Wash. state woman 1st death under new suicide law (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

TheHeretic -> Wash. state woman 1st death under new suicide law (5/23/2009 7:50:15 AM)

News article here

      This is one of those topics where I am really of two minds.  On the personal level, I see this as an absolute right of the individual.  In the big picture though, the thought of pencil-pushers, be they insurance companies or gov't bureaucrats, looking at the numbers for end-of-life care vs. a single prescription bothers me.



Musicmystery -> RE: Wash. state woman 1st death under new suicide law (5/23/2009 8:05:57 AM)

I'm also of two minds here. The potential for abuse is astronomical. But individuals should have a say too, and pancreatic cancer is a particularly painful way to die. She's right--she'd just have been in a cloud of narcotics.

Heirs could rush Grandma to Elysium. Insurers could trim their liability. Convenient legal guidelines could appear masked as "public good."

But why sentence an innocent person to a tortuous end? It's a difficult issue.




CruelNUnsual -> RE: Wash. state woman 1st death under new suicide law (5/23/2009 8:08:39 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

In the big picture though, the thought of pencil-pushers, be they insurance companies or gov't bureaucrats, looking at the numbers for end-of-life care vs. a single prescription bothers me.


And insurance companies don't need to make that decision as long as they can charge premiums that cover the end of life care. The Government rationing is a different story.



philosophy -> RE: Wash. state woman 1st death under new suicide law (5/23/2009 8:17:35 AM)

It's all about the safeguards. However, there are a number of activities now that are perfectly legal where the safeguards work. This is novel, so we tend to be see it as untested....which is true. However, give it time. It is better to have a right that can be abused, than to to be denied a right because it could be abused.



rulemylife -> RE: Wash. state woman 1st death under new suicide law (5/23/2009 8:24:46 AM)

I really can't see the potential for abuse in this.

The way it is structured it is solely the patient's decision.

Even that is being met with opposition from groups opposing the right to die.

I can't see any insurance company taking on the legal battles and public outcry if they were to try to withhold treatment based on someone's terminal condition.  I wouldn't put it past them to try, but I doubt it would ever happen..



Musicmystery -> RE: Wash. state woman 1st death under new suicide law (5/23/2009 8:35:54 AM)

quote:

I really can't see the potential for abuse in this.

The way it is structured it is solely the patient's decision.


With a terminal condition comes depression and a range of other emotional responses, all readily manipulated into "the patient's decision."

And the incentive to influence the decision is high--the last six months of life are very high in health care costs. Eliminating those six months would reduce costs quite significantly.

Further, we already know there are people who would make such decisions--like the Ford/Pinto memo in the 70s, when executives and the Nixon administration decided it was cheaper let people die in explosions and pay the death claims than recall the cars and fix the danger, along with a cost analysis that literally argued the cars were worth more than the people.

That said, philosophy also makes a good point: "better to have a right that can be abused, than to to be denied a right because it could be abused."

So again, I'm of two minds.



TheHeretic -> RE: Wash. state woman 1st death under new suicide law (5/23/2009 8:57:36 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy
It is better to have a right that can be abused, than to to be denied a right because it could be abused.



     Very well put, Phil.



breatheasone -> RE: Wash. state woman 1st death under new suicide law (5/23/2009 11:10:55 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy
It is better to have a right that can be abused, than to to be denied a right because it could be abused.



    Very well put, Phil.

[sm=applause.gif]



Rainfire -> RE: Wash. state woman 1st death under new suicide law (5/23/2009 11:23:33 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

With a terminal condition comes depression and a range of other emotional responses, all readily manipulated into "the patient's decision."

{snipped for pertinent info only}


This is also where a living will can come into play, making it known, in advance that a patient does not desire to be kept alive with "heroic measures" or life-support machines. In this case, a patient can have it on file, upfront, that in a situation like this lady's, while in sound mind, she has made her decision. I've made it a point that my family knows my wishes, should I reach a stage like that. I do not want to be kept on life-support or have my death dragged out. As for the pancreatic cancer, I'm already a candidate for it - I have a currently benign tumour on my pancreas that was discovered last year. The specialist says I need to have it checked yearly because it can go cancerous at any time. So I make provisions a head of time.

Would I do something like this? Possibly. But I definitely want that right, and it needs to be MINE to make, not some insurance company's or governmental agency. 



MasterG2kTR -> RE: Wash. state woman 1st death under new suicide law (5/23/2009 1:57:18 PM)

Where is Dr. Jack Kevorkian when you need him? He had it right, and started a movement that seriously needs to be considered. People routinely euthanize pets that are too sick to be helped, yet for some bizarre reason we feel people need to be kept alive at any cost?? When the quality of life can no longer meet or be elevated (by artificial means) to an acceptable level, the option should be available without question! The one caveat I will throw in though is that it should be clearly stated in a living will at a time when there are no such issues to cloud the decision.



MrRodgers -> RE: Wash. state woman 1st death under new suicide law (5/23/2009 6:05:25 PM)

Kinkroids, this is America. The only competing interests here is hospital and doctor income versus insurance co. profits. That we have even two states that would allow me to cut off their cash...is progress.



marie2 -> RE: Wash. state woman 1st death under new suicide law (5/23/2009 6:11:21 PM)

I'm all for it.  I'm glad to see this happening and I hope it spreads to the other states as well. 



Lucylastic -> RE: Wash. state woman 1st death under new suicide law (5/23/2009 6:32:45 PM)

There isnt a law out there that hasnt been loopholed or abused for greed, murder or a mix of unknowns and I dont see that this one will be any different.
But this is a step in the right direction in my opinion. I know from m y own experiences in work and personal life that I do not want to end up hooked up to machines in agony for a  long period of time just to appease my relatives or a hospital/doc.
It just needs careful checks and balances to make the possible abuse harder to get away with.
Lucy




thornhappy -> RE: Wash. state woman 1st death under new suicide law (5/24/2009 5:06:51 PM)

Has Oregon seen widespread abuse?



Rainfire -> RE: Wash. state woman 1st death under new suicide law (5/25/2009 7:04:43 AM)

No, because they've made it very hard to actually use the assisted-suicide law. There are strict protocols in place that have to be followed, no exceptions. I lived on the Idaho-Oregon border and can tell you that in Eastern Oregon, it was almost never used. The few times it's been used have mostly been in the Portland area. Here's a link to some stats for Oregon:

8 Years under Oregon's Assisted-Suicide Law (Death With Dignity)

The numbers aren't that high all things considered. I'm still looking for more recent stats but this shows a trend to not abuse the law. Doctors have an ongoing relationship with a patient before prescribing the fatal overdose. Average time is 12 weeks of care before writing the prescription. So it's not like calling Kevorkian up and saying you need drugs.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.015625