Gov. Brown signs controversial assisted-suicide bill

[Revoltingest]

I'm Kevorkian's official replacement, so would you prefer hemlock or talking to an insurance salesman for 24 hours?

You need to ask?
A shovel upside me head!

 

[Laika]

Trust me on this: I have absolutely no problem with you choosing an excruciating death for yourself, but that you would mandate it for others is simply sick.

As one branch of the US governemnt says "we really care about people and want them to die with dignity", another branch is enacting the death penalty, another is exonerating a cop from killing a civillian, or using drone strikes against civillians on other countries, all the while whilst sitting on the largest arsenal of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons the world has ever known.

I would draw from that, that our society is sick because we have such an inconsistent attitude towards developing a life-affirming morality. the alarm bells start ringing when someone says we have the freedom to chose whether we live or die. I know why you'd want to support this, but I don't buy the "warm fussy" feeling that this is all supposed to go away. freedom comes with responsibility, and honestly I don't think we measure up very well on the latter when it comes to life and death issues. I would support this if I thought we could be trusted with this kind of freedom, but the sheer level of inconsistency in the way we deal with death as a moral issue makes me nervous.

The entire notion that we get to chose between an "excruciating death" and a "quick death" is an illusion. the pain is still real, but death is still death. no matter how it happens, it is still final. if it's by your own decision, it just gets even more complicated as a form of moral judgement. As a society we tend to think death is a choice when in fact it is inevitable. This just appeals to our illusions because its more comforting to think we are in control than accept there are many ways we can die and all of them will be to a greater or lesser extent ugly. I don't think this is the right answer, at least not yet.

Why not let them end their suffering, rather than enduring it even though there is no hope for tomorrow, it will not get better, and in fact it is likely to only get worse?

why is it "their" suffering and "their" choice when death is universal? doesn't it sound a little absurd? can anyone really "own" their own death? isn't this something that is shared and that entire religions were build precisely to transcend our own morality? consciousness of death has been the defining problem of human philosophy?

how can anyone know that dying is the right decision?

 

[BSM1]

I agree with that.

It puts lives back into the hands of the individual as opposed to others to decide what a person can and cannot do with their own life.

I do think careful steps should be taken however to insure it's the persons sincere wishes, and not something in the heat of the moment, or a premature rash reaction.

What possible difference would that make. If a person wishes to take his own life, let him.

I am all for assisted suicide as long as there are stringent safeguards in place to ensure that taking advantage of this option is not abused.

You would only take advantage of it once.

 

[Twilight Hue]

What possible difference would that make. If a person wishes to take his own life, let him

Sometimes people change their minds. A failsafe might be prudent If the desire to live surfaces. Maybe a slow acting drug with an antidote. If there is such a thing.

 

[SomeRandom]

I'd rather a mentally capable adult person (with terminal illness and no prospect of surviving) be given the option of dying on their own terms. I have seen what cancer does to a person, I have seen a once strong proud man fall weak and helpless. I have seen the embarrassment it causes to a person and the pain they had to put up with because............well to be frank, because other people were too damned selfish to allow them to die peacefully.
Of course there should be safeguards. Stringent ones.

 

[Nietzsche]

Voted "Oppose the bill".

Life and death questions are the hardest of them all, and I don't need a religion to believe that. My opinion on this is more "gut" feeling in response to thinking about my own period when I felt sucicidal. I believe that death is final and think this is side stepping a much larger debate about how we deal with death as a society.

Some people will chose to die because they believe in an afterlife and a "better place". Others will chose to die because they want the illusion of control and call it dignity or choice and get to pretend they are their own god. Both ultimately trivialise death based on how little we value life and on how much we exaggerate our own significance by thinking our choices matter. we've built a culture based on turning death into something "normal" so we don't ask these questions. After the zombie movies and a killing spree on grand theft auto maybe we can tune in to watch someone die in a "freak accident" in midsummer murders? is that how we understand 'death'? Do we think taking a pill is going to make it all better and go away, when in reality its the last decision of any consequencewe will ever make?

our society hates life. it spends billions of dollars in advertising trying to make us hate ourselves, our lives and think we are failures, that we should fill ourlives with junk, do jobs we hate so we can be paid and then buy stuff to impress people who don't know us, whilst our relatives wait in the wings for us to die so they can inherit it as we age of neglect in a "retirement home".

