Europe's cure for autism is death

[SearchingforPeace]

Europe’s ‘cure’ for autism is euthanasia | New York Post

A very disturbing article. But pretty much expected. It is an obvious continuation from policies.

A few quotes. Read the entire thing.

...

Thus did a man in his 30s whose only diagnosis was autism become one of 110 people to be euthanized for mental disorders in the Netherlands between 2011 and 2014.

...

Among the obvious risks, Columbia University psychiatrist Paul S. Appelbaum writes in a companion article to Kim’s, is “inducing hopelessness among other individuals with similar conditions and removing pressure for an improvement in psychiatric and social services.”

....

In 2009, a 37-year-old Belgian woman became distraught after a romantic breakup and began seeking a doctor to euthanize her, per that country’s law, which is similar to Holland’s. The woman, Tine Nys, had a history of mental illness, including a teenage suicide attempt, but had more recently been doing well. In February 2010, she received a new diagnosis of autism and, two months later, a lethal injection.

 

[Amargith]

God, what is with the click-baiting, histrionic titles of some articles out there, already?

Canadians are now debating how to implement last year’s ruling by their Supreme Court establishing a right to “physician-assisted dying” in cases of a “grievous and irremediable medical condition.” A panel of experts advising Ontario and 10 other provinces and territories has urged the ruling be construed to include mental illness.

And why not? The Canadian Supreme Court’s opinion specifically said that, in Belgium and the Netherlands, the “predicted abuse and disproportionate impact on vulnerable populations has not materialized.”

Sounds about right. I see honestly no problem with this. Chronic suffering is worse than death, imho. And the people petitioning for this obviously agree and do so of their own voluntary will. As for mentally disturbed people, the only thing that the article commented on was that in some cases the doctors weren't fully in agreement as to the futility of further treatment and suggested some potential options still.

When faced with chronic suffering, the idea of going through a lengthy process of trying to fix what is causing you pain and stress day in day out without even a guarantee, but it being more like a hail mary, after already a lifetime of battling this shit and jumping through every hoop out there...I'd petition and plead for their help as well. Being mentally ill should not =/= having to suffer for life, just because.

It is cruel to keep people locked up in their chronic suffering and deny them any chance of release until they die in agony - maybe years later. Death is not the enemy, imho. One of the things I did when I was working at an animal clinic was be there for the owners who had made the difficult decision of putting their animal out of their misery - often, they felt guilty despite having done *everything* in their power. In truth, they were there for their animal until the very end and did right by them to take away the pain. And I've seen the opposite - people who refuse to give up on their animal despite the fact that the animal was crying in agony, day in day out.

The second one was infinitely harder to witness and respect.

And my mom has seen the same happen with elderly people in homes - where the kids just aren't ready to say goodbye to mom or dad due to guilt, or worse, a sense of social propriety (What will people think???!!!) and made them suffer that much more with invasive tests, clinic visits and all the other crap they desperately try, giving them a few more miserable weeks while being in sheer agony. Or worse - keeping that cycle going for years on end, with those people pleading, begging and absolutely crying to please be put out of their misery to the staff. The lack of empathy and concern for their parents wishes is...honestly staggering.

It was heartbreaking to even hear about, let alone be there and not be able to do anything.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

That's kind of a bummer.

I can sympathize with patient 2014-77. It's a miracle my marriage has lasted this long. I've always had trouble forming and maintaining relationships. If not for my son, I'd strongly consider ending my life. I think life insurance should be awarded to the kin of suicide victims.

 

[SearchingforPeace]

The problem is very simple: people who are temporarily in crisis are being killed.

People are not animals so let's not even go there unless you want them to act that way . If living in Mad Max land looks fun, be prepared for might makes right and life that is short and nasty.

It is a very small progression from voluntary to involuntary and when someone is mentally ill, they often lack the capacity to voluntarily decide.

In essence, doctors are killing people because they are mentally ill. I find it sick and a violation of the entire ethics of the medical profession.

They might as well go on to red heads and left handed people next...

Death panels here we come. Maybe the unproductive and unuseful will be next.

Suffering is not something to avoid at all costs. It is avoidance of epic proportions to think so.

 

[Amargith]

The problem is very simple: people who are temporarily in crisis are being killed.

