Replies

Having watched two people close to me die from terminal diseases, I have mixed feelings on this matter.

My Aunt had terminal cancer throughout her body. By the time she finally passed, she weighed 75lbs, was in an induced coma for pain and lived that way for months.

Another was a dear friend who died from the complications of AIDS (yes he was gay, sue me). After watching his skin slough off of his body, the incredible pain he was in, it would have been more humane for him to pass sooner.

A person being in sound mind, facing a few months to live, who makes the decision to end life-saving treatment to hasten death or who asks for an injection of medicine to end their life is one thing. An adulterous husband, a woman inconvenienced by a pregnancy or a third party making the decision for another person is another.

It is my understanding that the Oregon law does not allow for a their person to decide a person in sound mind should die. It only allows the patient, with medical agreement, to make the decision for themselves.

Careful. It sounds like you are thinking for yourself.

You see, there are some "conservatives" here who think that not only should people go to prison for easing end-of-life misery, but that the people of a given state should not be able to keep people out of prison who provide such aid, even under strict rules.

The "conservative bloc" on the court disappoints when it is too "police state government" oriented (drunk driving roadblocks, etc.)

Another was a dear friend who died from the complications of AIDS (yes he was gay, sue me). After watching his skin slough off of his body, the incredible pain he was in, it would have been more humane for him to pass sooner.

There's a million ways to kill oneself.

Now I understand someone in a coma and all that. Plus other extenuating cases. But if a person has a terminable disease and doesn't want to live then that person, or his/her loved ones, can somehow, someway, get medicine that can be overdosed with no pain.

Why on earth does this country insist on getting the medical profession all involved in this matter? Doctors are supposed to HEAL people, not kill them.

Of course I must mention the lovely Dr. Kavorkian who got his rocks off killing people. THAT's the sort of doctor who wants to kill people as I see it.

If you kill your own self, what? they gonna put you in jail?

But oh no. We found a way to make money at it! We can create our own little dying industry. For a small fee, of course.

Not to mention, then I'll shut up, the abuse such a system foments. Like another poster mentioned, soon, given the slippery slope, we'll have OTHER people making decisions to end the lives of those who are a burden.

It is my understanding that the Oregon law does not allow for a their person to decide a person in sound mind should die. It only allows the patient, with medical agreement, to make the decision for themselves.

The same is true, in principle, in EVERY case. It is the patient deciding for themself. The differences are the time shift between the decision and the death, and the circumstances of the patient at the time of the decision. An advance directive typically has greater time shift, and is made under "happy" circumstances.