it's different cases
don't act like it's impossible to distinguish between them
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;37356234]I am saying that it would be wrong to kill someone because of his (possibly) temporary impulse that he wants to die. I think that regulations should be put in place to attempt at giving everyone as much freedom towards choosing death as possible, while not compromising the attempt to protect their life in their interest while they might (temporarily) disagree with it. I am not saying this specific case should or should not have ended in Euthanasia, I was purely trying to respond to the "Fuck the system, legalize euthanasia!" By making an extreme example of what a simple "Yo lets allow dat shizzle" could end up in, anyone being able to choose death over a little headache or other (less ridiculous) cases. And as long as we can't decide for a line, at which it is ok, for as long no one should be allowed to, no matter how cruel that might seem. But if we allow this man to die, completely against current laws, it would imply that the guy with the headache has the same right to die over it.[/QUOTE]
holy fuck
I never said to legalize it for everyone, I meant to legalize it for these cases.
" But if we allow this man to die, completely against current laws, it would imply that the guy with the headache has the same right to die over it."
Do you even know what you're saying? That's so radically different you might as well say "Legalizing gay marriage will mean eventually we will legalize child rape!!!!" "Legalizing weed LOL you might as well legalize meth!!!"
You're over simplifying this so much it's sickening, and taking every word totally literal as if that's the stone cold written word. if you actually think a judge wouldn't be able to see headaches VS 20-40 years of immobilization and constant pain and agony then you have literally no argument.
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;37356234]I am saying that it would be wrong to kill someone because of his (possibly) temporary impulse that he wants to die. I think that regulations should be put in place to attempt at giving everyone as much freedom towards choosing death as possible, while not compromising the attempt to protect their life in their interest while they might (temporarily) disagree with it. I am not saying this specific case should or should not have ended in Euthanasia, I was purely trying to respond to the "Fuck the system, legalize euthanasia!" By making an extreme example of what a simple "Yo lets allow dat shizzle" could end up in, anyone being able to choose death over a little headache or other (less ridiculous) cases. And as long as we can't decide for a line, at which it is ok, for as long no one should be allowed to, no matter how cruel that might seem. But if we allow this man to die, completely against current laws, it would imply that the guy with the headache has the same right to die over it.[/QUOTE]
your example is fucking retarded. who chooses to die over a headache?
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;37356234]I am saying that it would be wrong to kill someone because of his (possibly) temporary impulse that he wants to die.[/QUOTE]
it most definitely wasn't going to be temporary, locked-in syndrome is incurable. everything that could have been done to make him happier was done straight away, and it had no permanent effect on his mood. all that was done by keeping him alive was prolonging his misery.
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;37356234]I think that regulations should be put in place to attempt at giving everyone as much freedom towards choosing death as possible, while not compromising the attempt to protect their life in their interest while they might (temporarily) disagree with it. I am not saying this specific case should or should not have ended in Euthanasia, I was purely trying to respond to the "Fuck the system, legalize euthanasia!" By making an extreme example of what a simple "Yo lets allow dat shizzle" could end up in, anyone being able to choose death over a little headache or other (less ridiculous) cases.[/QUOTE]
well of course you'd get tons and tons of examination before it was allowed. you wouldn't just be able to say that you want to kill yourself, there'd be doctors to sort you out beforehand. only if there was absolutely no hope would someone be allowed to die, otherwise that would contradict the very point of euthanasia. that is, ending unnecessary suffering through the sufferer's death.
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;37356234]And as long as we can't decide for a line, at which it is ok, for as long no one should be allowed to, no matter how cruel that might seem. But if we allow this man to die, completely against current laws, it would imply that the guy with the headache has the same right to die over it.[/QUOTE]
what? no it wouldn't. Nicklinson was trapped with absolutely no hope left. a headache can be fixed, so there's hope, which therefore means that euthanasia would be unnecessary. equating a headache to something as horrible, terrifying and all-round horrid as locked-in syndrome is just 100% asinine.
I am saying that making the distinction is hard as fuck, especially with a huge amount of locked-in syndrome cases where the person is barely able to communicate at all, evaluating someones better judgement is near impossible there. Not to mention that the question, if we even want to allow anyone this option, or allow anyone to kill someone for this, is still quite hard to answer on it's own. Most countries don't allow you suicide, and the question where Euthanasia ends and just simple suicide starts is extremely hard to answer.
Euthanasia just penetrates so many very very basic and important laws that exist, that it is extremely hard to find a solution that doesn't at the same time violate them, or even worse, change them in a way that is exactly not what we want.
