This man is my hero.
He said he would not be actively involved in assisted suicide but would remain an activist in favor of assisted suicide.
I'm glad he's out. He didn't deserve to be there in the first place, IMO.
Printable View
This man is my hero.
He said he would not be actively involved in assisted suicide but would remain an activist in favor of assisted suicide.
I'm glad he's out. He didn't deserve to be there in the first place, IMO.
I totally agree. After all anyone can take a gun or pills and kill themselves he was just making it more dignified.
Ooooh- this topic came up at work today. What a fight.
I happen to agree with both of you. My reasoning is this:
Hospice. Did you know that when a person is signed up with Hospice that it is basically assisted suicide? They do not call it that. They prefer to tell you their job is to "make a person's passing more comfortable". Now, before a person can qualify, they must of course be diagnosed as terminal. Hospice limits any life-prolonging measures. Hospice generally has pain drugs prescribed "as needed". At least Kevorkian was upfront about his motives.
I strongly dislike Hospice because of the deceit. Pain-management means morphine overdose. It is the same thing Kevorkian did prison time for, with one "minor" difference. The people in Hospice did not realize that this choice would:
put them into a drug induced fog
mean fluids would be witheld
bring the inevitable death faster
At least Jack Kevorkian presented his intent honestly and his patients/ families were fully aware of what his role was. The most important thing is that they had complete control.
I have always thought that access to assisted suicide should be one of the basic human rights and freedoms. Mr. Kevorkian shouldn't have been in jail in the first place, he was merely helping people die with dignity, who otherwise couldn't. I can't see why the law can't allow a man to help someone who desperately wants to die in peace, but can't do it themselves.
I TOTALLY AGREE!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by moosmom
We realize the need for and kindness of euthanasia when it is our beloved pet suffering. We are allowed to make the right choice.
But when it is a human family member? Noooo ... can't do the same basic humane kindness we do for Fluffy for Grandpa. Have to watch him suffer and die slowly and painfully.
It's absurd.
I agree he should never have been in prison for 8 years. He was doing what sick people wanted. We enthuanize our pets when they are suffering but let people suffer for sometimes years with no relief. Does not seem right to me!
Hospice is NOT assisted suicide. Hospice is what people do who live in places where assisted suicide is illegal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wahoo
Hospice may include:
Pain management, yes, including opioids, but also including NSAIDs, massage, acupuncture, meditation, and replacement of unsuitable beds, chairs, and medical appliances with more comfortable ones
Family counseling and advocacy, such as helping the family steer clear of unethical funeral services and keeping disputes over wills away from the patient unless the patient absolutely needs to be consulted
"Watchdog care" to prevent infections, bed sores, malnutrition, and other complications of end-stage disease
Medical advocacy, to prevent hospitals and doctors from putting the patient through unnecessary suffering for financial reasons
The point of hospice is to allow a patient to die at home among family, rather than in a hospital, and as naturally and comfortably as possible. If the patient requests more pain medication, they can have it, but only to the extent allowed by law, and hospice nurses are always willing to try things like heating pads, music, and visualization exercises to enhance the effect of the medicine.
Love, Columbine
Thinking on euth. has changed a lot in recent years.If you can believe
polls, more people favor legalizing it, than not.
Thank you Columbine for your post. The comments regarding Hospice made me very angry. :mad: Obviously this person has never experienced the loving care offered by Hospice with a loved one who is terminal.
I am glad he is out as well and I admire him for standing up for his beliefs and doing the time.
I watched my mom, at the age of 44, die a slow, agonizing death from lung cancer that went to her brain. She used to tell me she WANTED to die because she couldn't stand the pain, or having to put my Dad through administering morphine injections to her. That's why I feel as strongly as I do in favor of dignity in dying.
It has also influenced my decision to make a "living will" that will prevent any measure to prolong my life should I become terminal. I've also saved up a bunch of meds to "help" me on my journey.
Finally something upon we all seem to agree. Yea sanity.
I agree 100%!!! We should be ghiven the right to make that choice!Quote:
Originally Posted by Twisterdog
My dad died in 1996 of malignant melanoma that had spread to brain and liver in 2 years.
He was given a bit more morphine about 1/2 hour before he died. That may or may not be a coincidence - but apparently (no one wants to be officially quoted saying this), there are more morphine 'overdoses' on terminal patients in hospitals that we might like to believe.
I do believe that is what happened with my dad. And while it bugs me a bit - what was the alternative? He was in a coma for a week, his breathing was awful, and Mom was going to stay the night there. I was horrified - I wouldn't have been able to rest, and neither would she...
Since it happens anyway, why not bring it out in the open?
Dr Kevorkian did, and I support that.
I'm in Michigan, where Dr. Kervorkian practiced medicine. And I'm a nurse. I applaud what he did; I just wish he had been a bit more careful so as not to go to prison.
But he knew what he was doing; he wanted to bring attention to a person's right to choose. Even now, Oregon is the only state to legally allow assisted suicide.
Ouch.
Actually, I have witnessed the care provided by Hospice. Sadly, on three different occassions.
I extend my apologies for making you very angry, it was not my intent. Obviously we have different perspectives and I applaud that. Rather than turn the tangent into an arguement, I prefer to bow out now. As they say, "agree to disagree".