People are not animals so let's not even go there unless you want them to act that way . If living in Mad Max land looks fun, be prepared for might makes right and life that is short and nasty.

It is a very small progression from voluntary to involuntary and when someone is mentally ill, they often lack the capacity to voluntarily decide.

In essence, doctors are killing people because they are mentally ill. I find it sick and a violation of the entire ethics of the medical profession.

They might as well go on to red heads and left handed people next...

Death panels here we come. Maybe the unproductive and unuseful will be next.

Suffering is not something to avoid at all costs. It is avoidance of epic proportions to think so.

They have an unending string of hoops and evaluations before they actually even get to the decision. And it is petitioned by the very people who want it to happen, themselves. This isn't about temporary suffering. It's about long-term, life-crippling suffering that they want to end.

I'm all on board with your pov if it's a temporary and a fixable condition.

I'm absolutely pro euthanasia if it's not.

(And as far as I'm concerned, animals are just as much living beings that can suffer as humans are, so I don't make any distinction there
As for humans acting like animals...a) we are animals, b) people have never had a problem acting like it, nor do I consider it to be 'wrong' to act like your own nature, and c) we are way more harmful to others and our environments than most other animals are- but that's a tangent, I'm sure).

 

[SearchingforPeace]

As for humans acting like animals...a) we are animals, b) people have never had a problem acting like it, nor do I consider it to be 'wrong' to act like your own nature, and c) we are way more harmful to others and our environments than most other animals are- but that's a tangent, I'm sure).

So, simple honest question: how can you condemn pollution, rape, murder, sexual assault, sexism, environmental destruction, genocide, or anything else if it is not "wrong" to act like one's own nature? Wouldn't anything be acceptable and nothing wrong?

 

[Amargith]

So, simple honest question: how can you condemn pollution, rape, murder, sexual assault, sexism, environmental destruction, genocide, or anything else if it is not "wrong" to act like one's own nature? Wouldn't anything be acceptable and nothing wrong?

It's part of how Nature works - the self-preservation and opportunistic system at work. And we're a lot more likely to commit those 'crimes' than animals are, ime. To me, our human nature is like any tool and it can be optimised or used to create short cuts, imho.

I guess the difference is that the sentence 'acting like animals' just rings archaic to me. The meaning we attribute to that sentence just is not accurate.

Of course I oppose all those things - but I also understand where they come from, how they're shaped, both by instinct and environment, and how they can be optimised - or rigged for short term thinking only, damaging others and everything around you. To me, it's just a matter of reprogramming the brain to understand that there are...well, serious benefits to optimising for the long-term good, and triggering that empathy they naturally have.

The same is true for animals. Animals get conditioned by their own instincts and by their environments - and yes, they are opportunistic. But they also care for each other - and other species (just google dolphin saves dog, man, etc), as many other species too have cooperative/social wiring like we do. And - maybe due to the supposed brain capacity we have over them - they tend to be less malignant due to their level of opportunism vs that of humans.

Only humans and viruses change the environment they live in to suit their needs, to the extent of destroying it. Only humans wage war on such a massive scale, destroying everything in sight. Sure, animals fight over resources as well, but they rarely seem to behave in a grudge like fashion, like we do, or be out to destroy - chasing off the opponent from the resource is often enough.

And there's a theory out there that states that the more heavily armed an animal is (teeth and fangs), the more conflict avoidant they are because of the massive consequences that can have. On the contrary, animals who aren't naturally heavily armed (such as people), tend to be the most aggressive species out there.

In the end, I don't see them or us as different in any significant way, though - safe from us being way more potentially harmful due to our numbers and level of opportunism (on account of our big bulky brain?). We're all animals, and we all have the capacity to use the full range of our cognitive functions to our benefit - be it for self-preservation at the cost of others, or for cooperation through empathy to ensure the survival of the group.

As for me, personally...Pets were just about the only living beings, growing up, I felt safe with. They didn't expect you to be anything else than who you were, communicated clearly what they did and did not appreciate and what their needs were, didn't guilt trip you, make you feel ashamed of yourself or bully the crap out of you - for any reason.

