Getting old is terrible... Assisted suicide yay/nay? (1 Viewer)

[rockaction]

I think there's a big difference, a chasm if you will, between choosing to end your own life and the State choosing to end your life.

I would say both State-sanctioned murder and State-enforced continuation of life are both inhumane. I don't see the dissonance that you do.

My worry is that the State will eventually choose to end your own life through either public policy cost concerns or that private people will end your life with imperfect consent with state sanction. 

Much like I don't like state interference with reproductive issues or capital punishment issues, I do not like state-sanctioned death. I just...

It's not a perfectly rational subject; I don't have perfectly rational reasons. I actually agreed with Palin about death panels. We have too many policy concerns tied up with health care and the elderly and indigent to recklessly support broad assisted suicide allowances, IMO.  

 

[St. Louis Bob]

There are all kinds of people I want to assist with suicide.

 

[The General]

Tough subject matter. I'd like to be able to have this option but there are many things that would have to be worked out.

 

[McGarnicle]

My heart is broken by some of the things I have seen elderly relatives go through. But when we talk about taking someones life we have to be sure. We can't give it back. I just read an article talking about a guy who owned a nursing company telling his people to deliberately overdose patients once they exceeded their allowable time in hospice on their insurance. He didn't want to lose any money because of that. I'm sorry but people are horrible and we run quite the risk if we just go with open season.

This is my big worry. I am slightly pro-choice, anti-capital punishment, and really hesitant about assisted suicide for the very reason this anecdote exists. I don't think any of the aforementioned topics are easy, and don't pretend to have answers, but killing people for reasons like this strikes me as inhumane, and very easily done.  

NCCommish's example is murder though. Does not seem to apply to this topic, unless he's saying the patient is requesting the overdose which isn't stated in his post.

 

[NCCommish]

NCCommish's example is murder though. Does not seem to apply to this topic, unless he's saying the patient is requesting the overdose which isn't stated in his post.

What I was saying is if we don't have guidelines and some way to tell what people want unscrupulous people could take advantage of an open situation for various reason but mostly money. Because people suck.

 

[ghostguy123]

This will be a good thread to read when I have time, but yes x 10000000000000.

I forget the exact numbers I saw a while back, but something like 75% of the healthcare resources spent on a person in their life (on average) is incurred over the last couple months of life, much of which is basically tax dollars/government programs. 

For every couple extra days someone lives there are people who can no afford healthcare because of it. 

 

[ghostguy123]

Oh yeah, and EVERY case is unique.  Hard to generalize here.  I can only imagine there are a bunch of arguments going on in here because people are generalizing.

 

[McGarnicle]

What I was saying is if we don't have guidelines and some way to tell what people want unscrupulous people could take advantage of an open situation for various reason but mostly money. Because people suck.

Oregon seems to have it figured out.

Q: How does a patient get a prescription from a participating physician?


A: The patient must meet certain criteria to be able to request to participate in the Act. Then, the following steps must be fulfilled: 

1. The patient must make two oral requests to the attending physician, separated by at least 15 days; 
   
2. The patient must provide a written request to the attending physician, signed in the presence of two witnesses, at least one of whom is not related to the patient;
   
3. The attending physician and a consulting physician must confirm the patient's diagnosis and prognosis; 
   
4. The attending physician and a consulting physician must determine whether the patient is capable of making and communicating health care decisions for him/herself; 
   
5. If either physician believes the patient's judgment is impaired by a psychiatric or psychological disorder (such as depression), the patient must be referred for a psychological examination; 
   
6. The attending physician must inform the patient of feasible alternatives to the Act including comfort care, hospice care, and pain control;
   
7. The attending physician must request, but may not require, the patient to notify their next-of-kin of the prescription request. A patient can rescind a request at any time and in any manner. The attending physician will also offer the patient an opportunity to rescind his/her request at the end of the 15-day waiting period following the initial request to participate.
   

Physicians must report all prescriptions for lethal medications to the Oregon Health Authority, Vital Records. As of 1999, pharmacists must be informed of the prescribed medication's ultimate use.

 

[rockaction]

This will be a good thread to read when I have time, but yes x 10000000000000.

I forget the exact numbers I saw a while back, but something like 75% of the healthcare resources spent on a person in their life (on average) is incurred over the last couple months of life, much of which is basically tax dollars/government programs. 

For every couple extra days someone lives there are people who can no afford healthcare because of it. 

This utile logic is exactly what scares me about assisted suicide and how public policy can be influenced to lean on those that are at the end to kill themselves. 

