• We are a multilingual website again. Read the notice about this.
  • Understand AI use at MyPTSD: all AI use is explained in our AI help page. AI use is by choice here. It exists if you want it, but does nothing unless you choose to use it.

News Doctor-Assisted Death For Those Living With Ptsd

Status
Not open for further replies.
What I mean is how f*cking inhumane to allow a person to suffer with a terminal illness without support/help/medical attention ...whatever... for any period of time.

I get that it's a service/commodity user pay thing in other countries and I thank God I don't live in one of them because dying is f*cking hard enough anyway without getting a bloody nose trying to pay some bastard for what should be a completely free service.

I mean he wasn't kidding with the terminal illness was he? He was going to die... we need to give people a break here and help them die with some dignity. Try NOT for ONCE to have this insane profit making mentality reach into the last days or moments of another humans death.

OK it costs money to provide medicine/drugs/help to aid another human who is dying. Where do we, as humans draw the line. WE are ALL gonna die I can guarantee that... wouldn't it be just that bit better if we alleviated pain and discomfort the best possible way while these people do pass.

Animals get it easier than us and we are supposed to be the intelligent form of life?
 
I'm not trying to change the topic of this discussion, and I'm definitely not trying to turn this into a political debate, or anything of the sort. Honestly, this post doesn't really have a point to contribute to this discussion, but I realized something related to this a couple days ago that I found quite weird and a bit funny.

In many cases, it tends to be Conservatives who are against euthanasia. The reasoning behind this sometimes is that all life is sacred and/or because life is something given to us by God and shouldn't be ended by man. There are other reasons as well.

Yet, in many cases, it also tends to be Conservatives who are for the death penalty. The reasoning behind this sometimes is due to retribution and punishment, that guilty people should be punished, with the punishment fitting the crime committed, so a murderer would deserve the death penalty. There are other reasons as well.

I don't quite get how one can be against euthanasia, but for retribution, especially since one of the reasons against euthanasia is that God has given us life and man shouldn't take it away.

Again, I'm not trying to make this a political debate, or shift the conversation, just noting something I considered interesting. I understand that most of the arguments here do not deal with religion as well, so I'm also not trying to turn this into a religious debate. If it doesn't fit this thread, feel free to remove it.
 
I'm not trying to change the topic of this discussion, and I'm definitely not trying to turn this into a political debate, or anything of the sort. Honestly, this post doesn't really have a point to contribute to this discussion, but I realized something related to this a couple days ago that I found quite weird and a bit funny.

Sources?
 
I'm not trying to change the topic of this discussion, and I'm definitely not trying to turn this into a political debate, or anything of the sort. Honestly, this post doesn't really have a point to contribute to this discussion, but I realized something related to this a couple days ago that I found quite weird and a bit funny.

In many cases, it tends to be Conservatives who are against euthanasia. The reasoning behind this sometimes is that all life is sacred and/or because life is something given to us by God and shouldn't be ended by man. There are other reasons as well.

Yet, in many cases, it also tends to be Conservatives who are for the death penalty. The reasoning behind this sometimes is due to retribution and punishment, that guilty people should be punished, with the punishment fitting the crime committed, so a murderer would deserve the death penalty. There are other reasons as well.

I don't quite get how one can be against euthanasia, but for retribution, especially since one of the reasons against euthanasia is that God has given us life and man shouldn't take it away.

Again, I'm not trying to make this a political debate, or shift the conversation, just noting something I considered interesting. I understand that most of the arguments here do not deal with religion as well, so I'm also not trying to turn this into a religious debate. If it doesn't fit this thread, feel free to remove it.

Whose responsible? If doctors are to be held accountable for insuring that Euthanasia is done correctly, a fee should be attached, and it a business transaction, nothing more. There should be no feelings involved, just....does this patient's circumstance meet the criteria or not?If Euthanasia is permitted by law, then the practitioner to keep his license must follow the current laws surrounding Euthanasia.