They taught me more about supposed 'humanity' than many of the supposed humans around me ever did. So yes - to me, the phrase 'acting like animals' always puts a look of amusement on my face due to the inherent irony and the -to me - antiquated pov it holds.

/ tangent?

 

[SearchingforPeace]

It's part of how Nature works - the self-preservation and opportunistic system at work. And we're a lot more likely to commit those 'crimes' than animals are, ime. To me, our human nature is like any tool and it can be optimised or used to create short cuts, imho.

I guess the difference is that the sentence 'acting like animals' just rings archaic to me. Knowing animals as I do...the meaning we attribute to that sentence just is not accurate.

Of course I oppose all those things - but I also understand where they come from, how they're shaped, both by instinct and environment, and how they can be optimised - or rigged for short term thinking only, damaging others and everything around you. To me, it's just a matter of reprogramming the brain to understand that there are...well, serious benefits to optimising for the long-term good, and triggering that empathy they naturally have.

So are the things I mentioned "wrong"? Not whether you can understand the why, but are the actual things I listed "wrong"? Or are they just part of nature, without morality attached?

 

[Amargith]

So are the things I mentioned "wrong"? Not whether you can understand the why, but are the actual things I listed "wrong"? Or are they just part of nature, without morality attached?

Both.

I suspect most of them are survival systems that have gone off track - and are no longer working the way they're meant to. Typically, those things are committed by people who were traumatised to the point of becoming 'fear biters' - aka, grabbing power before someone else can wield that power over them. Then relishing in that power, because they were helpless for so long, and losing all empathy because of the trust issues that the trauma caused.

Others do not have a directly negative downside (such as pollution and environmental destruction), which means that people are less likely to pick up on the 'wrongness' of it, or be motivated properly to do something about it since it doesn't feel urgent.

Considering both are incredibly harmful to the self and to others, yes, I personally consider them to be morally wrong. Those behaviours would ideally be corrected within (human - as we cannot communicate or even grasp other species properly, yet) individual/society, to fully optimise life on this planet.

 

[Beorn]

“predicted abuse and disproportionate impact on vulnerable populations has not materialized.”

What exactly is an appropriate amount of abuse and disproportionate impact?

How many of my disabled friends have to be abused or killed before we draw the line?

God, what is with the click-baiting, histrionic titles of some articles out there, already?




Sounds about right. I see honestly no problem with this. Chronic suffering is worse than death, imho. And the people petitioning for this obviously agree and do so of their own voluntary will. As for mentally disturbed people, the only thing that the article commented on was that in some cases the doctors weren't fully in agreement as to the futility of further treatment and suggested some potential options still.

When faced with chronic suffering, the idea of going through a lengthy process of trying to fix what is causing you pain and stress day in day out without even a guarantee, but it being more like a hail mary, after already a lifetime of battling this shit and jumping through every hoop out there...I'd petition and plead for their help as well. Being mentally ill should not =/= having to suffer for life, just because.

It is cruel to keep people locked up in their chronic suffering and deny them any chance of release until they die in agony - maybe years later. Death is not the enemy, imho. One of the things I did when I was working at an animal clinic was be there for the owners who had made the difficult decision of putting their animal out of their misery - often, they felt guilty despite having done *everything* in their power. In truth, they were there for their animal until the very end and did right by them to take away the pain. And I've seen the opposite - people who refuse to give up on their animal despite the fact that the animal was crying in agony, day in day out.

The second one was infinitely harder to witness and respect.

And my mom has seen the same happen with elderly people in homes - where the kids just aren't ready to say goodbye to mom or dad due to guilt, or worse, a sense of social propriety (What will people think???!!!) and made them suffer that much more with invasive tests, clinic visits and all the other crap they desperately try, giving them a few more miserable weeks while being in sheer agony. Or worse - keeping that cycle going for years on end, with those people pleading, begging and absolutely crying to please be put out of their misery to the staff. The lack of empathy and concern for their parents wishes is...honestly staggering.

It was heartbreaking to even hear about, let alone be there and not be able to do anything.

Your fixing the wrong problem.
Living through pain is not the problem.
Living through pain without hope is the problem.

Europe now has a hopeless culture that says to people that there is nothing to live for without comfort and ease of life.

I know a good damn bit about this myself.