Like seriously, you can argue that suicide should be allowed, that doesn't mean that the system is fucked because we don't allow it right now for someone who is like really really sad and hates his life :(((
you are missing the point.
[QUOTE=Cone;37356391]it most definitely wasn't going to be temporary, locked-in syndrome is incurable. everything that could have been done to make him happier was done straight away, and it had no permanent effect on his mood. all that was done by keeping him alive was prolonging his misery.
well of course you'd get tons and tons of examination before it was allowed. you wouldn't just be able to say that you want to kill yourself, there'd be doctors to sort you out beforehand. only if there was absolutely no hope would someone be allowed to die, otherwise that would contradict the very point of euthanasia. that is, ending unnecessary suffering through the sufferer's death.
what? no it wouldn't. Nicklinson was trapped with absolutely no hope left. a headache can be fixed, so there's hope, which therefore means that euthanasia would be unnecessary. equating a headache to something as horrible, terrifying and all-round horrid as locked-in syndrome is just 100% asinine.[/QUOTE]
I'm not equating it jesus christ, I am just saying that there is a somewhat feasible argument behind saying that this man had hope as well with all the advances that science makes nowadays, it's not something I would argue, but it is something others believe and they could just as well be right.
[editline]22nd August 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=SgtCr4zyGunz;37356395]you are missing the point.[/QUOTE]
No you are not, I have pointed out that the headache was simply an extremely overdrawn example. Of course you can now go on crying for hours about how silly that is and that no one would ever do THAT EXACT THING, it doesn't change that someone has to make a rule what qualifies for euthanasia and what doesn't.
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;37356407]I'm not equating it jesus christ, I am just saying that there is a somewhat feasible argument behind saying that this man had hope as well with all the advances that science makes nowadays, it's not something I would argue, but it is something others believe and they could just as well be right.
[editline]22nd August 2012[/editline]
No you are not, I have pointed out that the headache was simply an extremely overdrawn example. Of course you can now go on crying for hours about how silly that is and that no one would ever do THAT EXACT THING, it doesn't change that someone has to make a rule what qualifies for euthanasia and what doesn't.[/QUOTE]
and I was pointing out that the comparison is just as bad as comparing gay marriage to violent child rape
" you can argue that suicide should be allowed, that doesn't mean that the system is fucked because we don't allow it right now for someone who is like really really sad and hates his life"
Yes it does mean that the system is fucked
[QUOTE=Mlisen14;37355540]That doesn't represent any of the complexity of the issue, all of which is why it isn't allowed yet.[/QUOTE]
I still don't get why an animal gets to be put out of its misery but when a human is in the same situation, an animal that is capable of making it's own decisions, people feel the need to have a morality argument.
The person is in a pain that can not just end or be dulled due to medical reasons. If its immoral to keep an animal in pain, its immoral to keep a person in pain. Keeping a person alive while in pain isn't moral.
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;37356407]I'm not equating it jesus christ, I am just saying that there is a somewhat feasible argument behind saying that this man had hope as well with all the advances that science makes nowadays, it's not something I would argue, but it is something others believe and they could just as well be right.
[editline]22nd August 2012[/editline]
No you are not, I have pointed out that the headache was simply an extremely overdrawn example. Of course you can now go on crying for hours about how silly that is and that no one would ever do THAT EXACT THING, it doesn't change that someone has to make a rule what qualifies for euthanasia and what doesn't.[/QUOTE]
no, it wasn't an overdrawn example. it was a retarded example.
it's literally just like saying "gay marriage? but then we have to make a rule for people who are gonna marry their dogs!"
please look up the definition of the euthanasia and the circumstances the involve the decision because you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
[QUOTE]-I cut out this bit because you typed a lot, but you didn't really say much-[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;37356234]Euthanasia just penetrates so many very very basic and important laws that exist, that it is extremely hard to find a solution that doesn't at the same time violate them, or even worse, change them in a way that is exactly not what we want.[/QUOTE]
I think that what we want takes a back-seat to what the guy who's currently in constant agony wants.
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;37356234]Like seriously, you can argue that suicide should be allowed, that doesn't mean that the system is fucked because we don't allow it right now for someone who is like really really sad and hates his life :((([/QUOTE]
don't trivialize the need for euthanasia like that, it's incredibly offensive to people who are actually clinically depressed and/or terminally ill.
[url]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9480227/Tony-Nicklinson-breaks-down-as-High-Court-rejects-his-right-to-die-plea.html[/url]
actually watch the video Cobra
you might as well sound like "He is "really really sad and hates his life", we might as well also allow people with headaches do the same because he wants to die and that's unfair! he should live and suffer! BECAUSE THAT IS THE LAWWWW!!!!!!"