We get to keep their precious illusion of control on their deathbeds as it is stripped away from them in the rest of their lives. the moment they wake up from the fanatasy world and see just how utterly small and inconsequential, how irrelevant have been their ambitions and meaningless their financial success, just they are is the moment they're going to die.

How can we face the nightmare of knowing we've lived a lie, let alone deal with death? the fear of death destroys our ego and our illusion of individuality. lets avoid the existential angst and just get it over with shall we?

come on. this is not about the sanctity of human life. it's self-administered eugenics where we pass the buck for making other people feel like a burden and then get them to push the button for us because we are too cowardly to accept responsibility for the life of another human being. life is so "sacred" we have to wash our hands of it. why force the government to kill the sick, or let them die on the street because they can't afford healthcare, when you can get them to sign a piece of paper so they do it themselves? isn't that the best way to conceal our hypocrisy? dress up our cruelty and indifference as kindness?

Is there a better way to save the government from giving free healthcare to poor people by getting them to kill themselves? When we create a society that treats them that they aren't "useful" to society alive- is it not much more kind to "end their suffering"? how benevolent are "we" to generously provide them to drugs to end it for them. Will a preist be free too so tell us how we should hate our earthly form and long for a better place?

"Don't worry poor timmy. it will be over soon. And you can go be with your pet dog. here's some pills so you can go play fetch in the afterlife. go to sleep now."

How American; call it "freedom" and people will do whatever they're told. Let the dying people choose to die, rather than make the living think about the abyss and imagine themselves in their place. we can keep our dellusions of our own significance a little longer and preach empty sentimentality to others as we ourselves remain in denial.

I don't buy it. it may be right and I could probably even accept that, but I resent the pretense that this is "freedom". I don't think we're ready as a society to accept responsibility what that implies. we're still so deep in denial that death is final that this is one freedom I seriously doubt we can be trusted with. I may probably feel differently if this was passed in a referendum, but it might just underline the fact that everyone's really trying to run away from the issue that we are all going to die. I might be delluding myself, but I want to take the chance and live for as long as I have got. Why is it individualism to chose our own death, rather than fight for every second we've got?

p.s. California still has the death penalty. In 2012, 52% of people voted to keep it rather than replace it with life imprisonment. I don't find that encouraging.

You've clearly never been in continuous, serious pain. Because guess what, life loses its luster when your definition of "life" is "pain every moment, waking or not". I face the very real possibility that one day I will be in so much pain that there will be nothing to dull it short of literally cutting nerves. If I get to that point, I'm checking out. Bills like this make it so I don't have to buy the medication to do that with off the street, because I'm not remotely confident enough in a gun or hanging myself.

 

[Nietzsche]

Sometimes people change their minds. A failsafe might be prudent If the desire to live surfaces. Maybe a slow acting drug with an antidote. If there is such a thing.

Morphine over-dose is a good candidate for that, actually, and your "antidote" would be Naloxone, which works immediately.

 

[YmirGF]

You would only take advantage of it once.

I meant it in the sense of concerned family members wanting to get their inheritance a bit earlier, not the "Off-ee" as it were.

 

[Revoltingest]

I meant it in the sense of concerned family members wanting to get their inheritance a bit earlier, not the "Off-ee" as it were.

Could I inherit your cape?

 

[YmirGF]

Could I inherit your cape?

Only if I can inherit your wit and charm first

Hmmmm.... wait a sec....

 

[Revoltingest]

It's a trade!

 

[Laika]

You've clearly never been in continuous, serious pain. Because guess what, life loses its luster when your definition of "life" is "pain every moment, waking or not". I face the very real possibility that one day I will be in so much pain that there will be nothing to dull it short of literally cutting nerves. If I get to that point, I'm checking out. Bills like this make it so I don't have to buy the medication to do that with off the street, because I'm not remotely confident enough in a gun or hanging myself.

removed my prevcious reply and changed my vote to "support the bill". there's dying for selfish reasons and then there is keeping someone alive for selfish reasons. somethings are beyond our control.

This is a conversation I'm yet to have in RL.