The whole efficiency/utile line of logic is frightening. 

Oregon seems to have it figured out.

As for Oregon, what happens in practice is often different than statutory drafts. But the conditions seem reasonable and well thought-out.

 

[ghostguy123]

This utile logic is exactly what scares me about assisted suicide and how public policy can be influenced to lean on those that are at the end to kill themselves. 

The whole efficiency/utile line of logic is frightening. 

As for Oregon, what happens in practice is often different than statutory drafts. But the conditions seem reasonable and well thought-out.

As I mentioned in the follow up post, people are going to be arguing about generalizations when each and every case is unique and should be viewed as such. 

Maybe you would be better off giving me a specific example/situation and I can tell you my opinion on it. There are thousands of different scenarios for this kind of thing. 

 

[rockaction]

As I mentioned in the follow up post, people are going to be arguing about generalizations when each and every case is unique and should be viewed as such. 

Maybe you would be better off giving me a specific example/situation and I can tell you my opinion on it. There are thousands of different scenarios for this kind of thing. 

I'm not trying to be rude, but your line of thought is what scares me generally, not specifically. Specifics don't matter with the overriding philosophy of utilitarian and efficiency cost concerns.

The utile view of life is a frightening one to me when codified into public policy or when public policy concerns are used to justify the shortening of a lifespan (see? I already figured out the bureauspeak. I could write it for them.)

I'm just worried that utilitarian concerns will come into play if we allow assisted suicide. What sort of mission or bureaucratic creep will happen in that instance? What will the counselors be called upon to say to a patient? What will the doctors be asked to do? If one doesn't think there will be a slippery slope once cost is invoked, one is wrong. Death panels were a huge concern when Palin was speaking about the PPACA, and she wasn't wrong, IIRC. 

eta* I guess I should say what I voted for, and that was for the middle particularity. I don't think I have a problem with people making a living will and saying something to the effect of "I have a genetic predisposition to Alzheimer's or dementia or ALS (RIP, friend) and I'd like to go before I become so in pain that I can't function and pee myself in my bed." 

I should also say that terminal cancers like liver and pancreatic and lung should be dealt with in the same way. 

I don't see much else. 

 

[Johnnymac]

I just dont see how this is a big issue.  I realize that it is, just dont understand why.  If I'm of sound mind (not in dementia, alzheimers, etc) I have the right to end my life.  As for the cases where a person's mind is gone, that is what living wills would be for.  Easy peasy.

 

[rockaction]

I just dont see how this is a big issue.  I realize that it is, just dont understand why.  If I'm of sound mind (not in dementia, alzheimers, etc) I have the right to end my life.  As for the cases where a person's mind is gone, that is what living wills would be for.  Easy peasy.

Because it's where politics and policy intersects with the grey areas of dementia and confusion. People don't always make living wills, or might choose to change their mind about something they thought when they were thirty or forty. It's erring on the side of caution in those instances - and other physical ones - that make this so tough. You cannot, as NCCommish pointed out, give a life back. Once it's gone, it's gone.  

 

[ghostguy123]

I'm not trying to be rude, but your line of thought is what scares me generally, not specifically. Specifics don't matter with the overriding philosophy of utilitarian and efficiency cost concerns.

The utile view of life is a frightening one to me when codified into public policy or when public policy concerns are used to justify the shortening of a lifespan (see? I already figured out the bureauspeak. I could write it for them.)

I'm just worried that utilitarian concerns will come into play if we allow assisted suicide. What sort of mission or bureaucratic creep will happen in that instance? What will the counselors be called upon to say to a patient? What will the doctors be asked to do? If one doesn't think there will be a slippery slope once cost is invoked, one is wrong. Death panels were a huge concern when Palin was speaking about the PPACA, and she wasn't wrong, IIRC. 

eta* I guess I should say what I voted for, and that was for the middle particularity. I don't think I have a problem with people making a living will and saying something to the effect of "I have a genetic predisposition to Alzheimer's or dementia or ALS (RIP, friend) and I'd like to go before I become so in pain that I can't function and pee myself in my bed." 

I should also say that terminal cancers like liver and pancreatic and lung should be dealt with in the same way. 

I don't see much else. 

Hey, if you are ok with people living a few extra days in a ####ty zero quality of life situation burning through huge tax payer expenditures that could be used to save the lives of much much much younger people through screenings and curing diseases, then so be it.  You are entitled to your opinion. 