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;37356407]I'm not equating it jesus christ, I am just saying that there is a somewhat feasible argument behind saying that this man had hope as well with all the advances that science makes nowadays, it's not something I would argue, but it is something others believe and they could just as well be right.[/QUOTE]
so... you don't actually [I]believe[/I] in your point... except you're arguing it. or else there wouldn't be an argument.
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;37356407]No you are not, I have pointed out that the headache was simply an extremely overdrawn example. Of course you can now go on crying for hours about how silly that is and that no one would ever do THAT EXACT THING, it doesn't change that someone has to make a rule what qualifies for euthanasia and what doesn't. [/QUOTE]
so you're worried that someone's sadness could be confused for a genuine need for euthanasia? what the fuck kind of shambles of a government are you thinking of if they wouldn't even send some psychologists or doctors to look at the subject and determine if they are genuinely a hopeless case?
no government that would allow euthanasia could ever possibly be that incompetent. people will inevitably slip through the cracks, but nowhere near as many to totally disallow euthanasia.
[QUOTE=Cone;37356456]I think that what we want takes a back-seat to what the guy who's currently in constant agony wants.
don't trivialize the need for euthanasia like that, it's incredibly offensive to people who are actually clinically depressed and/or terminally ill.[/QUOTE]
I'm sorry, I don't involve myself in discussions about life and death where someone somewhere possibly being insulted by the simple mention of something means that we can't fully discuss the matter. Not to mention that I didn't say that the person that is like really really sad and hates his life is terminally ill or has clinical depression, it could just be any other teenager that got the idea to kill himself right now. If you are telling me that all of those should have the right to get euthanized because they think that's what they want at that point, I obviously have lost any argument. However pretty much all of the many people who toy with the idea nad often attempt suicide in teenage years lose all of that a few years later and go on to live happily and all that fancy stuff. And that's why you can't just say "Uhm yeah if he has cancer he can't die, but if it's locked-in syndrome he does, AIDS only if the doctor says it's advanced enough!"
[editline]22nd August 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Cone;37356512]so you're worried that someone's sadness could be confused for a genuine need for euthanasia? what the fuck kind of shambles of a government are you thinking of if they wouldn't even send some psychologists or doctors to look at the subject and determine if they are genuinely a hopeless case?[/QUOTE]
Uhm, Psychologists and Doctors are first of all human, they have emotions and they make mistakes. Psychologists have often shown that they collectively manage to be total fucking idiots in the past, and especially in the US it's an extremely popular option to just visit every last doctor till you get the one that gives you the prescription you wanted.
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;37355535]I was pointing out that euthanasia is denied because someone normally interested in it is considered to be in a state of pain/w/e that clouds their rational thinking.[/QUOTE]
He's been trapped in a critically damaged shell since what... 2005? Thats 2555 days of being unable to do ANYTHING but notice how absolutely crippled and powerless you are. 2555 times that person has woken up, realized they're still crippled, it wasn't a dream, and they really are fucked for the rest of their lives. The fact that he made it this far is absolutely astounding. I wouldn't say that its clouding his judgement, I'd say that pain and suffering has become the reality of his existence and is a primary driving force behind the rational thought that the prospect of ceasing to exist is far more pleasant that going another 2555 days waking up and realizing he's still fucked.
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;37356554]I'm sorry, I don't involve myself in discussions about life and death where someone somewhere possibly being insulted by the simple mention of something means that we can't fully discuss the matter. Not to mention that I didn't say that the person that is like really really sad and hates his life is terminally ill or has clinical depression, it could just be any other teenager that got the idea to kill himself right now. If you are telling me that all of those should have the right to get euthanized because they think that's what they want at that point, I obviously have lost any argument. However pretty much all of the many people who toy with the idea nad often attempt suicide in teenage years lose all of that a few years later and go on to live happily and all that fancy stuff. And that's why you can't just say "Uhm yeah if he has cancer he can't die, but if it's locked-in syndrome he does, AIDS only if the doctor says it's advanced enough!"
[editline]22nd August 2012[/editline]
Uhm, Psychologists and Doctors are first of all human, they have emotions and they make mistakes. Psychologists have often shown that they collectively manage to be total fucking idiots in the past, and especially in the US it's an extremely popular option to just visit every last doctor till you get the one that gives you the prescription you wanted.[/QUOTE]
yeah because 1 doctor could mistake headaches for locked in syndrome we shouldn't allow this guy to die guys. :downs:
"and especially in the US it's an extremely popular option to just visit every last doctor till you get the one that gives you the prescription you wanted."
