NationStates Jolt Archive

Euthanasia is the killing of someone because they are in great pain, however it also extends to the killing of someone, without there permission, based on the fact they think the person would want it.
IS THIS RIGHT?

Ugh. Sometimes i actually see it making sense. then i hit myself on the head.

...
The cases for euthanasia NOT racism, simple euthanasia, are very damning...

The NHS and likewise healthcare services are messsing up out genepool.

I find it disturbing that such an evil ideology actually make sense.

Any comments?

I don' t understand what your trying to say. Euthanasia is bad?
My grandmother has cancer right now and cannot be cured, she is 90. Because she doesn' t want a painfull sickbed she signed a euthanasia form. In the last week, 2 doctors came to check her mental wellbeing and wether the cancer was really incureable. They found euthanasia would be suited when it got too bad and now her own doctor is going to decide with my grandmother when the Euthanasia takes places. Considering the rate at which she is declining and the disease is progressing this will most likely be next monday.


Doesn' t sound so bad to me, she was able to say goodbye to everybody and now she chooses to die, without having to suffer too much. She wants it herself and there is no chance of it being a depression and no chance of her ever being cured. What' s wrong with deciding for herself when she is going to die?

Isnt euthanasia the term for ending a persons life early to stopp his/hers suffering? if so, then I am all for it, as long as the person in question wants it. If not, please tell me what the word means.

EDIT: seems by the above post that I did remember correctly about what Euthenasia is.

I don' t understand what your trying to say. Euthanasia is bad?
My grandmother has cancer right now and cannot be cured, she is 90. Because she doesn' t want a painfull sickbed she signed a euthanasia form. In the last week, 2 doctors came to check her mental wellbeing and wether the cancer was really incureable. They found euthanasia would be suited when it got too bad and now her own doctor is going to decide with my grandmother when the Euthanasia takes places. Considering the rate at which she is declining and the disease is progressing this will most likely be next monday.


Doesn' t sound so bad to me, she was able to say goodbye to everybody and now she chooses to die, without having to suffer too much. She wants it herself and there is no chance of it being a depression and no chance of her ever being cured. What' s wrong with deciding for herself when she is going to die?

BAh! yes. apologies, euthanasia is good.
I actually meant Eugenics.
Which is a lot worse.

Then I wonder, what is Eugenics?

What' s wrong with deciding for herself when she is going to die?

Everything. If you ask that question, you also have to ask," What's wrong with a man who just lost his whole family in a car accident for deciding when he is going to die because he lost everything important to him?"

The pros make it seems sensible. But the cons far outweigh it.

Having read about Eugenics on Wikipedia I can now give a better answer about my opinion on it. I am all for research on trying to enchance the human species through science, but selective breeding and denying people to have kids because they are not seen as the right breeding material, thats just wrong. It smacks of nazism, culling the "weak" out of the herd. On a scientific level its important for our knowledge about the genes, on a political level its wrong. Thats my opinion at least.

Then I wonder, what is Eugenics?


It is a philosophy that advocates the improvement of traits genetically. This is in the aim to reduce needless suffering, an efficient use of resources and create healthier and more intelligent people.

Though this is only the defnition and ever since its introduction, controversy has followed.

Everything. If you ask that question, you also have to ask," What's wrong with a man who just lost his whole family in a car accident for deciding when he is going to die because he lost everything important to him?"

The pros make it seems sensible. But the cons far outweigh it.

When you just lost everything: your family in a car accident, you are most likely suffering from shock or depression. Both are mental dissorders/diseases, which with theraphy can be cured. A doctor would never allow such a person euthanasia, because it is not an incurable disease.

It is a completly different situation.

anyway, this discussion is about eugenics, something I know very little about, so let' s stop this discussion and let the people debat the topic at hand.

Everything. If you ask that question, you also have to ask," What's wrong with a man who just lost his whole family in a car accident for deciding when he is going to die because he lost everything important to him?"

The pros make it seems sensible. But the cons far outweigh it.