My mother suffered from a rare disease similar to ALS/Lou Gehrig's Disease. At her worst she would cry out for death at night. But, I'm proud of my mother, my family, and friends. She was brave and she relied on all of us to get through it. We all became closer and stronger because of it. I never thought much of my mother before that, honestly. She wasn't a very good parent. But, her bravery redeemed her in my estimation and I know what it will take when my time comes to go through deep suffering.

I'm sorry for the people that do not have the same support as my mother. I'm even more sorry for the people who have their children put them through extended suffering because they have not planned and/or are making decisions for the wrong reasons. We knew exactly what we were headed towards and made decisions to not extend suffering through a tracheotomy or other procedures.

I'm most sorry for Europe where they think the value of life is relative and have not filled the void of the Church with any meaningful philosophy that gives hope in suffering.

I also work with the developmentally disabled. I will be damned if I ever see any of them put at ANY RISK of being killed because of their disability. One of the greatest moments of by life was watching Baroness Campbell of Surbiton, who has suffered her whole life from spinal muscle atrophy, make her plea to parliament as a peer to stop an assisted suicide law.

"'If this amendment were to succeed I believe it will place a new and invidious pressure on disabled and terminally ill people to think they are closer to the end of their lives. Some will consider death is preferable to fighting for the support to live with dignity. It would be the cheapest, quickest, simplest option. "

That concern is completely legitimate. Because in that parliament was Baroness Warnock who actually stated: "If you're demented, you're wasting people's lives - your family's lives - and you're wasting the resources of the National Health Service."

The problem is not suffering. The problem is a hopeless society and an ignorant selfish society.
You fix the right problem and you will see tremendous fruit. You fix the wrong problem and you put the most vulnerable at legitimate risk.

Edit:
This other quote from Baroness Campbell is pretty damning:
"I tick every box of Lord Falconer's [The bill's author] criteria to die. I could go tomorrow and, believe me, I would have no trouble in persuading two doctors. Three years ago two doctors persuaded me it was time for me to go on my way."

 

[Amargith]

What exactly is an appropriate amount of abuse and disproportionate impact?

How many of my disabled friends have to be abused or killed before we draw the line?



Your fixing the wrong problem.
Living through pain is not the problem.
Living through pain without hope is the problem.

Europe now has a hopeless culture that says to people that there is nothing to live for without comfort and ease of life.

I know a good damn bit about this myself.

My mother suffered from a rare disease similar to ALS/Lou Gehrig's Disease. At her worst she would cry out for death at night. But, I'm proud of my mother, my family, and friends. She was brave and she relied on all of us to get through it. We all became closer and stronger because of it. I never thought much of my mother before that, honestly. She wasn't a very good parent. But, her bravery redeemed her in my estimation and I know what it will take when my time comes to go through deep suffering.

I'm sorry for the people that do not the same support as my mother. I'm even more sorry for the people who have their children put them through extended suffering because they have not planned and/or are making decisions for the wrong reasons. We knew exactly what we were headed towards and made decisions to not extend suffering through a tracheotomy or other procedures.

I'm most sorry for Europe where they think the value of life is relative and have not filled the void of the Church with any meaningful philosophy that gives hope in suffering.

I also work with the developmentally disabled. I will be damned if I ever see any of them put at ANY RISK of being killed because of their disability. One of the greatest moments of by life was watching Baroness Campbell of Surbiton, who has suffered her whole life from spinal muscle atrophy, make her plea to parliament as a peer to stop an assisted suicide law.

"'If this amendment were to succeed I believe it will place a new and invidious pressure on disabled and terminally ill people to think they are closer to the end of their lives. Some will consider death is preferable to fighting for the support to live with dignity. It would be the cheapest, quickest, simplest option. "

That concern is completely legitimate. Because in that parliament was Baroness Warnock who actually stated: "If you're demented, you're wasting people's lives - your family's lives - and you're wasting the resources of the National Health Service."

The problem is not suffering. The problem is a hopeless society and an ignorant selfish society.
You fix the right problem and you will see tremendous fruit. You fix the wrong problem and you put the most vulnerable at legitimate risk.

That's not even what the article was about.

It was about prolonged suffering without any hope of ever alleviating that suffering and the person themselves petitioning to have that suffering put to an end.