[B]I've never heard this in my entire life.[/B]
Doctors are TRAINED to be correct and know what they hell they're talking about, they aren't some random fool on the web, they're intelligent people and actually are very professional.
"If you are telling me that all of those should have the right to get euthanized because they think that's what they want at that point, I obviously have lost any argument. "
except no one actually said that at all. We're saying no doctor would not be able to see the obvious. You can't see it, of course.
[QUOTE=S31-Syntax;37356580]He's been trapped in a critically damaged shell since what... 2005? Thats 2555 days of being unable to do ANYTHING but notice how absolutely crippled and powerless you are. 2555 times that person has woken up, realized they're still crippled, it wasn't a dream, and they really are fucked for the rest of their lives. The fact that he made it this far is absolutely astounding. I wouldn't say that its clouding his judgement, I'd say that pain and suffering has become the reality of his existence and is a primary driving force behind the rational thought that the prospect of ceasing to exist is far more pleasant that going another 2555 days waking up and realizing he's still fucked.[/QUOTE]
Again, I am not judging this specific case in any way.
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;37356614]Again, I am not judging this specific case in any way.[/QUOTE]
Back pedaling backwards down an endless hill.
[URL="http://www.facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1205651&p=37356616&viewfull=1#post37356616"]http://www.facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1205651&p=37356616&viewfull=1#post37356616[/URL]
I think that this applies to your argument, SEK
[QUOTE=J!NX;37356593]yeah because 1 doctor could mistake headaches for locked in syndrome we shouldn't allow this guy to die guys. :downs:
"and especially in the US it's an extremely popular option to just visit every last doctor till you get the one that gives you the prescription you wanted."
[B]I've never heard this in my entire life.[/B]
Doctors are TRAINED to be correct and know what they hell they're talking about, they aren't some random fool on the web, they're intelligent people and actually are very professional.[/QUOTE]
They are humans who went to a specific school which means that most of them should have picked up a decent bit of knowledge in medicine. Yet this doesn't change that one might say "Hey ho, we can probably cure this in a year and he'll live for 6 at the very least, no way we can euthanize him!" while the other guy says "Ah shit this if impossible to ever fix, just end his misery". I don't know how many doctors you have worked with, but they aren't some sort of superhuman or only the smart-500 of the country or something, they simply studied a field that others haven't and therefore know things that others don't.
[QUOTE=Cone;37356638][URL="http://www.facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1205651&p=37356616&viewfull=1#post37356616"]http://www.facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1205651&p=37356616&viewfull=1#post37356616[/URL]
I think that this applies to your argument, SEK[/QUOTE]
naw man but he isn't talking about this guy anymore he's talking about teens with headaches being mistaken as locked in victims!
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;37356656]They are humans who went to a specific school which means that most of them should have picked up a decent bit of knowledge in medicine. Yet this doesn't change that one might say "Hey ho, we can probably cure this in a year and he'll live for 6 at the very least, no way we can euthanize him!" while the other guy says "Ah shit this if impossible to ever fix, just end his misery". I don't know how many doctors you have worked with, but they aren't some sort of superhuman or only the smart-500 of the country or something, they simply studied a field that others haven't and therefore know things that others don't.[/QUOTE]
Umm no the world doesn't work that way at all.
Have you even been to any doctor ever?
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;37355261]Yeah seriously how fucked up is this!!!!
I have a headache, it's so bad please kill me I''ll sign any release form w/e.[/QUOTE]
You're a special kind of stupid, arnt you
[QUOTE=MILKE;37356686]You're a special kind of stupid, arnt you[/QUOTE]
read the rest
you don't even know 1% of it.
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;37356656]They are humans who went to a specific school which means that most of them should have picked up a decent bit of knowledge in medicine. Yet this doesn't change that one might say "Hey ho, we can probably cure this in a year and he'll live for 6 at the very least, no way we can euthanize him!" while the other guy says "Ah shit this if impossible to ever fix, just end his misery". I don't know how many doctors you have worked with, but they aren't some sort of superhuman or only the smart-500 of the country or something, they simply studied a field that others haven't and therefore know things that others don't.[/QUOTE]
part of studying in that field is identifying illness. your argument assumes a level of stupidity that's insulting to anyone who's dedicated many years of their life to practicing medicine.
