# Euthanasia



## bearycool (May 8, 2016)

The title is self-explanatory, and I'll keep this OP short and sweet: the assistance of death to make it as painless as possible. Think of what you do for your old pets, etc.

As for my opinion on the matter, I'm completely okay with it, and it shouldn't be such a taboo thing. It just makes death much scarier than it is if we make it taboo, and creates more pain than necessary.


----------



## Mesh Gear Fox (May 8, 2016)

I am an adamant supporter of legalizing physician-assisted suicide.  I've seen far too many people die needlessly long and painful deaths.  Death isn't always a bad thing and there's no virtue in suffering needlessly.  I wish more docs in mainstream medicine in the US felt this way.  It is a huge taboo and is something that is dealt with by complete avoidance.  You get labeled a kook if you make your views known, so it's just best not to say anything to anyone.


----------



## autisticdragonkin (May 8, 2016)

I think that all the arguments against voluntary euthanasia (of terminally ill persons) is completely baseless and I think that if people were to simply decide to have euthanasia at a certain time once they become sick enough I think that it will be much better for almost everyone (as well as much cheaper)

I think that involuntary euthanasia is unacceptable because it is declaring someone's life to not be of value when only a person themselves can say how valuable their life is (to themselves) so it infringes upon their autonomy


----------



## Lugal (May 10, 2016)

I strongly support the right to assisted suicide in cases of terminal illness. I think the idea of forcing someone to keep on living, in unbearable agony, with no hope of recovery, is absolutely vile. This is one circumstance in which I just don't see how a decent, reasonable person could possibly disagree.


----------



## Coldgrip (May 11, 2016)

China doesn't need any more kids.


----------



## autisticdragonkin (May 11, 2016)

Coldgrip said:


> China doesn't need any more kids.


Something called birth control is used in China and that allows it to have a lower population growth than the USA


----------



## Andy27 (May 11, 2016)

I am theoretically in favor of the right to euthanasia, but if it is to be applied in practice it must be accompanied by very strong safeguards to ensure no abuse of the system.


----------



## autisticdragonkin (May 11, 2016)

Andy27 said:


> I am theoretically in favor of the right to euthanasia, but if it is to be applied in practice it must be accompanied by very strong safeguards to ensure no abuse of the system.


What is the abuse of the system that you have in mind (assuming only voluntary euthanasia)


----------



## TowinKarz (May 11, 2016)

Terminal patients effectively choose it already by withdrawing treatment/medication.  There's no reason why they shouldn't, if possessed of clear consciousness and mind, have it as an option in and of itself without the painful lingering.


----------



## AnOminous (May 11, 2016)

autisticdragonkin said:


> What is the abuse of the system that you have in mind (assuming only voluntary euthanasia)



Being pressured into it while not of sound mind through undue influence by heirs greedy for getting their inheritance immediately, or motivated by the fear that they will lose it through end of life medical expenses.


----------



## Andy27 (May 11, 2016)

autisticdragonkin said:


> What is the abuse of the system that you have in mind (assuming only voluntary euthanasia)



Pretty much what Anominous mentioned above, undue pressure from greedy heirs or from some "overzealous" doctor with a savior / angel of death complex.


----------



## autisticdragonkin (May 11, 2016)

AnOminous said:


> Being pressured into it while not of sound mind through undue influence by heirs greedy for getting their inheritance immediately, or motivated by the fear that they will lose it through end of life medical expenses.


Wouldn't the latter be a legitimate reason to go through with it on the part of the person though? They don't want to put too much financial strain on their families


----------



## Sanshain (May 12, 2016)

I fully support voluntary euthanasia for the terminally ill. Doctors are far too zealous about trying to wring just one more day of life from cancer patients, even when the suffering they're undergoing could arguably qualify as torture. Several of my relatives have stated in the past that should they ever be diagnosed with a fatal condition they'd put their remaining independent lifespan to productive use, then seek a dignified but quick death as opposed to a long and financially ruinous stay in hospital.

In my personal experience, the perception of death is the main deciding factor in the euthanasia/no euthanasia argument. Personally, I have zero fear of death itself, so I don't have any desire to cling to an agonizing existence that benefits nobody but myself. On the other hand, some people have such an inability to accept the prospect of nonexistence they go to completely irrational lengths to prolong their stay in the land of the living.