 

[Revoltingest]

I figure that everyone own's their own life.
If they want to end it, whether we think it's a good or bad decision, it is nonetheless still their decision.
And if they want assistance, that is between them & their helper.

Reasonable regulation could be useful though.
I wouldn't want to pay Dr Death for a morphine overdose, only to discover that he injected me with Dr Pepper to cut costs.

 

[SkepticThinker]

As one branch of the US governemnt says "we really care about people and want them to die with dignity", another branch is enacting the death penalty, another is exonerating a cop from killing a civillian, or using drone strikes against civillians on other countries, all the while whilst sitting on the largest arsenal of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons the world has ever known.

I would draw from that, that our society is sick because we have such an inconsistent attitude towards developing a life-affirming morality. the alarm bells start ringing when someone says we have the freedom to chose whether we live or die. I know why you'd want to support this, but I don't buy the "warm fussy" feeling that this is all supposed to go away. freedom comes with responsibility, and honestly I don't think we measure up very well on the latter when it comes to life and death issues. I would support this if I thought we could be trusted with this kind of freedom, but the sheer level of inconsistency in the way we deal with death as a moral issue makes me nervous.

The entire notion that we get to chose between an "excruciating death" and a "quick death" is an illusion. the pain is still real, but death is still death. no matter how it happens, it is still final. if it's by your own decision, it just gets even more complicated as a form of moral judgement. As a society we tend to think death is a choice when in fact it is inevitable. This just appeals to our illusions because its more comforting to think we are in control than accept there are many ways we can die and all of them will be to a greater or lesser extent ugly. I don't think this is the right answer, at least not yet.



why is it "their" suffering and "their" choice when death is universal? doesn't it sound a little absurd? can anyone really "own" their own death? isn't this something that is shared and that entire religions were build precisely to transcend our own morality? consciousness of death has been the defining problem of human philosophy?

how can anyone know that dying is the right decision?

Because it's their life and therefore, their choice. I don't know what's absurd about it. Have you ever watched someone die a slow, painful death? I have, and I don't want it for myself, nor for anyone I love, for that matter.

 

[Nietzsche]

No. I haven't. But I'd probably would feel the same way. I've had depression, and I was sucicidal. At no point did the legality of the question of taking my own life come accross my mind. not once. life and death decisions are final and you have to be absolutely certain it's the right things to do.this isn't a mistake you get to take back. if it's truly the "right" decision, why does it matter if it were a crime to end your own life?

The "crime" bit isn't what bothers me. It's the complications that come from messing up the crime. Buying drugs off the street can end in jail time. That would put a serious hamper in my plans to die. If you could guarantee that I'd die from a gunshot, I'd do it. Hell, if you could give me enough explosives, I'd much prefer that. Blaze of glory! Screaming VAAALHALLA! ****, if I thought I'd make a good showing I'd die in combat, but I'd just embarrass myself at this point, regardless of my fencing training.

if you don't have confidence in using a gun or hanging yourself, (probably because you think that it would be "messy") how exactly it is "your" decision to end your own life? How does the presence of a man in a lab coat make this any better than a DIY job with using a length of rope to hang ourselves from the celing, or jupming off a tall building, or jumping in front of a train, or leaving the car on whilst closing the door in a garage or bleeding on the carpet? Why not douse ourselves in petrol and light a match? there are millions of ways to end your own life. take a second and think about it; if we wouldn't want to end our lives that way, how does a change of scenery to a hospital better somehow make this better?

I don't particularly care how messy it would be. I just know the survival rates and **** that. As for your other methods; I might live. That's a problem. A big one. There are indeed millions of ways. But those millions are hardly fool-proof. You screw up and you survive. With certain medications you will die, that's all there is to it. It's not about how pleasant the idea is, it's about how effective they are. But like I said, you find a way to guarantee that I'll die, and I'll do it another way. The method is trivial. I just want it to stick.

I'M NOT ADVOCATING SUICICIDE,

Past a point, I sure as hell am.

and as I hope my examples illustrate, it's such a horrible way to go. But "death with dignity" is a nonesense phrase, a thought terminating cliche, that stops us thinking about the gravity of the decision we are making. our language is built around denying that death is final and trying to make it seem 'normal'; "checking out", "pull the plug", "going to sleep"', "collecteral damage", "stepping up to the pearly gates," etc.