 

[Deepster]

So this guy who is in his late 80's, still has some memory and mental capacity (which is deteriorating rapidly), can't see/hear/use a bathroom/walk/basically do anything, in pain, and extremely depressed should be kept in his wheelchair until he succumbs to old age (which he is in the process of doing)? Why?

I'm all for it in terminal situations like Brittany Maynard. I'm just not on board with every old person who's depressed deciding they want to end it all.  We don't agree there and we're not changing each other's minds. 

 

[ghostguy123]

I'm all for it in terminal situations like Brittany Maynard. I'm just not on board with every old person who's depressed deciding they want to end it all.  We don't agree there and we're not changing each other's minds. 

Has anyone said they are on board with EVERY old person who is depressed ending it all?

 

[ghostguy123]

This is my big worry. I am slightly pro-choice, anti-capital punishment, and really hesitant about assisted suicide for the very reason this anecdote exists. I don't think any of the aforementioned topics are easy, and don't pretend to have answers, but killing people for reasons like this strikes me as inhumane, and very easily done.  

So you are comparing this to killing people who did not want to die, did not consent to anything, and who's families were completely unaware that someone was murdering their parents??  Alrighty.

I should have known not to respond to you when you said you were "slightly pro choice". 

 

[rockaction]

So you are comparing this to killing people who did not want to die, did not consent to anything, and who's families were completely unaware that someone was murdering their parents??  Alrighty.

I should have known not to respond to you when you said you were "slightly pro choice". 

Huh? I have a problem with the state sanctioning or in any way involved with death or reproduction. What's your issue? 

How can you not grasp the abstractness of the notion that consent is not the end-all and be-all of life in this country, never was, never has been. 

 

[ghostguy123]

Huh? I have a problem with the state sanctioning or in any way involved with death or reproduction. What's your issue? 

How can you not grasp the abstractness of the notion that consent is not the end-all and be-all of life in this country, never was, never has been. 

Pretty sure you aren't even talking about the same thing I am, so nevermind.

Still wondering what "slightly pro choice" means.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

And we just don't know. What if that person we think is just laying there is actually reliving all the best times of their life? Birthdays, weddings, that cute girl finally saying yes? The mind is an incredible thing. And without any guidance from that individual we just don't have the right to say that sucks let's call it. Only you can draw the curtain on your time on the stage of your life.

I wouldn't want to make that call and I do support a pretty broad assisted suicide right.

You're a good fellow, NCC.  I think this may be one of the handful of issues where we agree on down to the specifics.  

 

[rockaction]

Pretty sure you aren't even talking about the same thing I am, so nevermind.

Still wondering what "slightly pro choice" means.

I'm thinking abstractly and about slippery slopes, you're thinking policy and concretizing. I think we can agree to let this one go.  

It means my reasoning is because miscarriages happen and the recent Trump debacle shows you exactly that they will be coming after women and picking through your garbage and getting involved with doctors, etc. for benign things. There is no way to enforce a rigid pro-life agenda without questioning the demand to get to the suppliers. It is draconian. 

It's also a tepid position because I think life begins fairly early, and I'm a trimester guy. I am against partial birth abortions except given threats to the life or health of the mother; and not some namby pamby doctor-shopped excuse, but where the real life or health of the mother is at stake.  

 

[Johnnymac]

I'm all for it in terminal situations like Brittany Maynard. I'm just not on board with every old person who's depressed deciding they want to end it all.  We don't agree there and we're not changing each other's minds. 

But shouldn't it be the old person who is depressed decision?

 

[D_House]

Palin's Death Panel claim was completely made up. The provision she cited when challenged on her BS claim didn't make it into the PPACA but is Medicare practice as of 2016. And it has nothing to do with physician assisted suicide.

 

[cstu]

I'm all for it in terminal situations like Brittany Maynard. I'm just not on board with every old person who's depressed deciding they want to end it all.  We don't agree there and we're not changing each other's minds. 

We're all terminal...and who are you to tell people when they can die?

 

[NCCommish]

You're a good fellow, NCC.  I think this may be one of the handful of issues where we agree on down to the specifics.  

As I am sure you know I hold.your opinion in high regard even when we disagree so I feel pretty good when we agree.

 

[ghostguy123]

I'm thinking abstractly and about slippery slopes, you're thinking policy and concretizing. I think we can agree to let this one go.  

I am actually not thinking that way at all.  No idea where you got that from.  If I was, I wouldnt have  been asking you for specific examples. 

 

[ghostguy123]

But shouldn't it be the old person who is depressed decision?