My only problems with the legalization of euthanasia is that it might become seen as a 'quick out' by those with debilitating but non-life-threatening conditions. There would need to be very strict oversight to the procedures, especially in regards to making sure that relatives didn't put undue pressure on the victim to take one course over another. It is, ultimately, a personal decision.


----------



## KingGeedorah (May 12, 2016)

I'm cool with it. Fuck this gay Earth.


----------



## LazarusOwenhart (May 13, 2016)

autisticdragonkin said:


> What is the abuse of the system that you have in mind (assuming only voluntary euthanasia)


Elderly relatives with terminal illnesses who become a perceived burden to their families may be coerced into signing consent forms for euthanasia even if they themselves aren't entirely willing to die. Younger people who become ill with terminal/degenerative diseases may feel obliged to euthanize themselves. Those are two examples I can think of.


----------



## Melkor (May 15, 2016)

From personal experience, it's incredibly painful to watch a pet or a loved one pass away naturally, especially if you're a very sensitive person when it comes to things like this.

I think, if it makes the dying more comfortable, then all the power to them in their final hours. It's quick and painless, and also entirely ethical.


----------



## millais (May 17, 2016)

euthanasia is the first step to eugenics, which is where we should be heading anyway. people opposed to euthanasia are blocking the way of progress


----------



## autisticdragonkin (May 17, 2016)

millais said:


> euthanasia is the first step to eugenics, which is where we should be heading anyway. people opposed to euthanasia are blocking the way of progress


Why should we move to eugenics? Society doesn't exist so society doesn't benefit from eugenics so my question is who does and why should we care about that person?


----------



## Roast Chicken (May 18, 2016)

I support it; we're merciful enough to give our pets a peaceful death when they're suffering but people aren't allowed the same mercy even when they ask for it? It's not right to me. At the moment in the UK, if you're terminally ill you'll be pumped full of painkillers until your organs fail or you you prefer, you can deny yourself food and water until you die - which seems medieval to me.


----------



## ScrewTheRules (Jun 11, 2016)

I know of several people who would make great arguments for euthanasia...

Inappropriate gallows humor aside, if I ever get to the point where I'm that ill I can't go to the bathroom by myself and there's no chance of recovery, I'm locking myself in there with a box of Durex and huffing latex until I die of anaphylaxis,  and I don't think that option should be taken away from anyone else even if they don't have horrifying allergies to do the job for them.
Granted, there is some risk of people being coerced into it by greedy relatives or sociopathic doctors, which is why certain protocols and safeguards need to be put in place, including some amount of mandatory counseling to make sure the person has really thought about what they're doing, but it is doable and there are countries where this is already legal and functions perfectly fine as far as I'm aware.


----------



## autisticdragonkin (Jun 14, 2016)

Honestly the big thing question the Euthanasia debate rises for me is why many of these people can't just commit suicide the old fashioned way. Some of these people actually have paralysis or are comatose but many are perfectly able to do things at least for a short period of time until their painful deaths. If I were one of those people the last thing I would want to do with my limited time on earth is enter a fruitless legal battle so I would just do whatever I really want to do before I die and then I would shoot myself


----------



## Mesh Gear Fox (Jun 17, 2016)

autisticdragonkin said:


> Honestly the big thing question the Euthanasia debate rises for me is why many of these people can't just commit suicide the old fashioned way



Many people are incapable of doing such.  Having someone else do it makes a world of difference.  Also, lots of folks have a lot of fear of their method of suicide being painful.  Giving a large dose of an opiate or a combo of drugs is hell of a lot of a better way than a gun shot/knife/rope.  It's much more peaceful, and there is an extremely high chance of success having a medical professional do the deed.


----------



## Pinkamena Diane Pie (Jun 17, 2016)

I would think that it should be legalized for those in extreme pain that can't be treated. If all else fails and they're slowly dying, it's the most humane thing possible for a person. 