Who pays? As adults, we grow up knowing that medical care is expensive and we have to pay for our necessities (food, housing, and medical falls under that)...but planning for the future is something that many in our current generations are not doing......entitlement
for others to pay....is the trend). I had a drive to be independent and pay my own way, and now I can....I'm retired live comfortablly and know my basics are covered in old age. While I'd like to say we can all create our own fairy tale endings, and die when we wish, if we haven't prepared for it....it is not someone else's responsibility to pay for. With that said, if I had a friend who was terminal, and asked me for financial help to end his/her life, and it was legal, I would gladly help out....my choice. If assisted suicide is something one believes in, then they should prepare for the possibility early on in life.....financially speaking. I am not a conservative.....but I am not a liberal who wants something for nothing and not willing to prepare for the possibility by saving for future needs. When it comes to people taking financial responsibility for their own life and outcomes......on this topic I'm firm. Death can be about choices....too many people living in the moment, and not putting $ away for the future needs, usually end up with fewer choices and regretting-and then blaming society for not giving them more when they didn't even try to prepare. I speak about those individuals who have for the most part of their life held jobs and made their own choices about how they spend their $..not the minority who is disabled on gov't assistance and has lived their life this way.
 
Last edited:
Ya the poor often are spending on a lot of things ('extras' -?) like food, baby formula and rent. Meds aren't covered, either. Can't afford? Do without. Here the COL is higher too. That doesn't include tragedies, natural disasters, funeral costs, employment, or the like, either. Or therapy proper.

But, I agree. Survival of the fittest , pull-one's self -up-by the bootstraps. But these people are just asking for the pain to stop, not to drain the system. IMHO.

I suppose it could be viewed the same- why were people so weak as to get ptsd? Or need meds, etc etc. I know that was my family's mindset- just get the job done and don't worry about frivolities like whining, emotions, or trauma(s). If you survived, you're lucky. I didn't even know what a SA was, barring violent rape or Aggravated SA, for example. And actually, it's battery, not SA, if I'm not mistaken. SA is just threats of it, or a similar definition. We could all say, "So what? What do you want, a medal? You shouldn't have been here, or stayed there, or stayed in DV", etc. Which perhaps gives a sense of false security- until it no longer applies.
 
Last edited:
I mean he wasn't kidding with the terminal illness was he? He was going to die... we need to give people a break here and help them die with some dignity.
@flowerapple ... Did I misunderstand? I read what you wrote as they wouldn’t pay for the medical bills to help him spend his last days with his small child, but WOULD pay for assisted suicide... so after attempting to appeal, raise money, the dad chose the 100% paid for option?

(Assisted suicide is covered, palliative care was not).
 
Whose responsible? If doctors are to be held accountable for insuring that Euthanasia is done correctly, a fee should be attached, and it a business transaction, nothing more. There should be no feelings involved, just....does this patient's circumstance meet the criteria or not?If Euthanasia is permitted by law, then the practitioner to keep his license must follow the current laws surrounding Euthanasia.

I believe that that's how it is in the countries that have legalized euthanasia. Correct me if I'm wrong though.
Dead Link Removed
 
Yes I too have never understood why the Conservative Right pushes for Right to Life but supports conditions where poor(er) people can't afford to live. Like the man, it's cheaper to end his life. Very few who have lost their primary breadwinner on top of it, with a minor child, could afford an extra 7000$+ / month.
 
@flowerapple ... Did I misunderstand? I read what you wrote as they wouldn’t pay for the medical bills to help him spend his last days with his small child, but WOULD pay for assisted suicide... so after attempting to appeal, raise money, the dad chose the 100% paid for option?

I don't think I was the one who posted that.
 
Whoops! My bad. I meant @Tinyflame
There was a guy in my country with a terminal illness, and they wouldn't cover him for 24 hour care. He fought to get it increased from 15 to 20 hours, but the remaining 4 hours would have been billed to him at $263.50/ day. They never even responded to his appeal. So though he had a young son, he opted for it. It's 100% covered.
 