There is a reason that in movies, they say 'Before long, you'll be begging for death' when they're about to torture someone.

For sure, you can offset that pain with good things such as family and love and meaning in your life, but ultimately, depending on how much that pain fucks up your life (and certain mental illnesses do a REAL number on your social relationships - the pain of that kind of isolation and loneliness for a social, cooperative species is....not to be underestimated), yeah, I do believe that you get to decide 'enough is enough'.

It has absolutely nothing to do with the lack of faith or a need for comfort, or whatever else you're discussing. Fwiw, I do practice religion - and I still believe all of this. Ive seen and heard of too much intense suffering on account of what I consider selfish relatives who aren't ready to let go to believe otherwise.

To me (and apparently to many other Euros), it is a lot more immoral to let the fear of the unknown and of death - a normal part of life that cannot be avoided, anyway - extend the excruciating suffering that some people go through. And it's not like these people are just being taken on a whim - like, they cry out for it one day, and they get their wish. It's a lengthy process of 'are you sure?' and 'are there any other options to mitigate, manage or resolve your agony?'.

Apparently it's true what they say. Death and taxes - and they're ironically also the two things that get vilified beyond belief.

 

[Beorn]

That's not even what the article was about.

It was about prolonged suffering without any hope of ever alleviating that suffering and the person themselves petitioning to have that suffering put to an end.

There is a reason that in movies, they say 'Before long, you'll be begging for death' when they're about to torture someone.

For sure, you can offset that pain with good things such as family and love and meaning in your life, but ultimately, depending on how much that pain fucks up your life (and certain mental illnesses do a REAL number on your social relationships - the pain of that kind of isolation and loneliness for a social, cooperative species is....not to be underestimated), yeah, I do believe that you get to decide 'enough is enough'.

It has absolutely nothing to do with the lack of faith or a need for comfort, or whatever else you're discussing. Fwiw, I do practice religion - and I still believe all of this. Ive seen and heard of too much intense suffering on account of what I consider selfish relatives who aren't ready to let go to believe otherwise.

To me (and apparently to many other Euros), it is a lot more immoral to let the fear of the unknown and of death - a normal part of life that cannot be avoided, anyway - extend the excruciating suffering that some people go through. And it's not like these people are just being taken on a whim - like, they cry out for it one day, and they get their wish. It's a lengthy process of 'are you sure?' and 'are there any other options to mitigate, manage or resolve your agony?'.

Apparently it's true what they say. Death and taxes - and they're ironically also the two things that get vilified beyond belief.

You took only ten minutes to answer my post and did not answer my questions or concerns about the most vulnerable members of society.

Clearly, you're not interested in reflecting on the experience I'm relaying or the concerns of the developmentally disabled.

If assisted-suicide laws were in place in England than Baroness Campbell very well could have been dead instead of speaking in parliament and displaying self-advocacy for the developmentally disabled at the very highest level.

 

[Poki]

So, simple honest question: how can you condemn pollution, rape, murder, sexual assault, sexism, environmental destruction, genocide, or anything else if it is not "wrong" to act like one's own nature? Wouldn't anything be acceptable and nothing wrong?

All those things are aimed outside of self, destruction of property outside of self, this affects self. Those are acts against another person, or thing. This is an act against themselves.

A more acceptable comparison is a person saying rape me...which is actually acceptable because at that points it's not really rape. Or to treat a person in a sexist nature if they want to be treated that way.

 

[Amargith]

You took only ten minutes to answer my post and did not answer my questions or concerns about the most vulnerable members of society.

Clearly, you're not interested in reflecting on the experience I'm relaying or the concerns of the developmentally disabled.

If assisted-suicide laws were in place in England than Baroness Campbell very well could have been dead instead of speaking in parliament and displaying self-advocacy for the developmentally disabled at the very highest level.

It is absolutely an important concern. I'm all for making sure being vigilant on those matters because it is easily abused, I won't deny that.

That said, those concerns do not outweigh those of the people who actually are in agony and deserve our help or at least our permission to take matters into their own hands. That too, is too important to deny. So we'll have to walk a very rigid and tight rope on this. It's not a reason not to walk it though, sorry.


You shared a personal story with me, and I will do the same, in the hope that it may...create some more understanding between us.

