Was it murder?

[volinbham]

yet in your scenarios the people are perfectly capable of doing the deed themselves. I would see assisted suicide as something that requires the individual to be unable to complete the act without assistance (and not just lacking the will)

I would think a terminally ill person might still be able to pull a trigger. One of the things Dr. K was doing was providing knowledge and materials to these people.

On the larger issue of "rights" I don't see why it is a right only if you can't do it yourself regardless what definition of "can't do it yourself" is used. Or that it is a right only if you are terminally ill but isn't if you have other reasons (e.g. paralyzed)

I think we can legally establish rights to assisted suicide in some situations but that doesn't mean they are rights as in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness

 

[IPorange]

I would think a terminally ill person might still be able to pull a trigger. One of the things Dr. K was doing was providing knowledge and materials to these people.

On the larger issue of "rights" I don't see why it is a right only if you can't do it yourself regardless what definition of "can't do it yourself" is used. Or that it is a right only if you are terminally ill but isn't if you have other reasons (e.g. paralyzed)

I think we can legally establish rights to assisted suicide in some situations but that doesn't mean they are rights as in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness

Yes, in many circumstances, Dr. K. was setting a scenario where 1 action or inaction under their control would result in death. Isn't that what assisted suicide is? I feel like you're trying to pull in some sort of murder angle to this that isn't there.

On your second point, you're adding in things that haven't been said or advocated. I don't know why you are doing this.

On your third point, I think people have a say into whether they exist or not. I am not saying anything about the morality of choosing to not exist in many cases.

 

[volinbham]

Yes, in many circumstances, Dr. K. was setting a scenario where 1 action or inaction under their control would result in death. Isn't that what assisted suicide is? I feel like you're trying to pull in some sort of murder angle to this that isn't there.

I'm not working a murder angle at all - I don't consider this to be murder. I believe murder implies against one's will.

On your second point, you're adding in things that haven't been said or advocated. I don't know why you are doing this.

Maybe I'm not clear on what you mean by a unalienable right to assisted suicide. To me such rights are ones we exercise ourselves. If they require the actions of another party then I don't see them as unalienable rights. Now we certainly can make such actions legal but that is not the same. Driving a car is legal but it is not an unalienable right.

On your third point, I think people have a say into whether they exist or not. I am not saying anything about the morality of choosing to not exist in many cases.

I'm not making a morality call here - at least not directly. I think I can choose to live or die. If the dying part requires someone to kill me I'm not sure I have that "right" as an unalienable right. Perhaps I'll have the legal right some day. You appear to be saying it's not someone "killing" me if I give them permission. If you are, that's what I disagree with. If that's not what you are saying then I'm not clear on what you are saying.

 

[OrangeYankee]

I had no problem at all with the idea behind Kevorkian's idea, the problem is I feel this can be a very slippery slope that can lead to the Government being able to step in and decide people's fates... that's the part that scares me.

It's like that lady who sparked the huge debate a few years ago, whose husband wanted to remove the feeding tube. The thing that scared me was the fact that Government stepped in and decided this argument between him and her parents, and while it does make sense how they ruled (If she truly had a living will), I just think it's the start of a precedent that will eventually lead us to a place that no one wants to go.

 

[droski]

the problem is people in these situations generally aren't thinking rationally. you don't want a situation where in a moment of weakness someone says they want to go and they just off them without talking them through it. if you recall dr jack was accused of doing just that.

 

[n_huffhines]

If I were miserably ill and terminal, I'd want a way out.

 

[lumberjack4]

the problem is people in these situations generally aren't thinking rationally. you don't want a situation where in a moment of weakness someone says they want to go and they just off them without talking them through it. if you recall dr jack was accused of doing just that.

Dr. K was very selective on the patients he would take on. He would visit and talk to them multiple times before accepting or denying patients.

 

[droski]

Dr. K was very selective on the patients he would take on. He would visit and talk to them multiple times before accepting or denying patients.

i've always assumed the complaints were bitter kids who didn't know their parents full wishes, but it's still a major problem with assisted suicide. particurally if it starts being a money making situation.

 

[volinbham]

i've always assumed the complaints were bitter kids who didn't know their parents full wishes, but it's still a major problem with assisted suicide. particurally if it starts being a money making situation.

:yes:

 

[IPorange]

Assisted suicide being profitable is a problem in the same way that medicine being profitable is a problem... In my mind, the benefits out-way the risks. If you disagree, you might reconsider utgibb's perspectives.