As adults, we grow up knowing that medical care is expensive and we have to pay for our necessities (food, housing, and medical falls under that)...but planning for the future is something that many in our current generations are not doing......entitlement
for others to pay....is the trend). I had a drive to be independent and pay my own way, and now I can....I'm retired live comfortablly and know my basics are covered in old age.

I think that's a very black-and-white way to look at it. I don't think we should just assume that because someone is struggling to pay bills, or haven't planned far ahead in terms of saving, etc., then it's because they weren't independent, or squandered their money away in their youth, or any other assumption. It's not a fair conclusion to draw from that. There are many factors that can cause a person to be in those same positions where they are struggling to make it in life monetarily, that don't have to do with irresponsible spending. And it's not merely one factor that can affect that as well, but a multitude of factors each with a differing magnitude.

For example, many people aren't as fortunate as others to have a great start in life, whether it be that they were born into an impoverished, or abusive, or any other type of disadvantaged household, or they somewhere along the way developed some chronic illness. Therefore for them to make it anywhere, they would have to work harder than the person who was born in an advantageous household to get the same position. So it wouldn't be so much of an argument to say that the disadvantaged person didn't get the position because they weren't determined enough, as there wasn't a level playing field to begin with.

Also, many things happen throughout life, where even the most responsible people on the planet could end up falling flat on their faces, and you can't blame people for those things happening to them. When life throws you a curveball, like a natural disaster, or sudden illness, etc., many people who have been dutifully saving for the future end up having to go and spend that savings, often spending all of it. This is even worse for those who have families, or sick family members to which they have a responsibility to, whether imagined or real. There are many stories out there of people who have money saved, or have insurance plans taken out for those unexpected events that could occur, but during a natural disaster their contracts and other documents get lost or damaged, so when it comes time to claim for their damages, they can't because they don't have the proof for it. So they end up in debt, broke and penniless.

Also people have different ways to deal with situations, even when they are in the situation. And not because one person was able to handle it better and the other didn't, it doesn't mean that the other person didn't work hard enough. It's almost the same kind of explanation for why one person develops ptsd and the doesn't after experiencing trauma.

I'm not saying this is always the case, as you do have some who are like as you described that waste their money instead of saving it.

While I'd like to say we can all create our own fairy tale endings, and die when we wish, if we haven't prepared for it....it is not someone else's responsibility to pay for. With that said, if I had a friend who was terminal, and asked me for financial help to end his/her life, and it was legal, I would gladly help out....my choice. If assisted suicide is something one believes in, then they should prepare for the possibility early on in life.....financially speaking. I am not a conservative.....but I am not a liberal who wants something for nothing and not willing to prepare for the possibility by saving for future needs.

Also, I do not agree with this opinion. Life is unpredictable and we live in an unpredictable world, so it is impossible to predict an event in the future with certainty. Plus, normally people don't sit and think "you know someday in the future I might want to end my life early and be euthanized, so I better start saving now." So you can't say that if it's something they believe in then they should plan for it monetarily. Also, one can feel that way, but still would like to not die, so the mere act of saving for that possibility would work against them trying to not die as well.

If you were talking about death in general, I can understand that though. There are life insurance policies that people can take out, but I don't see how that would work to pay for the procedure itself, as that it something that comes after. Also, taking out an insurance policy would be something beneficial, but not everyone can afford to pay the monthly fees associated with them, or they would be able to pay for it, but it means leaving something else unpaid. Plus the cost of the drugs needed for euthanasia are quite costly and continues to increase, so those who live in countries where they are expected to pay for themselves would have an extra burden to pay, especially if doing so could cause debt for their remaining family, so then they wouldn't be able to pay for it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Donation drives

2026 Donation Goal

Goal
$1,800.00
Earned
$910.00
This donation drive ends in
0 hours, 0 minutes, 0 seconds
  50.6%

Trending content

Featured content

Back
Top Bottom