You'd see a human doing so for an animal in extreme pain because the end result is needless suffering. People should have some way out if they're suffering that's less painful than what they're suffering from


----------



## Hypodermic Johnny (Jul 12, 2016)

One of the other potential abuses (outside of the "God complex doctor" or "greedy vulturous relatives" situations) I can conceive is, what is the so-called 'line' for suffering? Now when that comes up, most people immediately jump to eugenics as being the next step after euthanasia becomes an accepted practice but I'm more concerned about the potential of it being used by those who are not so much dying physically as they are mentally. Mental illness and suicide are already heavily intertwined; what's to say there isn't a potential abuse in some patient of sound body but severe depression who begs for death from their doctor as a result, because they see themselves as terminal on a different level? I mean, yeah, that could potentially be fixed by imposing limits for euthanasia for only physical terminal illness cases...but then that raises the dilemma of "do the mentally ill not deserve the right to a painless death?"

Now, I don't think this applies to people who still have a chance to get better, mind you; people with supportive family and friend networks; future prospects; goals; etc. I'm talking people so hopeless and so far at the end of their rope that all they have left is literally enough to hang themselves with. If their suffering is just as bad as someone with a terminal illness, don't they deserve the same rights to die with dignity and without pain? If they attempt on their own and don't succeed, they could end up causing worse psychological/physical damage to themselves, which could only worsen their condition and suffering.

Do we limit it at physical pain only? Or do we include mental anguish? What about psychosomatic conditions? Where, exactly, on that sliding scale, do we draw the line?

(Note: I am actually in favor of euthanasia, if handled responsibly. And I personally think the suicidal should receive help/support to avoid that 'final solution' rather than be aided in it, but I still think this is a good ethical dilemma that should be addressed.)


----------



## Polexia Aphrodisia (Jul 12, 2016)

Your life is your life, you should be able to do with it what you want. If you want to end it before your body up and stops working on its own, that should be your decision. Allowing physicians to assist and make the process as simple and painless as possible can only be a plus.
Not to mention that I feel like the pharmaceutical industry is more concerned with profits than actually helping people at this venture, so choosing to painlessly end your life if you have a terminal illness instead of stretching it out with costly drugs should be a legal option...


----------



## Internet War Criminal (Jul 13, 2016)

I am 100% against doctor-assisted suicide because every where it becomes legal more and more people end up being pushed that way by "well meaning" doctors. Belgium is going crazy with it and instead of giving psychological help to mentally ill people they just off them 

You can take your own life if you want to, but the State should never be involved in taking the life of anyone except the most horrible of murderers in a bulletproof case.


----------



## DuskEngine (Jul 13, 2016)

PolexiaAphrodisia said:


> Not to mention that I feel like the pharmaceutical industry is more concerned with profits than actually helping people at this venture, so choosing to painlessly end your life if you have a terminal illness instead of stretching it out with costly drugs should be a legal option...



They're not really as mercenary as one would think on the issue. Pharmas like Pfizer refuse to sell their drugs to states that practice lethal injection because they don't want their drugs to be used in executions.

EDIT: Euthanasia would probably make for better PR though so they might be willing to bend on that plausibly.


----------



## Big_Boss (Jul 13, 2016)

I only support it in cases where the person requests it , not their families not anyone but themselves. If they're in so much pain and there's no hope for them, end stages of cancer for example, then they shouldn't suffer more than they have to. I've seen way too many people suffering that wished they were dead to count, it's awful.

Otherwise, families should not be writing off on their blood without consulting them, especially if there's inheritances involved.


----------



## Internet War Criminal (Jul 13, 2016)

Big_Boss said:


> *I only support it in cases where the person requests it* , not their families not anyone but themselves. If they're in so much pain and there's no hope for them, end stages of cancer for example, then they shouldn't suffer more than they have to. I've seen way too many people suffering that wished they were dead to count, it's awful.



So that 24 year old girl who is suicidal but doesn't suffer from any actual diseases, you support doctors killing her? 

Anyone with suicidal thoughts who requests it should be able to get it?


----------



## Big_Boss (Jul 13, 2016)

Internet War Criminal said:


> So that 24 year old girl who is suicidal but doesn't suffer from any actual diseases, you support doctors killing her?
> 
> Anyone with suicidal thoughts who requests it should be able to get it?



That's not what I said or even implied though. I support it in cases where people are too sick to even get up and they're living in the hospital, or if it's very late stage cancer and your chances of living are zero. 