If or when I reach a point where my life is nothing but unending and untouchable physical pain, I want to kill myself so that I won't have to endure that any longer than necessary.

put it this way. Nietzsche, you've visited Auschwitz several times; didn't the Nazis make huge efforts to avoid calling what they were doing what it actually was? they chose the phrase "final solution to the jewish question" for that reason so they could hold on to the illusion that what they were doing wasn't happening or was normal or acceptable even when they were being complete sadists. I know this is the same thing with the communists ("liquidate the kualks as a class", someone becoming an "unperson", etc.). both groups tried to deny the humanity of the people they were killing by thinking of them as animals, parasites, etc. members of the cheka took to using cocaine because the amount of blood and death drove them insane and was the only way to "do the job". making those decisions screwed them up. the psychology of this doesn't add up. If some of the people we would consider the most evil in history flinch at the idea of calling it "murder" or "death" even when they are doing it on an industrial scale and are not actually the victims of what they are doing, doesn't that demonstrate that it takes a huge amount of de-realisation to accept something like this as a "moral"? if they were ultimately not willing to accept personal responsibility for life and death decisions, and these were professional killers doing it on a probably daily basis, how can we realistically cliam the decision to end our own lives is going to be rational?

Did you really just compare someone trying to end their own life to the Holocaust, Holodomor and mass-murder in general?

We all have the power to end our own lives, and we've had it since infancy the moment we realise that sharp pointy metal thing can cut stuff. how does it become legal or moral a right? how did "pull the plug" become "better" than "pull the trigger"? it doesn't make any sense.

Pull the plug implies a vegetative state, at which point it's no longer a person, it's meat.

edit. Huh. Made another post while I was typing this up. Sorry.

 

[Laika]

Because it's their life and therefore, their choice. I don't know what's absurd about it. Have you ever watched someone die a slow, painful death? I have, and I don't want it for myself, nor for anyone I love, for that matter.

I've had to change my vote since then as death is something I cannot control, but really there is nothing to say their life is any more important than our grief. it is ridiculously egotistical to think that people die in isolation when they are surronded by others who care about them. this is true even of the doctors and nurses who treat a patient and then have to keep going about their job. they still have to admit defeat and accept it as well. I imagine telling someone they are going to die is hard, but compound that with "I can make it go faster" as I just feel sorry for them. no-one wants to do that part of the job so making it a deliberate, conscious choice crosses a kind of threshold where we say we can and should control the time and the manner in which we die. that is something new, and perhaps "good", but the egotism of "it's there choice" is highly problematic and doesn't do justice to the greiving process for those left behind.

it is always different between discussing these things in the abstract and actually having to do it. the notion of "self-ownership" is so nebulous as watching someone die affects us. it's a really bad way to think of the boundaries involved on this.

I don't particularly care how messy it would be. I just know the survival rates and **** that. As for your other methods; I might live. That's a problem. A big one. There are indeed millions of ways. But those millions are hardly fool-proof. You screw up and you survive. With certain medications you will die, that's all there is to it. It's not about how pleasant the idea is, it's about how effective they are. But like I said, you find a way to guarantee that I'll die, and I'll do it another way. The method is trivial. I just want it to stick.

If I'd had the option, I would have died two years ago. the day after my 26th birthday came back in july this year, when my parents were out I burst into tears because I'd never considered I'd actually live this long. the idea of having a "future" after depression has been strange. it simply hadn't occured to me that I might survive the daily battle of justifying my own existence, constant mood swings, self-doubt and abusive inner voices. now I might even live in to an old age, though I suspect the stress will have knocked a few years off. the fact I knew it wasn't going to be quick was one of the reasons I gave myself the chance to keep living. that and the fact I really didn't hate the world or the people around me enough. being confused and uncertian makes death looking "appealing" because it draws a line under things, when in fact theres still some part of you treating it as if it were happening to someone else, like you are watching a movie. as natural hedonists, "wanting" to die may be beyond us- wanting not to live is more likely way of understanding it. dealing with a terminal illness is different, but how much is hard to say as I'm obviously not in that position.

