 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Ethics, etc. > Ending lives or perfecting love | Forum Quick Jump
|
 | 
Similitude
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
| Posted 1/9/2010 5:29 PM (GMT -6) |   | I guess my question would be, are there any examples of people that once wanted to die and then subsequently became glad they lived on? I would think there are lots of such cases. So I would think that at bare minimum we would need compelling evidence that such is not the case before assisting a suicide.
And unless a patient is literally UNable to commit suicide, we're not even being ethically realistic. If someone CAN commit suicide, then why should a doctor assist that? I'm thinking that if I'm so miserable I want to die, and I'm physically capable of committing suicide, I should do it myself rather than involve another human being in such an ethically-ambiguous act. It seems cowardly to expect someone else to become involved in a killing that I can accomplish on my own.
But I don't know how to argue against every single case. And God won't allow us to be tested above what we're able. So all we can do in the meanwhile, with respect to reasoning with others, is to try to think through what seem to be the principles involved and see which cases we can ascertain with a substantial degree of reasonableness, given those principles.
Post Edited (Similtude) : 1/9/2010 10:49:02 PM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 1/10/2010 12:59 AM (GMT -6) | | This is tough. Where I am right now is...
a) With Jeff, I'd say IF a patient (even a terminally ill one) is physically capable of committing suicide, then the doctor is better off not becoming involved.
b) If the patient isn't physically capable, and if they're terminally ill, then for me the question becomes one of quality of life. If I enjoy SOME level of quality of life with no arms and legs, then I think I'd like to stick around. I'd still have a brain and could talk, relate, etc. Once the cancer (and the drugs) becomes so painful and disorienting that my quality of life drops to zero basically and I'm spaced-out 24/7, then I'd like to save my family the increased medical bills and exit this world.
c) I don't want to condone cowardice either. Terminally ill patents who want to commit suicide because they're depressed or angry or embarrassed that someone has to feed them or change their bedpan do have a quality of life that engages the world on some level and we shouldn't help such people leave this world.
d) Anita and I have talked about what the other wants in the event we're vegetables. Pull the plug. I'd go farther and say, put sum'in in me to take me out. She can't say that.
e) We should never condone someone's choosing to commit suicide (assisted or otherwise) so long as they're equally as capable of choosing to maximize some measure of enjoyment in life. But once no perceivable measure of quality/enjoyment remains, then I think I could agree to the person wanting to leave. But I think I just defined the person into having to have declared his/her wishes in writing before the "zero level" arrives, because if you can talk and engage others, you're not at rock bottom. Being terminally ill itself doesn't qualify one (in my opinion) for suicide. It's about the possibility of a quality of life.
f) I'm no longer convinced that it's more "human" of us to keep alive those in prolonged, irreparable vegetative states. Why does prolonging such states make us more human? What are we really saying about the value of human being when we prolong life in such instances?
Tom
"Man is a person not by nature but by spirit. By nature he is only an individual." Nicolas BerdyaevPost Edited (Tom) : 1/10/2010 12:04:23 AM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Corey
Five with a Four-wing
Date Joined Feb 2003
Total Posts : 1893
| Posted 1/10/2010 8:57 AM (GMT -6) | | | I've not reflected on this deeply enough to have a developed opinion. So I'll only be able to offer some initial perspective.
It's conspicuous that Dr. Napier (but I've always called him Steve) didn't bring up the principle of, "do unto others as you'd have them do unto you" while he was in the scriptural neighborhood. This would likely be the moral basis of many physicians' willingness to participate in such activity.
The general problem, for me, is that it places us in the judgment seat in making the call on sufficient "quality of life". How can any of us know the inner world of the dying one?
I will attest, along the lines of Steve, that in the midst of suffering is when I'm most aware of the presence of God. The suffering, for me, becomes fount for some of the best worship times I've had in my life, as I bitterly cry and agree with God that this is not what he intended and that even this is in process of redemption. There IS resurrection!
By going deeply into the horrible moment I bear testimony to something greater. This is a "quality of life" that no one would wish on anyone, but nonetheless, if it falls to you, it can be opportunity for praiseworthy response -- it can result in imperishable jewels in one's crown: it can be one of the things of which Jesus says, "Well done good and faithful servant."
Post Edited (Corey) : 1/10/2010 8:18:22 AM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 11:00 AM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|