There's absolutely no hope for these people to get better even with modern medicine, why make them suffer more than they have to?


----------



## Internet War Criminal (Jul 13, 2016)

Big_Boss said:


> That's not what I said or even implied though. I support it in cases where people are too sick to even get up and they're living in the hospital, or if it's very late stage cancer and your chances of living are zero.
> 
> There's absolutely no hope for these people to get better even with modern medicine, why make them suffer more than they have to?



Who are you to say that this 24 year old is not suffering as much as those who have terminal cancer? What about emotional pain? Another recent suicide by doctor case was a girl in her 20s who had been severely sexually abused as a child. 

Do you support that?


----------



## Big_Boss (Jul 13, 2016)

Internet War Criminal said:


> Who are you to say that this 24 year old is not suffering as much as those who have terminal cancer? What about emotional pain? Another recent suicide by doctor case was a girl in her 20s who had been severely sexually abused as a child.
> 
> Do you support that?



No I don't at all? I've clearly stated I support it in cases where there's no hope for the person to continue living. In case you didn't know, even when people dying it takes awhile for organs to completely shut down. I've seen people live months, even years in pain and wanting to die already.

If the US were to legalize it I want them to do it like how we do organ donations after we die. It would 100% be their decision if they had absolutely no chance of living. 

It shouldn't be used on suicidal people at all.


----------



## Internet War Criminal (Jul 13, 2016)

Big_Boss said:


> No I don't at all? I've clearly stated I support it in cases where there's no hope for the person to continue living. In case you didn't know, even when people dying it takes awhile for organs to completely shut down. I've seen people live months, even years in pain and wanting to die already.



How is that different from a girl who was sexually abused and tortured horribly for years? Mental anguish and pain can be much worse than physical pain, why shouldn't she be given the same rights as terminal patients?


----------



## AnOminous (Jul 13, 2016)

Someone able-bodied and young who wants to kill themselves is going to do it no matter what the law is.  It's only when someone is physically incapable of doing it that they really need a physician's assistance.


----------



## waffle (Jul 14, 2016)

I'm theoretically fine with it and I think you certainly have a right to kill your self. But, I think there's going to be a lot of borderline cases of people getting kind of strong armed into killing them selves or, a feeling that old people should all kill them selves so they aren't a burden if Euthanasia were legal and, "clean", for lack of a better word. I think the inherent grisliness of getting a pistol and shooting your self if you want to die makes people less likely to be forced into it or feel obligated to do it. 

TL;DR It needs to be totally your decision, and people are awful.

I'm honestly a little uncomfortable with how much we euthanize pets as a society, and think it is primarily done for selfish reasons. We tell our selves that they aren't enjoying life, or are in too much pain to go on. But, I don't rely see much evidence that your dog wouldn't want to live as long as it can, just like most people would.


----------



## Marvin (Jul 15, 2016)

waffle said:


> I'm honestly a little uncomfortable with how much we euthanize pets as a society, and think it is primarily done for selfish reasons. We tell our selves that they aren't enjoying life, or are in too much pain to go on. But, I don't rely see much evidence that your dog wouldn't want to live as long as it can, just like most people would.


To be frank, what dogs "want" doesn't really matter. When it comes to animals, we control every aspect of their lives. We breed animals, we neuter animals and we eat animals.

Animal cruelty is when you're causing the animal undue pain/distress. Until you get to animal cruelty levels, the moral issues are a lot more vague and debatable.

Animal rights are something I've thought about a lot. I have pets and I love my pets, but I don't think what they want really matters unless you go whole hog and start advocating for full animal liberation. Which is certainly a thing to some people, I suppose.


----------



## Ebola (Jul 15, 2016)

If this doesn't make you feel feels, you are autistic:


----------



## keksz (Jul 15, 2016)

To all those saying "it's fine as long as there's no other solution and the person is really suffering": well who gets to decide that? Doctors have a lot of power already but that is because we offer it to them so they can do whatever's necessary to save a life. I'm not overly confident on having them take lives away too- what prevents them from deciding this or that case is too unlikely to respond to treatment and might as well be euthanized right away for the greater good? I'm not saying they'd murder someone but all a doctor has to do is say "sorry  we've ran out of options, your best choice now is to die peacefully."