Just their decision??  I would say no.  Someone of some sort of medical authority should also be involved to make sure there really isn't any sort of hope to turn things around for the person.  As I said before, ever situation here would be unique. 

 

[Rirruto]

Has anyone said they are on board with EVERY old person who is depressed ending it all?

I would, except cross out "old." I think people should have autonomy over their own lives. I think all of the slippery slope talk is wacky. 

 

[SoBeDad]

Once a person gets dementia, there is no way medical professionals can determine if he/she really wants to dies, or has changed his/her mind about a documented request to die upon getting dementia. That is the dilemma faced even in Europe.

In the USA, more doctors are placing patients with Alzheimer's Disease and other causes of dementia in hospice care. That helps to prevent the use of feeding tubes and the use of meds which are no longer necessary. But a person can live with dementia for long time, so hospice care is only a band-aide on a big problem which will get even bigger as the world gets older. There needs to be a legal solution that prevents potential misuse. How many children or second spouses are desperate for the assets of their parents or spouses?         

 

[ghostguy123]

I would, except cross out "old." I think people should have autonomy over their own lives. I think all of the slippery slope talk is wacky. 

Sounds dumb.  Do you even realize (highly unlikely that you do) how many young people have seriously wanted to (and tried to) take their own lives, gotten help, then no longer wanted to die, then went on to live with excellent quality of life?

Autonomy over their own LIVES, not their own deaths.  Not in those situations.

 

[CurlyNight]

The DWD law in CA is great and all but that's only for the terminally ill who are of sound mind and have less than 6 months to live. This doesn't address the being old with a chronic illness and no quality of life people.

 

[GilbertGrape]

My Father had rapid onset dementia. Became a shell of a man in a few years. One of the last lucid things he ever said to me was: "Don't ever let yourself get like this". Had to wear a diaper. My sisters are convinced there was some conspiracy involving my Stepmother and Hospice that killed him. I don't care if there was, he had no quality of life and would never have wanted to live that way. 

 

[cockroach]

One of the episodes of the podcast Criminal is about a lady who sits with people who are committing suicide. The people have to buy and set up all the stuff themselves, otherwise her involvement becomes manslaughter or 3rd degree murder or something.  So she just sits there and make sure everything goes smooth and then calls for a coroner or something.  Fascinating episode.  I don't think they were able to say specifically, but I sort of looked into it and apparently they use Helium and some kind of hood.  You fall asleep and die painlessly in a few minutes.  Sounds like a pretty nice way to end it rather than suffering for years with a broke down body and mind.

 

[Arizona Ron]

I'm for it.  I think as mentioned, not easy to write into law though.  There are too many fights over money/property after someone dies; now add in that those would be the same people making the decision if someone should die or not.

 

[LAUNCH]

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/health/death-with-dignity-doctors-thwart-steep-price-hike-for-lethal-drug/

Washington state Death with Dignity advocates have found a way to thwart a drug company that abruptly doubled the price — to more than $3,000 — of the lethal medication some terminally ill patients use to end their lives.

They’ve come up with a new mix of medications that induces death for about $500, said Dr. Robert Wood, a longtime University of Washington HIV/AIDS researcher who now volunteers with End of Life Washington, an advocacy group.

“We thought we should concoct an alternative that would work as well,” Wood said. “It does work as well.”

So Wood and other doctors in the state decided to seek an alternative to the high-priced drug sold by Valeant, which is among firms under fire by Congress for hiking prices on desperately needed drugs.

They turned to a compounding pharmacist, who doesn’t have access to the exact ingredients included in secobarbital. The result was a less-expensive mix of three medications: phenobarbital, chloral hydrate and morphine sulfate, all in powdered form to be mixed with water, alcohol, applesauce or juice.

 

[cstu]

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/health/death-with-dignity-doctors-thwart-steep-price-hike-for-lethal-drug/

Washington state Death with Dignity advocates have found a way to thwart a drug company that abruptly doubled the price — to more than $3,000 — of the lethal medication some terminally ill patients use to end their lives.

They’ve come up with a new mix of medications that induces death for about $500, said Dr. Robert Wood, a longtime University of Washington HIV/AIDS researcher who now volunteers with End of Life Washington, an advocacy group.

“We thought we should concoct an alternative that would work as well,” Wood said. “It does work as well.”

So Wood and other doctors in the state decided to seek an alternative to the high-priced drug sold by Valeant, which is among firms under fire by Congress for hiking prices on desperately needed drugs.