If or when I reach a point where my life is nothing but unending and untouchable physical pain, I want to kill myself so that I won't have to endure that any longer than necessary.

fair enough. [he says with a long sigh]. There really isn't anything I could do to stop you. But it doesn't feel right not to try. it's human to want to save people, but in the end we all end up in the same destination. its never a question of if, but when. for me saying "I want this" isn't enough as I've been there and walked away from it. my own period when I felt suicicidal was based on an illusion that I couldn't overcome my depression and wanting to do it was selfish as a result. I couldn't do that to other people and chose to keep going instead. if life really is that futile not to go on, why make the effort of killing yourself? it's a really strange place to be emotionally as ethical certianty of this magnitude is hard to come by.

I've been on forums several times with people wanting to commit sucicide and even being at the other end of an internet connection, it still affects you particuarly when you know the thought processes involved. sucicide is so personal because of how deliberate it is. But, trying to force someone to live because you can't accept that it will happen anyway, is just as selfish. death is inevitable, but accepting that means giving up the illusion of control that the pain and suffering involved is avoidable. I think there is a quote something like that "you can only learn how to live once you've learned how to die" as it's such an important part of who we are. I dislike the way in which the notion of choice is presented as a truism when this is a fundamental question about who we are. it seems so emotionally impoverished and dellusional to think the fact we choose it somehow makes it better.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I've had to change my vote since then as death is something I cannot control, but really there is nothing to say their life is any more important than our grief. it is ridiculously egotistical to think that people die in isolation when they are surronded by others who care about them. this is true even of the doctors and nurses who treat a patient and then have to keep going about their job. they still have to admit defeat and accept it as well. I imagine telling someone they are going to die is hard, but compound that with "I can make it go faster" as I just feel sorry for them. no-one wants to do that part of the job so making it a deliberate, conscious choice crosses a kind of threshold where we say we can and should control the time and the manner in which we die. that is something new, and perhaps "good", but the egotism of "it's there choice" is highly problematic and doesn't do justice to the greiving process for those left behind.

I see that you did change your mind, and I find that admirable.

I feel like it's selfish and egotistical to focus on ME and MY feelings, when someone else is in constant pain and agony and may want to (understandably) end that pain and agony by ending their life. My grief doesn't mean much in that context because I feel their life IS more important than my grief.

Nurses and doctors are compassionate people as well - the nurses who were taking care of my grandmother at the end gave her a little extra morphine when she was on her way out to make hers a far less painful death than it would have been.

it is always different between discussing these things in the abstract and actually having to do it. the notion of "self-ownership" is so nebulous as watching someone die affects us. it's a really bad way to think of the boundaries involved on this.

I've had to turn off the machines ("pull the plug") and watch my father die. Luckily it was peaceful because he was given mass amounts of morphine and was put into an induced coma.
I've also watched my husband's grandmother die choking to death and gasping for air, and I would wish that on absolutely nobody. So if you want to talk about grief, imagine the grief of having to watch another human being choke to death knowing you can do nothing to help versus watching a person peacefully fall asleep and die.

 

[Wirey]

I am all for assisted suicide as long as there are stringent safeguards in place to ensure that taking advantage of this option is not abused.

Exactly this.

 

[Wirey]

It's a trade!

You just got a cape for nothing!

 

[Laika]

I've had to turn off the machines ("pull the plug") and watch my father die. Luckily it was peaceful because he was given mass amounts of morphine and was put into an induced coma.
I've also watched my husband's grandmother die choking to death and gasping for air, and I would wish that on absolutely nobody. So if you want to talk about grief, imagine the grief of having to watch another human being choke to death knowing you can do nothing to help versus watching a person peacefully fall asleep and die.

there isn't really a response to that is there? [smiles weakly.]

I watched an episode of the West Wing yesterday and this issue actually came up. they said something like that "the founders never had to deal with the ethical issues where medical breakthroughs that prolonged people's lives." I suppose there is no longer a hard and fast distinction between what is and isn't a natural death anymore, as science has so changed our lives that it's changed how we die to. Although "natural death" was probably also a false distinction to make even in the 16th century. someone who reached 120 years old would have been burned for witchcraft, it would be that inconcieveable. its hard to get your head around how quickly things have changed and how that affects how we respond to the same thing several centuries later.

though I much prefer 21st century medicine to the Witch doctor.