The Suicidal TouristFollow

Granted, I didn't read the entire thread, so I'm not sure if I'm contradicting someone, but the doctor should always have the right to refuse the service.

For example, abortion is legal, but the women's clinic I go to does not perform the operation at all. They will, instead, point a needing woman in the direction of the nearest Planned Parenthood.

Why is anyone rating anyone?

Its a touchy subject, and I'm entitled to my opinion. I don't really want to think about it anymore.

I'm just going off what Ambrya said and how she responded to the question put to her, was yes, he's responsible.

Because I'm in a bad mood and it makes me argue myself into corners.

Edited, Dec 10th 2008 12:38pm by AshOnMyTomatoes

Yes, I watched my mom die from liver cancer. She died at home, and despite the pain, she seemed pretty content and non-pained at the moment of her death. She knew all hope for recovery was gone for probably the last month of her life. I don't think she would have ever agreed to doctor assisted suicide to end her life.

But, I also can't say that if faced with the opportunity, that in a particularly bad moment, when maybe the meds wore off, she might have screamed out in pain and begged for the end, and maybe even, with a release form in front of her, sign it. But then the moment might have passed leaving her with a few more cherished moments with loved ones.

How can the doctor be sure an individual is ready to die?

There are those clear cut cases of people that doctors should help, those that are in excruciating pain, with absolutely no chance at recovery. But that's pretty hard to quantify.

Is 'great pain' still great pain if it can be medicated away? Has there ever been an individual that has recovered from this disease or illness before? Is the patient truly wanting to die, or did they just have a bad moment when life 'seemed' unbearable and so the form was signed. Are there medical costs or resources that might inadvertently become criteria for choosing whether or not a person is a candidate for AS.

Not to mention, doctors take some sort of 'do no harm' oath.

It's tricky business for a species that values life above all else.





Edited, Dec 10th 2008 7:40pm by Elinda

The phsyican being responsible does not mean he/she is obligated to participate, but if he or she is not, they must then transfer the patients care records to another physician the patient has found who IS willing to help. They may not withhold records, etc, in order to actively prevent the patient from getting help.

http://www.oregon.gov/DHS/ph/pas/ors.shtml

127.885 s.4.01. Immunities; basis for prohibiting health care provider from participation; notification; permissible sanctions.

Except as provided in ORS 127.890:

(4) No health care provider shall be under any duty, whether by contract, by statute or by any other legal requirement to participate in the provision to a qualified patient of medication to end his or her life in a humane and dignified manner. If a health care provider is unable or unwilling to carry out a patient's request under ORS 127.800 to 127.897, and the patient transfers his or her care to a new health care provider, the prior health care provider shall transfer, upon request, a copy of the patient's relevant medical records to the new health care provider.

The physician is not required to prescribe the lethal dose if he or she chooses not to.

Are you really this stupid, or have you just not bothered to study or understand even the tiniest bit of the subject you're attempting to discuss.

In Oregon, here's how physician-assisted suicide works. The patient makes the request of the doctor. What follows is a screening process to be certain that the request is being made within the criteria outlined by the law, that the request is being made by a mentally competent adult person, that the patient has been advised of all the risks and alternatives, etc etc etc.

Once this process is complete, the physician then may dispense or prescribe a lethal dose of medication. The physician, however, DOES NOT administer the medication. Only the patient does that. In a way, it sucks for those who are incapable of swallowing the pills under their own power because no provision is made for those who are physically incapable of self-administering the dose, but it safeguards against the possibility of someone other than the patient making the decision for the patient.

Edited, Dec 10th 2008 10:45am by Ambrya

You don't take much into consideration do you?

I hear you and I understand where you are coming from. It's never easy. In my grandmother's case when the drugs wore off she would scream these horrible gut wrenching screams. She would beg to die. She talked of seeing her babies who died before she did, she said they were waiting for her to help her. She didn't know who was who in reality, she had to be restrained in bed because of how violently her body would jerk around in pain. There was no hope of recovering, she didn't fight it. She'd fought cancer most of her life and just this last time she knew she was tired of fighting. She donated her body to the med school, when they removed the tumor from her abdomen it was larger than a basket ball and weighed over 10lbs. It had hair and bits of bone in it. She was 41.

In my opinion, I have no qualms with assisted suicide. I think it should be regulated but I think anyone who after counseling still finds life to be to painful, ect then they should have the right to end it. I could care less if it's medical or just something mental that drives them to seek assisted suicide. I've already told MrKatie that if something happens to me that this becomes something I wanted that I should be taken to a state that allows it.

Hydatidiform mole?

I don't really know what you're saying. Are you implying that, were I to take more things into consideration, that I would place more value on life?



Not all people contemplating suicide must be depressed children, and even so, being depressed doesn't have to stop someone from making an informed and reasonable choice. Life need not be for everyone, just like you might prefer peas over potatoes. It's not that far a stretch.

"Well I've taken all of these drugs and I still can't acclimate into society, can't keep relationships, can't hold a job, can't focus on any dreams, or even dream to begin with, etc, etc"

It's not like it's any more selfish than someone dying of cancer wanting the same treatment. In either case you just want your misery to end, and there should never be a problem with wanting one's pain to stop.

there is a big difference between a person who is medically terminally ill and knows their time is coming and wants a voice in how to go and when, and a person who can not deal with life on a mental or emotional level. The second type of person has a chance of learning to survive and even thrive at life. The former knows no matter what they do they are going to die and die in a short time table. You can not justify asking a medical doctor to assist i a suicide if a person is not terminaly ill and the patient has nothing that is physically killing them. For those types of people there are multiple resources already available to them via mental institutions, therapy, etc. Nothing is killing them but themselves. Terminally ill patients do not have that option.

Your grandma was 31 when you were born? Your mom's a ****.