike externally with personality disorders like Schizotypal or Bordline) as a result of degenerated brain function.

Just in time for my birthday.

[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;49919333]Schizophrenia is not a death sentence anymore in 2016. The problem is that Schizophrenia is a degenerative psychotic disorder and requires aggressive treatment with anti-psychotics (which adversely affect the health of the individual) and it can be very difficult for someone with the disorder to live on their own. Schizophrenia is another example of a disorder getting in someones way to seek treatment. The reason why is because it can be very difficult for a Schizophrenic to notice when they're psychotic because the psychosis manifests itself internally (unlike externally with personality disorders like Schizotypal or Bordline) as a result of degenerated brain function.[/QUOTE] Kinda odd question if you can answer this Nouga, but would you have any clue why they are basically stuck between Schizotypal and Schizophrenia with me? At the moment they are not sure which it is, but the way to mention them seems far different from the way they are putting it.

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;49919378]Kinda odd question if you can answer this Nouga, but would you have any clue why they are basically stuck between Schizotypal and Schizophrenia with me? At the moment they are not sure which it is, but the way to mention them seems far different from the way they are putting it.[/QUOTE] Schizotypical is a personality disorder, a pattern of behavior present throughout adulthood, while Schizophrenia is a mental disorder that's defined by symptoms lasting six or more months. Schizotypical people may have weird thoughts and believe in things most others don't, while Schizophrenia sufferers lose their grip on reality and cannot differentiate what's real and what's imagined. Basically, Schizotypical personality patients have much less severe symptoms than Schizophrenia patients. The DSM decribes Schizotypical as a "pervasive pattern of social and interpersonal deficits marked by acute discomfort with, and reduced capacity for, close relationships as well as by cognitive or perceptual distortions and eccentricities of behavior, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts" while Schizophrenia is defined as "delusions, hallucinations, disorganized speech and behavior, and other symptoms that cause social or occupational dysfunction." Schizophrenia has more severe symptoms like hallucinations, lack of affect, speech, and/or motivation, disorganized speech (not able to form coherent sentences/arguments), very inappropriate behavior or catatonic symptoms. The thing with mental disorders is there's various different diagnoses that can be given. Since symptoms of one mental illness can be the same with other mental illnesses or even physical illnesses, it takes a lot of picking apart individual symptoms in different contexts and examining length of time of the symptoms and their severity. For example, the symptoms of either disorder could be caused by a neurological disorder, brain lesions, infection, delerium, etc. instead, and disorders like OCD and social anxiety overlap with some basic symptoms like obsessions or social withdrawal.

[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;49914857]Well you see there are social consequences to both drug use and being able to commit suicide whenever you feel like it. Drug abuse has many consequences that are external such as ruining families, relationships, and occupations. They also put strain on a medical care system because substance addiction is a disease. Anti-euthanasia laws are also in place to prevent people from killing themselves because of something that is temporary, curable, treatable, or is causing them to think irrationally or impulsively (such as with Depression, Bipolar Disorder, Psychotic Disorders etc). There are very good and valid reasons to have these laws in place.[/QUOTE] Drug laws only make drugs more dangerous, if there were no drug prohibition we would see massive decreases in OD deaths. Euthanasia shouldnt ever be rejected to anybody. A persons will to die is there will and to intervene is not something law enforcement should do

[QUOTE=cody8295;49921062]Drug laws only make drugs more dangerous, if there were no drug prohibition we would see massive decreases in OD deaths.[/QUOTE] says who exactly? which drugs? where?

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49921094]says who exactly? which drugs? where?[/QUOTE] all drugs and portugal

[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;49921526]all drugs and portugal[/QUOTE] portugal decriminalized drugs they didn't legalize them

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49921601]portugal decriminalized drugs they didn't legalize them[/QUOTE] They started in a direction towards a solution but decriminalization doesnt compete with black marketdrugs. If hard drigs were legal and sold at a competitive price do you think addicts would continue to gable on dangerous black market products or would they rather have peace of mind with government regulated, clearly labeled (dose wise) and pure products?