Actually, to qualify for euthanasia, one just doesn't ask for it and sign a form. There are psychological tests, extensive medical tests done to prove beyond all doubt that a condition is incurable. These are medical conditions that cause immense suffering and are irreversible.

The tests performed are done so by different doctors independently to ensure that there is no bias so that the decision to allow euthanasia is made by reason alone without emotional attachment. In addition to this, the patient concerned also needs to be of reasonable mind to make this decision and not depressed so in the situation given, the man would not be given the option of euthanasia.

When you just lost everything: your family in a car accident, you are most likely suffering from shock or depression. Both are mental dissorders/diseases, which with theraphy can be cured. A doctor would never allow such a person euthanasia, because it is not an incurable disease.

It is a completly different situation.

anyway, this discussion is about eugenics, something I know very little about, so let' s stop this discussion and let the people debat the topic at hand.

It may be a far better idea if you started a new thread titled Eugenics or removed this thread for that to occur as many people will enter here prepared for a a discussion on euthanasia.

Everything. If you ask that question, you also have to ask," What's wrong with a man who just lost his whole family in a car accident for deciding when he is going to die because he lost everything important to him?"

The pros make it seems sensible. But the cons far outweigh it.

The point with most euthanasia cases. The person is ill and won't recover and often unable to take their own life so its the humaine thing to do.

As for suicide, if you judge a man can decide the pros and cons of buying a car or having a familiy, you should leave him to decide the pros and cons of suicide himself.

If the person is so ill they're choosing to die, that's evidence enough of mental exhaustion. This means that they are not in the same mental state as a "healthy" person, and the "of sound mind" tag is never applicable.

I'd always see [assisted] euthanasia as murder, because it's effectively taking advantage of someone else's weakened mental state.

If someone's capable of procuring the various things necessary to enable them to commit suicide without any outside assistance, I have few qualms with it. However, if they must ask someone else to bring them the pills, or administer the injection, then they are obviously physically weakened to such an extent that it would have a noticeable effect on the conscious mind and opinions derived from it.

It is a philosophy that advocates the improvement of traits genetically. This is in the aim to reduce needless suffering, an efficient use of resources and create healthier and more intelligent people.

Though this is only the defnition and ever since its introduction, controversy has followed.


I don 't see how that can really work. I read just yesterday that it is biodiversity that helps keep in check all sorts of disease. If we thin out our human biodiversity in the long run then could cause more harm than it would heal.

Not to mention that the mere fact of picking and chooseing who gets to breed is ethicaly unsound.

This also touches on a continuing debate I have with a friend of mine who maintians that when the day comes that we can irradicate all mental health issues via drugs, gene thearpy or what ever, then we should all be forced to undergo such treatment.

My stance on this is to ask the question, who then gets to decide what normal is, what are the normal working parameters of the human brain? and who gets to decide that?

It smacks of eliteism in the exreame to me, and I don't like it.

If the person is so ill they're choosing to die, that's evidence enough of mental exhaustion. This means that they are not in the same mental state as a "healthy" person, and the "of sound mind" tag is never applicable.

I'd always see [assisted] euthanasia as murder, because it's effectively taking advantage of someone else's weakened mental state.

If someone's capable of procuring the various things necessary to enable them to commit suicide without any outside assistance, I have few qualms with it. However, if they must ask someone else to bring them the pills, or administer the injection, then they are obviously physically weakened to such an extent that it would have a noticeable effect on the conscious mind and opinions derived from it.


Ummm perhaps then the answer is euthenasia cards, like donor cards? Umm Solent Green anybody?

Euthanasia is the killing of someone because they are in great pain, however it also extends to the killing of someone, without there permission, based on the fact they think the person would want it.
IS THIS RIGHT?In as much as it is applied here, one of the conditions is that not only are people suffering, but that there is no foreseeable end to that suffering. i.e. they are going to die anyway, and for the remainder of their short life they will be suffering immensely. Hence it is justified to end their suffering in a humane way rather than to let it drag out.

If it were just about pain, without looking further than that, you might thinking euthanasia means you could shoot someone that just broke his leg (immensely painfull, but also just temporary).