Right to Die in Europe

[Warfish]

Deaf Belgian twins, 45, win right to die after losing sight

Reuters

Identical Belgian twin brothers, born deaf, becoming blind and unable to bear not being able to see and hear each other, had their wish to die granted in a case testing the boundaries of legal euthanasia.

Doctors gave the 45-year-old twins lethal injections after they had had a cup of coffee together and said goodbye to each other, a spokesman at the UZ Brussel hospital said on Monday.

"It's not simply that they were deaf and blind that they were granted the right to euthanasia. It is that they could no longer bear being unable to hear or see the other," he said.

Belgium is one of few countries where euthanasia is legal.

A patient must be an adult, capable of making a judgment, and the wish to die must be voluntary, overwhelming and repeated. The patient must also be suffering persistent and unbearable mental or physical pain beyond medical help.

In addition, the condition must be serious and incurable, and have been brought on by illness or injury.

"Unbearable suffering can be mental as well as physical," the hospital spokesman said. "The brothers were inseparable. They lived together and had the same job."

He said the brothers died on December 14 and that their family supported their wishes.

Belgium legalized euthanasia in 2002 and the number of cases has risen every year since. In 2011, 1,133 were granted the right to die, of which 86 percent were at least 60 years old and 72 percent suffering from cancer.

The Netherlands and Luxembourg have both decriminalized euthanasia. Switzerland allows assisted suicide if the person concerned takes an active role.

In other notes on Europe today, the Germans have now invented a working laser weapon system that sound very promising, and British and European Courts have started to more frequently deny U.S. Criminal Extradition Requests.

[gunnails]

Originally Posted by Warfish

In other notes on Europe today, the Germans have now invented a working laser weapon system that sound very promising, and British and European Courts have started to more frequently deny U.S. Criminal Extradition Requests.

=========================================

I always have liked the idea of assisted suicide for those who have no quality of life and wish to end there torment.

Do you have any further info on the German laser weapon system, a link would be appreciated.

[nj2socaljetsfan]

"How to Die in Oregon" is a great documentary about assisted suicide. It is extremely hard to watch though.

[JetPotato]

Never really have debated the topic, so not sure what the argument against the right to die is. Anyone?

[gunnails]

Originally Posted by JetPotato

Never really have debated the topic, so not sure what the argument against the right to die is. Anyone?

=============================================

As I recall some of the arguments against here in Oregon were primarily religious and moral. Some also felt there would be abuse of the system, as in people being euthanized without consent.

Although legal in OR, it is not a widespread practice, most people choose to live to the bitter end or simply have life support means withdrawn.

[32green]

Originally Posted by gunnails

=========================================

I always have liked the idea of assisted suicide for those who have no quality of life and wish to end there torment.

Do you have any further info on the German laser weapon system, a link would be appreciated.

Ideally, we could combine the above two developments and have chronically unhappy people blasted to bits by ******g German Lasers.

On live television.

-

[gunnails]

Originally Posted by 32green

Ideally, we could combine the above two developments and have chronically unhappy people blasted to bits by ******g German Lasers.

On live television.

-

==========================================

LOL, yeah, I think I missed WF's sarcasm.

In the public pool, sharks with lasers.

Help off set the costs.

[32green]

Originally Posted by gunnails

==========================================

LOL, yeah, I think I missed WF's sarcasm.

In the public pool, sharks with lasers.

Help off set the costs.

Btw, I think WF was dead serious about the lazers.

-

[gunnails]

Originally Posted by 32green

Btw, I think WF was dead serious about the lazers.

-

================================================== ===

I'll take your word for it, I'm a little slow on the uptake lately.

Was a big fan of Star Trek in the day. photon amplification by stimulated emission of radiation seems way better then light amplification by stimulated emission of radiation any day of the week.

Always wanted a phaser for personal protection, only with a limited capacity energy magazines of course

[32green]

Originally Posted by gunnails

only with a limited capacity energy magazines of course

"Set to stun?".

These libs were at it in the 60's too.




-

[Warfish]

Originally Posted by 32green

Btw, I think WF was dead serious about the lazers.

-

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2013/01/...ntcmp=features

[detjetsfan]

Originally Posted by JetPotato

Never really have debated the topic, so not sure what the argument against the right to die is. Anyone?

Religious Right is against assisted suicide for same reasons they are against abortion and birth control. It violates "Thou Shalt Not Kill" in Mosaic Law from the Old Testament of the Bible.

Ironic considering the same group also suports the death penalty and pro-war policies.

[gunnails]

Originally Posted by Warfish

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2013/01/...ntcmp=features

==============================================

Interesting, although the link does not describe exactly what type of laser is used, and I would like to also hear more about there superimposing technology.