[QUOTE=Cone;37356638][URL="http://www.facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1205651&p=37356616&viewfull=1#post37356616"]http://www.facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1205651&p=37356616&viewfull=1#post37356616[/URL]
I think that this applies to your argument, SEK[/QUOTE]
It does, and he paints a very basic picture of how this might be realized, but we still need rules on what kind of pain someone needs to have to qualify, not to mention that doctors and psychiatrists confined to such a facility would inevitably become used to making these judgements faster and faster, just like a neurologist is going to give you a diagnosis with less consideration than a non-specialist. Of course I am not saying that a specialist doesn't also at the same time know better, but it does inevitably lead to judgements that can miss things far more easily. Let's say depression is usually considered serious when his hands shake, they at least cry 50 % of the day and they never say anything nice. Now that facility might just not wait long enough or try hard enough to hear the goth kid say that he loves his parents and stuff, therefore assuming that he is "ready to die" ven though by the rules ( that we still need to make ) he wouldn't actually have been, the diagnosis simply did miss it. And yes, this is not how real depression works and not exactly like a real slipup would happen, but maybe it gives you an idea of how these things can happen.
[editline]22nd August 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Cone;37356702]part of studying in that field is identifying illness. your argument assumes a level of stupidity that's insulting to anyone who's dedicated many years of their life to practicing medicine.[/QUOTE]
Even the oldest doctors make mistakes, mistaking harmless things for tumors happens all the time, and so do many far more dangerous things.
[editline]22nd August 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Cone;37356702]part of studying in that field is identifying illness. your argument assumes a level of stupidity that's insulting to anyone who's dedicated many years of their life to practicing medicine.[/QUOTE]
It's like oyu are assuming doctors are unfailable, what kind of assumption is this, by this logic every cop is perfect and shouldn't even be questioned when he shoots that 12 year old that scratched his car.
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;37356720]It does, and he paints a very basic picture of how this might be realized, but we still need rules on what kind of pain someone needs to have to qualify, not to mention that doctors and psychiatrists confined to such a facility would inevitably become used to making these judgements faster and faster, just like a neurologist is going to give you a diagnosis with less consideration than a non-specialist. Of course I am not saying that a specialist doesn't also at the same time know better, but it does inevitably lead to judgements that can miss things far more easily. Let's say depression is usually considered serious when his hands shake, they at least cry 50 % of the day and they never say anything nice. Now that facility might just not wait long enough or try hard enough to hear the goth kid say that he loves his parents and stuff, therefore assuming that he is "ready to die" ven though by the rules ( that we still need to make ) he wouldn't actually have been, the diagnosis simply did miss it. And yes, this is not how real depression works and not exactly like a real slipup would happen, but maybe it gives you an idea of how these things can happen.[/QUOTE]
being emo and being in pain are two different things, that's not even going to happen like that at all. 1000% guaranteeing it.
everyone here wants people who are in true pain to legally suicide.
"It's like oyu are assuming doctors are unfailable, what kind of assumption is this, by this logic every cop is perfect and shouldn't even be questioned when he shoots that 12 year old that scratched his car."
blind comparison.
[QUOTE=J!NX;37356744]being emo and being in pain are two different things, that's not even going to happen like that at all. 1000% guaranteeing it.
[B]
everyone here wants people who are in true pain to legally suicide.[/B][/QUOTE]
Oh ok? Why isn't everyone rallying for the "true pain euthanization" bill right now?
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;37356755]Oh ok? Why isn't everyone rallying for the "true pain euthanization" bill right now?[/QUOTE]
I don't know maybe because I'm in America and we both know that that is more of a corporate run country than a true democracy where politics don't give 100% as fuck about the citizens like they should and I have no effect on the UK maybe?
that has nothing to do with anything though, you have literally no argument. You're basically saying this man should live because a doctor might let an emo kid die, when that's such an insane far reach.
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;37356755]Oh ok? Why isn't everyone rallying for the "true pain euthanization" bill right now?[/QUOTE]
Holy shit you're actually insane. Hey guess what, a poll two months ago showed 61% of Colorado supported Marijuana legalisation, hey you know what, I didn't notice over [B]eight hundred thousand people[/B] flooding the streets with placards. I assume you're an incredibly sheltered person considering your obtuse and completely lifeless views of the world.
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;37356720]Even the oldest doctors make mistakes, mistaking harmless things for tumors happens all the time, and so do many far more dangerous things.[/QUOTE]
okay, so what, exactly, is so impossible to notice that could also potentially lead to euthanasia? locked-in syndrome is very obvious, as is depression and the majority of terminal illnesses. what could a doctor possibly miss about these things that another wouldn't find, and vice-verse?
"oh yeah that isn't terminal cancer it's the common cold I can fix that in a week", or "OH SNAP THAT HEADACHE IS A SIGN OF INCURABLE DEPRESSION" are just two incredibly unlikely scenarios for trained doctors to cause
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