When I was 14, my great aunt came to live with us, because my mom, as a nurse, wanted to provide her the care she started to need. She had been diagnosed as not able to survive at the tender age of 3 weeks. Yet, when she came to live with us, she was the ripe age of 89 years old.

For years, she was the living embodiment of 'the squeaky wheel gets the grease'. Because of her condition, she was checked up on non-stop, medically throughout her life. And she lived it gladly and fully.

She lived with us for 4 months. I enjoyed her presence greatly as she was very wise, very kind, and very insightful. After two months, I realised something was going on. She was out and about, visiting relatives all over the place. Like..non-stop. She was saying good-bye. To everyone she'd ever known, in the most celebratory way, possible. I don't know that the people even realised that that was what she was doing. I knew, because I watched her up close.

Then, she asked my mom for her help. She told her: please, no more hospital visits. I've been prodded, poked, tested and 'rebooted' my entire life. Enough already. If I do have another attack (she had a heart condition), I want to just see it through.

I was sleeping when it happened, so when I came downstairs, she had just passed. The doorbell rung, and my mom stood there, with her arms filled with oxygen equipment. She'd gone out of her way to help where she could and had asked my great aunt time and again if she truly didn't want to go to the hospital. And as her lungs filled with fluid and she started to choke, she kept shaking her head 'no'. My mom then rushed out to get the equipment, to make her as comfortable as possible as the inevitable took place. She burst out in tears, when she realised she'd been too late, getting back.

I don't remember this, but I apparently spoke to my great aunt's body for about an hour, saying goodbye, after she'd passed. I don't think I cried. I was ok with this. I'd seen her say goodbye, I'd seen her take joy in her last moments, getting the most out of them and making memories, and I understood her decision. I respected it. And I was so proud of my mom, that she did too. It's not easy, standing by as your family member willingly chokes on her own fluids - especially as a trained professional.

This was her choice. Her life. She deserved to have the final say, imho.

My mom made me promise that if she ever was in that position, and she couldn't actually take the decision herself, I'd do the same for her.

And I will.

 

[SearchingforPeace]

It is absolutely an important concern. I'm all for making sure being vigilant on those matters because it is easily abused, I won't deny that.

That said, those concerns do not outweigh those of the people who actually are in agony and deserve our help or at least our permission to take matters into their own hands. That too, is too important to deny. So we'll have to walk a very rigid and tight rope on this. It's not a reason not to walk it though, sorry.


You shared a personal story with me, and I will do the same, in the hope that it may...create some more understanding between us.

When I was 14, my great aunt came to live with us, because my mom, as a nurse, wanted to provide her the care she started to need. She had been diagnosed as not able to survive at the tender age of 3 weeks. Yet, when she came to live with us, she was the ripe age of 89 years old.

For years, she was the living embodiment of 'the squeaky wheel gets the grease'. Because of her condition, she was checked up on non-stop, medically throughout her life. And she lived it gladly and fully.

She lived with us for 4 months. I enjoyed her presence greatly as she was very wise, very kind, and very insightful. After two months, I realised something was going on. She was out and about, visiting relatives all over the place. Like..non-stop. She was saying good-bye. To everyone she'd ever known, in the most celebratory way, possible. I don't know that the people even realised that that was what she was doing. I knew, because I watched her up close.

Then, she asked my mom for her help. She told her: please, no more hospital visits. I've been prodded, poked, tested and 'rebooted' my entire life. Enough already. If I do have another attack (she had a heart condition), I want to just see it through.

I was sleeping when it happened, so when I came downstairs, she had just passed. The doorbell rung, and my mom stood there, with her arms filled with oxygen equipment. She'd gone out of her way to help where she could and had asked my great aunt time and again if she truly didn't want to go to the hospital. And as her lungs filled with fluid and she started to choke, she kept shaking her head 'no'. My mom then rushed out to get the equipment, to make her as comfortable as possible as the inevitable took place. She burst out in tears, when she realised she'd been too late, getting back.

I don't remember this, but I apparently spoke to my great aunt's body for about an hour, saying goodbye, after she'd passed. I don't think I cried. I was ok with this. I'd seen her say goodbye, I'd seen her take joy in her last moments, getting the most out of them and making memories, and I understood her decision. I respected it. And I was so proud of my mom, that she did too. It's not easy, standing by as your family member willingly chokes on her own fluids - especially as a trained professional.