I'm 100% a believer in the natural right to suicide but as far as euthanasia goes I'm with the guy that said to leave governments, laws and professionals (and by extension) corporations out of this.  You wanna kill yourself ask your family for help getting to the roof and jump away but don't turn doctors into harbingers of death.


----------



## waffle (Jul 16, 2016)

Marvin said:


> To be frank, what dogs "want" doesn't really matter. When it comes to animals, we control every aspect of their lives. We breed animals, we neuter animals and we eat animals.
> 
> Animal cruelty is when you're causing the animal undue pain/distress. Until you get to animal cruelty levels, the moral issues are a lot more vague and debatable.
> 
> Animal rights are something I've thought about a lot. I have pets and I love my pets, but I don't think what they want really matters unless you go whole hog and start advocating for full animal liberation. Which is certainly a thing to some people, I suppose.


I don't disagree that what the animals want doesn't particularly matter, but I'm fundamentally uncomfortable with self deception.


----------



## keksz (Jul 16, 2016)

Ebola said:


>



It's absolutely terrifying to think a handful of that powder that costs 30 francs to produce can kill a person in one minute. This could probably be slipped into a strong drink without you even noticing. The fact this is probably not the only substance that can do that doesn't make me feel any safer.

I wonder what she chose that for. She seemed so alive and well, practically normal. Though I think that is true to many people on natural death's door as well. I've heard more than once that a sick or elderly person was having a great day before they passed away in their sleep.


----------



## Without A Gout (Jul 16, 2016)

At the end of the day, it should be the person's decision whether they want to die or not. If they feel that it would be far too painful for them and their family to see them rot away from cancer/ALS/another disease, they should be allowed to end it on their own terms. I personally argue it's far less humane to see someone rot away into a shell of what they once were than to end it quickly and relatively painlessly.


----------



## Daughter of Cernunnos (Sep 26, 2016)

I am disabled and like many people in our community, I oppose assisted suicide and euthanasia. Don't want to sound like a tumblrite but its considered an ableist practice.


----------



## LazarusOwenhart (Sep 27, 2016)

Daughter of Pomona said:


> I am disabled and like many people in our community, I oppose assisted suicide and euthanasia. Don't want to sound like a tumblrite but its considered an ableist practice.


How is it ableist to allow a severely ill/disabled person the option of quickly ending their suffering in a dignified and controlled manner? I know I'm falling for poor quality bait here but explain to me how it's ableism? I'd like to point out that earlier in the thread I personally made a point about abuses of the system where people coerce others into dying for their own benefit so don't go down the "We'll all be forced to die because we're a burden" line. Are guide dogs ableist? What about wheelchairs?


----------



## LordAzazel (Sep 27, 2016)

Several of my ancestral family members died from medical mishaps that everyone involved was very, very grateful for.

They're still joked about how lucky it was the doctors screwed up the way they did after they had a long, hard talk with the patient (and the family afterwards).

I'm glad it's now legal and doctors don't have to risk their future by providing a service that's so desperately needed.
However, this only works because we have universal healthcare. If I wanted to live a few years more, but those few years meant my family would be completely ruined, I'd chose euthanisia in a heartbeat.

And that's not okay killing yourself over money.

TL;DR: Universal health care is great, you guys should try it.


----------



## Cryin RN (Sep 27, 2016)

Daughter of Pomona said:


> I am disabled and like many people in our community, I oppose assisted suicide and euthanasia. Don't want to sound like a tumblrite but its considered an ableist practice.



The choice would never be made _for_ you.  It's something you would have to actively pursue with your doctor.  If you believe it's wrong, that's your right but there's no death panels.

I've done a lot of palliative care.  The expected deaths are so much nicer.  When you know the day you're going to die, your whole family can be there with you holding your hand.  You know that when it happens you won't have pain and you'll be with people that care about you that will cry afterwards.   

The alternative is a tired nurse noticing you stopped breathing at 3am who closes your eyes, pulls out your tubes and shuffles off to make a few sad phone calls.