They turned to a compounding pharmacist, who doesn’t have access to the exact ingredients included in secobarbital. The result was a less-expensive mix of three medications: phenobarbital, chloral hydrate and morphine sulfate, all in powdered form to be mixed with water, alcohol, applesauce or juice.

That's very close to what they used at Jonestown.

 

[Judge Smails]

We need to look at end of life differently.  Ridiculous the amount of money spent trying to string out the last few days/weeks and maybe months of life.  Especially if assisted, person has no quality of life, etc.  I'm a huge fan of hospice care for those terminal and not protracting the inevitable.  Make patients as comfortable as possible. Also support right to die with dignity, including assisted in the right circumstances.  Let's face it, when seeing all of the horror stories of a prolonged, painful death when we hear of someone who kicks the bucket instantly we want to go the same way.

 

[Eminence]

Personally, I'm going to stubbornly hold onto life until the end. Give me a pen and paper or a keyboard (this will be 40-50 years from now) and I have a reason to live. I don't think you should force anybody to live though, that sounds terrible.

It's a tough call, to be honest.

 

[CurlyNight]

Now that Assisted Suicide is legal in CA, insurance company says it will cover it, but not other treatments for cancer patient.

Wonder what insurance and plan she has. Maybe there is a cap on such txs. Doesn't say how long she's been battling, did she start out stage IV or has been going on for years. Our first complaint, well not the first, is having cancer bankrupts you if you have a ####ty plan. I for one love this law. If I ever become terminal, I'm all over getting these drugs.

I'm "watching" a few people on a cancer board who for religious reasons choose not to go this route and man are they suffering bad. Unfortunately with cancer when you become terminal, it doesn't mean you are about to go. There's one lady who's been end stage IV for 25 years. She's very rare but there are others who do reach 10 years or more. It's a crap shoot as you can't tell. Someone can look bad and you think this is it and here they are a few years later. Someone else looks good and a few months later, they're gone. Cancer is funny like that. You just don't know.

It's a shame that this lady in the article is being denied no matter what kind of coverage she has. There are people who are given 6 months that go on to live longer. And to deny someone with small kids?? Where is the humanity. I know, there is none. It's all about the mighty $..

I've had insurance try to deny one of my chemo drugs but my onc fought hard and got it approved. She's fierce and fights for her pts. That's one reason I'm paying cash to see her. The whole office can hear her when she's appealing the denial. That's one reason why they say the most important doc you have if you have/had cancer is oncologist. She's seeing me for the rest of my life, more often cause I'm high risk and I'm being monitored by CT scans. Many pts are dropped after the magical "5" year mark where supposedly it's the highest chance for recurrence. My surgeon too is seeing me every 6 months in place of mammograms then in a few years it's annual. Two docs in addition to continual labs and such with my pcp = 3 docs for life assuming nothing else pops up.  So this is a very pricey disease. Many skip scans and such because of insurance issues and that's just wrong.

I wish this lady well. She is considered young. Under 60 you are considered you in cancer land.

 

[Mrs. Rannous]

My MIL has Alzheimer's and in her mid 80s.  She gets around pretty good still, physically.  But her mental capacity deteriorates with every passing day.  A tough decision about a nursing home/24 hr care is looming and we are trying to figure out how to proceed.  She does not want to move and believes that she does not need anyone's help.  

If you live near one of these locations and can afford it, these people are the best.  My mom is there, and this makes everything better.

Of course, it would be better if she could just die.  I've been hoping for that for the last ten years.  It's not fun.

 

[wikkidpissah]

It's 50/50 i'd be dead if they had walk-ins. Currently OK being alive but would still like the option and would not have regretted deciding to go that way.

Thought about it so much when my health was failing - you cross thresholds on pain endurance, but it's not a fun process - that one of my many unfinished files is a play called PartyToGo, where a sweet, young party store operator notices an older man lurking & leaving several times. When he finally approaches the counter, he brings a lot of incongruous party stuff including a LOT of balloons and orders a tank of helium in a way (a la American Graffiti booze run) that makes her suspicious that a gasbag suicide is what he's planning instead of a party. The play is essentially her stalling the old man, getting him to admit it and trying to talk him out of it. The project has nice tension, interesting back stories for both leads, a good ending (wont tell), some real sweetness and two great parts for actors but, boy, is it hard to work on...

 

[Homer J Simpson]

That's very close to what they used at Jonestown.

So we know it works. :thumbsup:

 

[Otis]

We should all be free to go on our own terms. /thread?