This was her choice. Her life. She deserved to have the final say, imho.

My mom made me promise that if she ever was in that position, and she couldn't actually take the decision herself, I'd do the same for her.

And I will.

Thanks for sharing that story. Your mom had to really be firm in her love for your aunt to let her die.

I have never wanted to be kept alive worth extraordinary measures. The idea of being on life support long term is appalling to me.

Your story isn't euthanasia or suicide though. It is allowing death to take place. Without assistance.

No one needed to kill anyone.

Moreover, with the standards being advanced today, she would likely have been euthanized at 3 weeks of age, to end the suffering. I suspect she was happy to live those 89 years.

Going back to the article, the mentally ill are not in sound mind. Your aunt was. They can't make a reasoned choice.

Plus, their bodies are not going to suddenly die without someone killing them Your aunt died of natural causes......

 

[Amargith]

Thanks for sharing that story. Your mom had to really be firm in her love for your aunt to let her die.

I have never wanted to be kept alive worth extraordinary measures. The idea of being on life support long term is appalling to me.

Your story isn't euthanasia or suicide though. It is allowing death to take place. Without assistance.

No one needed to kill anyone.

Moreover, with the standards being advanced today, she would likely have been euthanized at 3 weeks of age, to end the suffering. I suspect she was happy to live those 89 years.

Going back to the article, the mentally ill are not in sound mind. Your aunt was. They can't make a reasoned choice.

Plus, their bodies are not going to suddenly die without someone killing them Your aunt died of natural causes......

Natural causes that were eminently treatable. They had done so for years. In not lending assistance, you could argue that it was euthanasia.

The thing is, just because you're mentally ill, doesn't mean you don't get a say about your quality of life, imho. My great aunt was lucky that her suffering was confined to the tests and the prodding, and that she was able to refuse that treatment, and only had to face suffering for a short moment before dying.

I shared her story, not because of I thought it was similar but because it illustrates why i'm so fine with death. And why I think that agency over your own life is so utterly crucial.

These people are evaluated by experts, and have to jump through an incredible amount of hoops to get 'permission' to end their own life. And while I agree that in desperation, people do crazy things and therefore, those rules should be stringent and that process should be beyond thorough, I do believe their pleas should be heard, taken seriously and evaluated as such.

People should be able to say 'enough'. My mom could've easily overridden my aunts wishes, gotten her to a hospital and they would've been obligated to help her out. She could've easily argued that due to her age, her brain wasn't capable of making such decisions anymore. And demanded she stay since she was still capable to - since what she had was very much treatable, through intense hospitalisation every few weeks. And my great aunt was tired of those tests, every time, the discomfort, the pain, the week of prodding, each interval. Can you imagine being in non-stop agony, never getting a break and not getting one from the people who claim to have your best interests at heart - and KNOWING beyond the shadow of a doubt, it will never end - not until you finally do die?

I'd choose killing myself in an instant over going out of my mind from pain and misery with NO option of relief, whatsoever. And I'd like to know that that choice would be respected. It may not be for you, but imho, you (=general you) don't get to decide that it's not for me (and yes, technically, I'm an - almost recovered - mental patient, btw).

 

[Luke O]

Not the part of Europe I live in, we can't even have euthanasia even if your quality of life is so poor, that all you want is to die peacefully.

 

[ChocolateMoose123]

Terminal illnesses, I don't have issues with euthanasia as an option.

Mental illnesses? No. I would say that is not a valid reason for euthanasia. If that was the case, why would we give a damn about people who are mentally ill that commit suicide? Can't have it both ways.

 

[prplchknz]

Terminal illnesses, I don't have issues with euthanasia as an option.

Mental illnesses? No. I would say that is not a valid reason for euthanasia. If that was the case, why would we give a damn about people who are mentally ill that commit suicide? Can't have it both ways.

yes the mental illness part is quite hypocritcal.

 

[Tellenbach]

I wonder if these doctors ever tried dietary changes. From what I've read in "Nutrient Power", about 85% of autistics who change their diet notice improvements in their symptoms.