----------



## Kartoffel (Sep 27, 2016)

I strongely believe in human dignity and that entails that a human can end his life if he has done this decision with a clear and informed mind. That entails in my oppinion that this decision has too fail before the person in question is in the terminally ill stadium - and a "yes" should be able to be withdrawn any time. Kinda like consent to sex. You got to get it beforehand and both participants have the right to withdraw it any time. 
A "yes" in the terminally ill stadium without no prior consent should only be allowed in rare cases; like some unforeseenable condition (e.g. that palliative care does not work because of an morphium intolerance) or that the death of the terminally ill person can save the life of someone else.  In every other case the doubt that the person might be coerced by someone else or simply be temporarily overwhelmed (kind of like torture - do it enough and people will tell you anything to make it end) is too strong.
Regarding mental illness like severe depressions (without accompanying debilitating physical illness); the right to euthanasia is out - simply because the tragic of people who want to commit suicide is that they are the ones who want to life the most. They should endure their condition long enough that there can be a real attempt to help them, be it medication, therapy or trying to change the situation that caused the depression in the first case. Suicide normally does not happen in a down stadium, but when people are again on the rise - because they want to avoid another down.
It's kind of perverse that the type of illness that causes the most subjective suffering is "just in the head".


----------



## Daughter of Cernunnos (Sep 27, 2016)

LazarusOwenhart said:


> How is it ableist to allow a severely ill/disabled person the option of quickly ending their suffering in a dignified and controlled manner? I know I'm falling for poor quality bait here but explain to me how it's ableism? I'd like to point out that earlier in the thread I personally made a point about abuses of the system where people coerce others into dying for their own benefit so don't go down the "We'll all be forced to die because we're a burden" line. Are guide dogs ableist? What about wheelchairs?


I'm not baiting this is my honest opinion. One problem with it is its a double standard. An able-bodied person gets suicide prevention while a disabled person is not assumed to need suicide prevention mental health services.

Another problem is ableist conceptions of what dignity is. Its considered by most abled people to be undignified to get help using the washroom, with personal care etc. yet many disabled people live long, happy, fulfilling life despite needing a personal care assistant.

I don't see how guide dogs and wheelchairs could be ableist. These are things that help disabled people live fulfilling lives, not help them die. We fight for all disabled people who need to have access to these things.

I hate it when people on the pro-assisted suicide side of debate claim that everyone who is against assisted suicide is Christian. There are lots of secular arguments from a disabled rights perspective. I have no religious objections and do not follow an Abrahamic religion.

If you're interested in the non-religious, disability rights perspective on this issue, here a couple links:

http://notdeadyet.org/disability-ri...cacy-against-legalization-of-assisted-suicide

https://crippledscholar.wordpress.c...ly-feel-that-way-a-critique-of-me-before-you/


----------



## AnOminous (Sep 27, 2016)

So how long would you throw a quadriplegic with terminal cancer in prison for if they paid someone to kill them?


----------



## LazarusOwenhart (Sep 28, 2016)

Daughter of Pomona said:


> I'm not baiting this is my honest opinion. One problem with it is its a double standard. An able-bodied person gets suicide prevention while a disabled person is not assumed to need suicide prevention mental health services.



So you're telling me that if a person with Motor Neuron Disease rings a suicide hotline and says to the operator, "I'm stood on a bridge about to jump. In a few months I won't be able to feed myself and in two years I'll be dead." The operator is gonna go "Yeah dude you should jump, this line is for non-depressing things only." Come on dude if you're gonna make an argument at least start off with a point that holds _some_ water.


----------



## Daughter of Cernunnos (Sep 28, 2016)

AnOminous said:


> So how long would you throw a quadriplegic with terminal cancer in prison for if they paid someone to kill them?


No time, the person who they paid to help should get in trouble though.


----------



## AN/ALR56 (Sep 28, 2016)

I saw my grandfather die of alzheimers.
I had to take care of him at 7 years old,alone at night because my parents were desperatly trying to get a job because a fucking maid conned him into marrying him and stealing his retirement money,so we had literally no money left,i watched for 6 months as a man who was proud,smart and loving decay to a bedridden shell of a man, alone and scared and confused, who forgot his own family,to later die and have his ribs broke because a fat nurse who dint gave a fuck tried to ressucitate him.
I dont care what anyone says, if someday i get gifted with a terminal or mentally crippled,im blowing my brains out.


