Post # 1
This is totally an off topic thread, but I am watching Dr. Phil and there is a woman who has two severly disabled children, who are only surviving through a feeding tube. She says they can not move, talk, communication, eat, drink, on their own. She wants the right to euthenize them ( which is illegal), but it wouldn’t be illegal if she had them take them off the feeding tubes (extra-ordinary measures) and let them starve/dehydrate till they die….She says that if they were able to make their own decision about suicide they would want to die…
Just wonder what people’s thoughts on this was… what would you do in that situation?
Post # 3
I’m for legalized euthanasia IF the person is shown competent to make the decision for themselves. I feel for those kids, but I’m not sure where the line is between mercy and murder if others are making that decision for them.
Post # 4
I’m watching too! Quite honestly, if I had zero quality of life, I would want Darling Husband or my family to be able to end it for me, plain and simple. My grandmother had a stroke and was in the hospital for over a month. The doctors and nurses went back and forth on whether or not she was going to get better and number of times, and ultimately they took the decision away from my family about her end of life care because it was hard to make a decision about what was best for her when you get conflicting reports every 4th day. They removed her feeding tubes/drinking tubes and she basically passed after a few days as a result. That’s a horrible way to go. I quite agree that you wouldn’t do that to a pet, so why is it okay to do it to your family member?
Post # 5
Well, my first reaction would be FRICK NO!
But, I have had pets put to sleep to end suffering…
Obviously it’s illegal because we’re talking about a HUMAN BEING, not a ferret. Logically, I think it’s ridiculous that it is legal to let the child(ren) starve to death by removing the feeding tube but it’s not ok to “euthanize” him or her. That doesn’t really make sense to me :/
Post # 6
@bakerella: I agree. Quality of life is important to me as well.
Post # 7
Really, I wouldn’t want them suffering. There is just so much pain involved no matter what the situation is. If these people are suffering I would definitely euthanize. Yes, it sounds horrible but at least they can be at peace
Post # 8
My lawyer brain is shouting “slippery slope” really loudly. No matter what I believe personally, legally, there’s a benefit to having a hard/fast rule, and that is in preventing people from abusing the “privilege”.
Post # 9
@MlleBrielle: I agree. I also think that the person should be competent enough to consent, if the case lends itself to that. When I think about it personally, if I were those children, I’d probably want someone to end my life, I just wouldn’t have a way to communicate that.
But it’s always a lose-lose…my grandparents are SO elderly that I think they are to the point wehre they are like “why are we still here?”. They’re perfectly health (luckily), but they are so, so, so feeble and unable to do anything and can’t see or hear or move hardly…if that was me, I wouldn’t want to live. My own father tells me that when he gets to that point to put a pillow over his face.
Post # 10
I’d rather have euthanasia be the source of death to end suffering, instead of amplifying it with MORE suffering by denying food & water. That’s cruel. I know that over simplifies things, but I’m putting consent, slippery slope, etc. aside.
Post # 11
@DaneLady: never thought of it that way re: starving to death or suffocating when a breathing tube is removed.
Post # 12
@DaneLady: I overlooked your response, but that’s exactly how I feel.
Post # 13
@bakerella: “Quite honestly, if I had zero quality of life, I would want Darling Husband or my family to be able to end it for me, plain and simple.”
I agree. But it sounds like these children have never been in a position where they could express that opinion which makes it a little trickier.
It does seem crazy to me that we can euthanize animals so they don’t have to suffer their final hours/days/etc but we can’t legally show the same compassion for humans.
Post # 14
@MrsWrangler: Perfectly stated.
Post # 15
I dont know how I feel about this, since I work with families of children with a disability. I understand the quality of life argument. I feel like this is one of those issues where you can never say that you would or wouldnt, agree or disagree until you are actually in that situation, you know?
Post # 16
@Mrs.KMM: Yeah, it’s hairy. That’s why I left my response so vague, because this is a huge grey area.
I did a paper in my philosophy class regarding the 12 year old boy whose mother decided to discontinue chemo therapy because it was making him miserable. She wanted to try a holistic approach, and fled the state to get away from authorities. The chemo treatment had a 90% cure rate, but she couldn’t stand her child begging for mercy, and didn’t see the point of him suffering through chemo if that’s not what he wanted.
Should she have the right to implement his wishes? As his parent and guardian, is this a responsible choice? As a parent, do you have the right to parent as you see fit, or are you bound to what the state deems necessary? That crosses a lot of lines, and it’s so complicated.