Should Mercy Killing or Euthanasia be made legal?

[daydreamer]

It is astonishing to find 'mercy' and 'killing' words together. but in certain cases they are.
When a person is gravely ill and in severe pain, and it is an incurable condition(most likely cancer), he might himself wish to die to be free from pain and disability. This is called mercy killing or euthanasia. There is lot of debate whether it should be legal or not?

In many parts of world, this is made legal but in most parts its still not legal. In certain parts of the world, Doctors have the right to perform euthanasia or mercy killing for patients with very little or no hope of recovery.

Mercy killing is quite different from 'Life support'. In the case of Life support, the patient is 'half dead' and have no choice. In Life support, the patient's family often make the decision whether to take the patient off the life support system. In euthanasia, the patient is very well alive but in great pain and doctors perform mercy killing or euthanasia to end his or her pain.

What is your take on it?

[Kofi]

Allowing mercy killing is just like allowing people the right to take their own lives. Allowing mercy killing is just like allowing people to commit suicide. Most people commit suicide because they are in pain, they are frustrated, they are fed up and wish to die just like the person suffering on the sickbed. Having an incurable sickness doesn't necessarily mean death. Remember anything can happen and the doctors could be wrong.

Doctors don't know everything because doctors do not make human beings. Doctors do not have the right to determine whether you live or die. Mercy killing is nothing but murder and those who perform mercy killing are nothing but criminals in my opinion. Allow the person to die naturally.

Ya in some cases, it really compulsory to adopt this system so as the person don't surfer anymore. But another point of view taking someone's life is god's job and you cannot take his place. Well it is a bit difficult sometime to take decision in these kind of cases

I dont think mercy killing should be allowed , i know whoever is in pain feels that i should die but that person once gone will never come to life .. and we will miss that person badly and we will hate ourself for killing them..

[rmholla]

I find it odd that so many religious people object to allowing someone to make the choice of when to end their life because we should not play god, but yet they have no trouble with the fact that hooking these people up to machines and keeping them alive artificially is playing god too. Pulling the plug is really only allowing nature to take its course.

I totally agree with mercy killing and I do feel that anyone (within limits) who chooses to die should be allowed to do so, whether with the help of doctors or by their own hand. In fact, I find it absolutely amazing that anyone can possibly even think they so much as have a "right" to make that decision for anyone else, much less have a say in it (once again, within limits). No, of course I don't like to see anyone die but, if that is what they want to do, they have their own reasons for wanting to do so and, as much as I'd dread having to "stay out of it", it's far from my place to make that decision for them. Sure, I might beg and plead for them to think differently but, when it comes right down to it, they (the individual making that choice) should have the final say. After all, it's their life and if they are freely choosing to end it then I can only imagine that they must have a pretty darned good reason for wanting to do so.

[ASOR]

I am for mercy killing. Under certain conditions, of course. The person dieing must be consenting, and they must be either in a vegetative state or in their last stages of a terminal illness, where basically they are on their death bed.

As you know, a doctor's oath pledges to do no harm. I saw a doctor on TV who was actually against mercy killing. He had a terminal illness, but in my opinion was still a productive member of society. Some people in more advanced stages who are on their deathbed may view their condition as hopeless and feel that the only thing they are doing by living is consuming the resources of their family (money), the doctors' time, the hospital's stuff, insurance, etc. Some don't want to be a drain on society.

If a person is just in a lot of pain or something that won't end their life soon, I believe that perhaps they have every right to end their life, but if it's that worth ending, they should have no problem doing it by themselves.

I would pretty much be against it. I think no one has the right to take a persons life but god himself. I understand that a person might be really ill and their families would want to end their suffering and help them, but I know I wouldn't be able to do that to one of my loved ones no matter how sick they were. I just couldn't let them go.

[DaughterUK]

I believe that euthenasia should be legal in some circumstances, but that there should be checks and balances in place to prevent abuses from occuring.

1. The person must be either terminally ill, in intolerable pain, or otherwise have a serious medical condition which means that they have a very poor quality of life.
2. The person must be of sound mind to make the decision to die. There should be psychiatric evaluation to ensure that the person is not suffering from a treatable condition such as manic depression.
3. The person must sign a document expressing their wish to die, or if this is impossible video/audio evidence should be recorded. A doctor should have to co-sign this document.

I think that providing that the above conditions are satisfied, there should not be a legal obstacle for people choosing to end their suffering in a dignified way.