----------



## DuckSucker (Oct 6, 2016)

I agree and actually kind of support Futurama-style suicide booths.


----------



## AnOminous (Oct 6, 2016)

AN/ALR-56 said:


> have his ribs broke because a fat nurse who dint gave a fuck tried to ressucitate him.



Just so you know, CPR isn't a magic revival process and even when done properly, USUALLY breaks ribs.  It's a desperate last-ditch process that rarely actually saves anyone.


----------



## ScrewTheRules (Oct 6, 2016)

AnOminous said:


> Just so you know, CPR isn't a magic revival process and even when done properly, USUALLY breaks ribs.  It's a desperate last-ditch process that rarely actually saves anyone.


:powerlevel: My father once told me that once you've actually had to perform CPR you start keeping count. He had a 1:1 success:failure rate at the time...
CPR does have a fairly good success rate with drowning and suffocating, so long as it's performed correctly (i.e. it _should _break ribs), immediately and as well as rather than instead of other emergency care. I think the success rate with heart attacks is one of the better ones, too, but anything else and it's basically a waste of time, ESPECIALLY if there's bleeding. Still no harm in trying, though.


----------



## ChuckSlaughter (Oct 15, 2016)

In some countries you can off yourself for autism, BPD, or gender dysphoria.

https://kiwifarms.net/threads/belgium-commits-genocide-against-lolcows.25018/


----------



## Magique (Oct 16, 2016)

Am I for euthanasia?

:powerlevel:I don't know anymore. My grandfather had an attack that got him in an hospital. They could save him but his right side of his body couldn't move. He can't talk but he was mentally well. Two night before he died, he has pneumonia. The doctors said that if he leaves the hospital, it was in a coffin.
So, my aunts told the doctor that no, they aren't gonna let grandfather live there forever.

My grandfather suffered for two days. They decided to make him do a Morphine overdose. My grandmother told me he was sleeping/suffering/crying those two days. I was only there when he died ( my family didn't want me to know what's going on since I just had my third daughter. I was pissed).

So, euthanasia? Before, I would say yes but now? Depends on the case. I hate seeing people suffer. I wish doctor could speed up the processus of euthanasia.


----------



## Todesfurcht (Oct 16, 2016)

I personally think that yes, euthanasia should be a thing.
No one deserves to suffer and humans have the ability to consent and make decisions, death should be one of those decisions.


----------



## HG 400 (Oct 16, 2016)

We should euthenise all the disableds tbh. Even the minorly disabled are a net drain on society and in the case of some (ie autistics and mentally ills) they are violent and disruptive too.


----------



## HG 400 (Oct 16, 2016)

Daughter of Pomona said:


> Its considered by most abled people to be undignified to get help using the washroom, with personal care etc.



It objectively is shameful and undignified to need somebody else to wipe your asshole and if you say otherwise you must be full retarded lmao


----------



## Daughter of Cernunnos (Oct 16, 2016)

Dynastia said:


> It objectively is shameful and undignified to need somebody else to wipe your asshole and if you say otherwise you must be full exceptional lmao


It's not something to kill yourself over, some people are like that their whole lives.


----------



## HG 400 (Oct 16, 2016)

Daughter of Pomona said:


> It's not something to kill yourself over, some people are like that their whole lives.



That's very selfish of them to continue being such a burden, then.


----------



## AnOminous (Oct 16, 2016)

Dynastia said:


> We should euthenise all the disableds tbh. Even the minorly disabled are a net drain on society and in the case of some (ie autistics and mentally ills) they are violent and disruptive too.



What if they're not a huge drain or violent, but they're just really annoying?


----------



## Jan_Hus (Oct 16, 2016)

AnOminous said:


> What if they're not a huge drain or violent, but they're just really annoying?


How annoying are we talking here?


----------



## AnOminous (Oct 16, 2016)

Jan_Hus said:


> How annoying are we talking here?



They won't stop talking about Sonic the Hedgehog all the time.


----------



## Jan_Hus (Oct 16, 2016)

AnOminous said:


> They won't stop talking about Sonic the Hedgehog all the time.


Execution by Russian firing squad, then crucifixion. Not painless euthanasia


----------