[QUOTE=cody8295;49931504]They started in a direction towards a solution but decriminalization doesnt compete with black marketdrugs. If hard drigs were legal and sold at a competitive price do you think addicts would continue to gable on dangerous black market products or would they rather have peace of mind with government regulated, clearly labeled (dose wise) and pure products?[/QUOTE] or you could give them facilities where they can get help without stigma or fear instead of giving up drug addiction is a medical problem, it's not something we should leave to the market to fix

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49931589]or you could give them facilities where they can get help without stigma or fear instead of giving up drug addiction is a medical problem, it's not something we should leave to the market to fix[/QUOTE] "Just legalize drugs" ignores how fucking terrible hard drugs are for your body, they aren't something you want to encourage people to keep using because they're going to be fucking dead before 30 if they do Decriminalizing and working to destroy the widespread idea that drug addicts are weak losers who should be looked down upon is far, [I]far[/I] better than shrugging your shoulders and effectively saying "Sure, go ahead and kill yourself, not my problem"

[QUOTE=Starlight 456;49931599]"Just legalize drugs" ignores how fucking terrible hard drugs are for your body, they aren't something you want to encourage people to keep using because they're going to be fucking dead before 30 if they do Decriminalizing and working to destroy the widespread idea that drug addicts are weak losers who should be looked down upon is far, [I]far[/I] better than shrugging your shoulders and effectively saying "Sure, go ahead and kill yourself, not my problem"[/QUOTE] It really depends what drug It's useless to define all of them under the same wide label.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49931589]or you could give them facilities where they can get help without stigma or fear instead of giving up drug addiction is a medical problem, it's not something we should leave to the market to fix[/QUOTE] Drug addiction is a related but other issue from drug use. Drug users are often required to venture into unsafe neighborhoods and/or make contact with dangerous people all under the risk of imprisonment all because the government doesn't respect his right to do with his body what he wishes. Drug addiction should absolutely be treated as a health issue and users with nothing but compassion. but should we continue the war on fundamental human rights? Should it be illegal simply to possess and consume a molecule which can be used responsibly while we pedal alcohol to everyone who's older than 21? [editline]14th March 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Starlight 456;49931599]"Just legalize drugs" ignores how fucking terrible hard drugs are for your body, they aren't something you want to encourage people to keep using because they're going to be fucking dead before 30 if they do Decriminalizing and working to destroy the widespread idea that drug addicts are weak losers who should be looked down upon is far, [I]far[/I] better than shrugging your shoulders and effectively saying "Sure, go ahead and kill yourself, not my problem"[/QUOTE] Just legalize drugs addresses the fact that black market producers don't give a fuck about their customers, and that distributors on all levels are free to cut their drugs with anything, including surgery grade fentanyl (which has killed several hundred people in my state [B]recently[/B]). Legalizing drugs is the only chance we have to introduce a safe and effective campaign against drug abuse.

[QUOTE=cody8295;49932327]Drug addiction is a related but other issue from drug use. Drug users are often required to venture into unsafe neighborhoods and/or make contact with dangerous people all under the risk of imprisonment all because the government doesn't respect his right to do with his body what he wishes.[/QUOTE] Then expand education about drugs and provide facilities for people to do it safely? I mean this isn't very hard and it doesn't require us to legalise drugs. There are no additional benefits I can see from legalising something that is frankly a problem to be managed rather than allowed to proliferate. Decriminalization and treating it as a medical/health problem is an important step towards this. Arguing that we should legalise it because somehow the "free market" will fix it is not how we formulate policy. This is primarily a medical problem, not an economic one.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49932970]Then expand education about drugs and provide facilities for people to do it safely? I mean this isn't very hard and it doesn't require us to legalise drugs. There are no additional benefits I can see from legalising something that is frankly a problem to be managed rather than allowed to proliferate. Decriminalization and treating it as a medical/health problem is an important step towards this. Arguing that we should legalise it because somehow the "free market" will fix it is not how we formulate policy. This is primarily a medical problem, not an economic one.[/QUOTE] So then criminalize alcohol and tobacco as they have greater by magnitude problems "Drugs" is such a far reaching term, I wonder how wide a net some of you cast with that term.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49933007]So then criminalize alcohol and tobacco as they have greater by magnitude problems "Drugs" is such a far reaching term, I wonder how wide a net some of you cast with that term.[/QUOTE] Well yeah I'd suggest to start treating tobacco and alcohol (focusing primarily on strong spirits/whiskeys/etc and the like) in much the same way.