That is very scary to me. Life is a very precious thing and don't forget that life is uncertain which means that anything can happen. You may think that the person cannot recover from such an untreatable illness but that cannot be %100 surety because there is always some little chance. As long as the person is breathing, there is still hope. Let the person continue to breath and let the person die naturally.

I have very mixed feelings about mercy killing. On one hand, I think it's the persons life, and they should be able to do with it whatever they please. However, on the other hand it also seems a fair bit wrong. The reason why I think this is because it hurts everyone that cares about them. Also, what IF they could've survived the illness? I know miracles are called miracles for a reason, but they still do tend to happen.

[Jenelle]

This is one of the questions where the answer is 'it depends on the situation.' Sure it'll be painful for all of us to see a loved on die. But sometimes, in some cases, it is better to let them die rather than see them suffer.

[rockingway]

For all who agree with euthaniasia. Please give an example of a person you knew who was in pain, and wanted to die. Were you by their side? How long? Did you help them achieve some things?

And if yes; now, is it based on that experience? In what condition was he or she suffering? Was it Cancer? Well, I have encountered this experience watching someone close.

I never never never had this thought of having him/her died, by pulling the plug off, injection or anything like that.

I heard someone saying intolerable pain. How do you define that?

The person never gave up despite great pain. You know, when you see it. It is tangible. You can smell and touch something. You can hear it. Every of this is a cause of a pain. And the person never compained.

Why someone want to die then?

[Kofi]

Originally Posted by rmholla

I find it odd that so many religious people object to allowing someone to make the choice of when to end their life because we should not play god...

The answer is very simple! Your life belongs to God because only God gives life. Even if you don't believe in God, your life doesn't belong to you alone because you form part of humanity and the human race and your life belongs to the entire humanity and the human race and you don't have the right to end it. No human person has the right to end your life including yourself.

What is "mercy" about killing? What is good about killing someone? Do you have the right to kill someone? Aren't you a murderer for killing your fellow human being? Are you God to take somebody's life? Who are you to kill someone? Are you not ashamed for being a murderer? Are you not a fool for trying to be wise? What is good about mercy killing?

[AltMvz]

Fact is this. Many people are appalled of by sick people getting help to die, or even taking there own lives. Their reason for THEIR opinion is either based on "God would not approve" angle or "They would miss the rest of their life" angle. First not all people believe in Jesus or God. Many are Atheist, and believe when you die you just get recycled back into the earth which isn't such a terrible thing as opposed to BURNING IN THE FIRES OF HELL! didn't mean to scare anyone.

Another point i'd like to make is when some people say that these people would miss the rest of their lives, they are not well now and they don't see they will be well in the future. I.e. an incurable disease, or mental disorder they have been going through for quiet some time. Point is this. No one knows the anguish and pain these people go through and unless you have gone through the pain these people go through you can't really decide they are making the wrong decision. An example and some people won't like it.

A dog with his legs broken no longer able to walk. Kept alive but no longer as i've said able to get about. People will be nice to it, when they have time that is, and will throw a bit a food to it now and again. Great. So the dog just lays there for the rest of it's days. It can't do what dogs love to do, sniff other dogs bums, pee on trees, jump in the river, rub itself in s**t, all the things dogs love to do. Now it just lays there. Ain't much of a dogs life.
But dogs adapt. Dogs have it easier that another, humans. Humans don't adapt as easy as dogs.

Humans think about the things he/she would like to do, run, just, sniff other peoples bums, etc. They watch others enviously, become depressed, analyze themselves, wish and dream of a better life. If they choose to end it, i believe they have that right. For you to come along and say you can't because God said you cant, or because you should live the rest of your life because it's law, i'd say pizz off! Doing yourself in was practical in roman times. Some when old and feeling they've lived they're live were happy to go early. It wasn't a big deal back then, it was part of roman culture. It was only when Christianity came along that some geezers decided that god doesn't like it and will send ya down below. yada yada...

This has always been a sensitive issue...and I personally have almost been faced with a similar scenario in my immediate family..

I believe euthaniasia should be legalized without a doubt...my reasons? I feel it is much better to let someone go and not prolong their agony...Its not about ethics, its doing the right thing. Nobody deserves to go out crying and in pain ... sometimes its just better to let go

[caledonia]

I'm still not into mercy killing. I believe that it is my responsibility as a daughter or a mother or a wife to do my best just for my love ones to stay alive. Because, if I know that I did my best before they die at least I've done everything to keep them alive. And it will be easy for me to accept their death.