Must admit that I am happy and proud the US Is far ahead of these guy's with teh Boeing YAL-1 Airborne Laser, this operates as a COIL Laser and has been tested successfully to shoot down missiles.

Sadly the US program a been mothballed.

[Axil]

Originally Posted by JetPotato

Never really have debated the topic, so not sure what the argument against the right to die is. Anyone?

I believe the argument goes something like this:

Only people who are mentally competent should be allowed to make the decision to end their life.

Anyone who wants to end their life is mentally incompetent.

Therefore, no one is eligible to make the decision to end their life.


I don't buy that argument wholesale, but I do suspect there is some subset of people who would like to kill themselves, that in their current mental state cannot fully understand the ramifications of that decision. Those people should probably be prohibited from doing so. I could also be persuaded that those wishing to die should have to administer the injection themselves. At least in cases where it's possible for them to do so.

[long island leprechaun]

Originally Posted by Axil

I believe the argument goes something like this:

Only people who are mentally competent should be allowed to make the decision to end their life.

Anyone who wants to end their life is mentally incompetent.

Therefore, no one is eligible to make the decision to end their life.


I don't buy that argument wholesale, but I do suspect there is some subset of people who would like to kill themselves, that in their current mental state cannot fully understand the ramifications of that decision. Those people should probably be prohibited from doing so. I could also be persuaded that those wishing to die should have to administer the injection themselves. At least in cases where it's possible for them to do so.

The typical situation is one in which an individual is in persistent, high level pain due to a condition that is either terminal or chronic, without known methods to cure or correct the condition. One alternative would be to drug the individual into near catatonia. Another would be for that person to determine that their quality of life is so extremely poor and their suffering so great that they prefer the peace of death. If the threshold for the right to die is high enough to eliminate all but such extreme cases, I find it hard to say that an individual does not possess the right and liberty to exercise this most personal decision. The question is the role of the state, medical providers, etc. in assisting that decision, as opposed to allowing access to the means to accomplish it, as you noted.

[Axil]

Originally Posted by long island leprechaun

The typical situation is one in which an individual is in persistent, high level pain due to a condition that is either terminal or chronic, without known methods to cure or correct the condition. One alternative would be to drug the individual into near catatonia. Another would be for that person to determine that their quality of life is so extremely poor and their suffering so great that they prefer the peace of death. If the threshold for the right to die is high enough to eliminate all but such extreme cases, I find it hard to say that an individual does not possess the right and liberty to exercise this most personal decision. The question is the role of the state, medical providers, etc. in assisting that decision, as opposed to allowing access to the means to accomplish it, as you noted.

In your opinion is there any objective way to determine the threshold?

Also it's interesting to note that in the case cited there was no physical pain involved. Their quality of life was diminished to the point they wished to die due to the isolation they felt being deaf and blind. Could someone else (say an avid outdoorsman, hiker, hunter, etc) who is a paraplegic make the case that the restrictions they are now subject are enough they ought be allowed end their life?

[JetPotato]

Originally Posted by Axil

I believe the argument goes something like this:

Only people who are mentally competent should be allowed to make the decision to end their life.

Anyone who wants to end their life is mentally incompetent.

Therefore, no one is eligible to make the decision to end their life.


I don't buy that argument wholesale, but I do suspect there is some subset of people who would like to kill themselves, that in their current mental state cannot fully understand the ramifications of that decision. Those people should probably be prohibited from doing so. I could also be persuaded that those wishing to die should have to administer the injection themselves. At least in cases where it's possible for them to do so.

Your last paragraph makes plenty of sense, fully agree.

Haven't really seen polls around this, but I can't see how it wouldn't garner support from most. Other than the most devout religious folks.

[Piper]

If we had their healthcare systems, I would want broader right to die rights here as well.

[Rexipus Rex]

Originally Posted by nj2socaljetsfan

"How to Die in Oregon" is a great documentary about assisted suicide. It is extremely hard to watch though.

Is it available on Netflix?

This topic interests me. No effing way am I dying in a nursing home with dementia.

[palmetto defender]

Originally Posted by Rexipus Rex

Is it available on Netflix?

This topic interests me. No effing way am I dying in a nursing home with dementia.

Here's the problem. If you have dementia, you are not mentally competent to ask to be terminated. You are doomed. You can have a "do not resusciate" document but not a "kill me" document. Too easy to create violations.
Way out: if you THINK you are headed downhill, do a Junior Seau and pre-empt the decline.

If someone wants to kill themselves - fine. Gun is easy. No gun? Take 40 sleepng pills. Just don't step in front of a car or train. Why give someone else guilt.