[thegamevg]

Its easy to see your point of view caledonia...It seems almost criminal to readily let your loved ones go. But you have to try looking at it from their perspective..is it fair on them to undergo a life of uncertainty,pain and suffering ?
Hope is the most beautiful word in the English language...but you have to feel that some of people would rather not endure the torture..

the name is mercy and killing. it is like + and - coming together. Killing is bad no matter what and you can cover that with the mercy in front of the name because it is still killing and the taking away of human life.

Originally Posted by Jenelle

This is one of the questions where the answer is 'it depends on the situation...

the answer is just simple! those who involve themselves in mercy killing are murderers just like those who perform abortion. Nobody the condition of the sickness you don't have the right to take another persons life. Some sicknesses may seem incurable but nothing is impossible for God and if God says yes who are we to say no?

[Benson]

To those of you who want to support Obama's health care plan, mercy killing will soon become rampant as it did during the time of the Nazis.

you are 150% right. Obama's healthcare plan will affect health care industries but in the long run, it will put Americans in real danger. Obama doesn't want health care industries to benefit more from the health system and health products and that seems like the main reason why he is doing this but he doesn't think about the long term effects on the common American. As I said in the other thread, Obama is a fake Messiah who doesn't even know how to save himself let alone saving others. To those of you who are following Obama, I am sorry to say you are all gonna end up in the deepest part of hell because Obama is a deceiver and a Prophet of Doom.

But care should betaken that mercy killing is not taken in a bad method. Its really just that we stop people suffering from pain from even more agony. So there absolutely no mistake in making it legal.

I am neutral with this thought.

'Mercy killing' or 'Euthanasia' is a practice of ending life in a manner to get rid of a painless life.
Or
In simple, 'Mercy killing' is an act of terminating the life of a person by giving him a lethal dose of medication or taking a consent of the relative in order to set that person free from incurable pain.


'Mercy Killing' must be done only when there is no alternative left to save the life of a person. But, 'Mercy Killing' is taking a bad shape nowadays in the form of acquiring inherent properties of parents and/or relatives & organ selling (trafficking).

I am sure that few will say 'yes', but i disagrees, because 'mercy killing' spreads bad message, And people tries to escape from there responsibilities through it.

from religious and moral point of view, it is a great sin to kill another person no matter how and why. Life is precious no matter how little. Miracles do occur and the person you are declaring dead might be able to recover. Nobody knows not even the doctors know when a person's time is up. If the person's time isn't up then please do not commit murder.

mercy killing or euthanasia will become very common after the collapse of social security and medicare. One thing we must remember is that the world's population is increasing and there will be more elderly people in the future because there are now advanced medical treatments which enable people to live longer and so I think in the near future people will undergo euthanasia or mercy killing whether they like it or not especially after the collapse of social security and medicare

No and No. life is precious no matter how little it might seem. who are you to decide who is to die and when to die? Doctors aren't God. Only God has the final say. If a patient wishes to die, one thing we should consider is the fact that he or she is not well. He is she is a "patient" physically and mentally and we shouldn't take all they say to be what they meant in real life.

I have read all of the postings and all have pertinent legal ethical humanitarian and religious merit. So, how do you pull these variables together to form any kind of conclusion. What appears to me to be apparent is that, we as humans, take our lives into our own hands every day by engaging in a plethora of broadly ranged risks. For example, smoking, alcohol, drugs etc, not to mention sky - diving and swimming with sharks! The point I'm making is that if you are 'healthy' you can engage in many extreme activities and not have your objectivity questioned. However, if someone has a terminal illness it appears that their right to risk becomes publicly (not intentionally) owned.

I believe, and I would state that I am pro-life, that if someone has been psychologically assessed by, say 3 totally independent professionals, the individual's quality of life has been equally assessed as being practically nil, and that no treatment can effectively diminish pain and counter the illness then there is substantive reason for a humane and dignified exit for the individual. This could be the first time that the individual has been able to control their actions and be positive towards their existence. This could be seen as empowerment and a blessing for the individual in that choice is present, and being able to plan and say goodbye, a last stance as an individual in control.

If you take this away from the person, you reduce the person's freedoms and remove what little controls they have access to. Lastly, would the individual be allowed to engage in risky activities. I'm sure that many 'accidental' deaths are probably planned due to the fact that the individual is intelligent and has read the situation. Choice with very focused checks is the answer, otherwise you will drive this same choice and decision underground with generally, more traumatic experiences for family and friends.