Euthanasia - Right or Wrong?

[DeletedUser]

Not really, I just don't figure it to be a deciding factor. If you're a vegetable, you're a vegetable. Your state and/or recovery isn't dependant on your age or any other factors. Not to mention that a lot of disabled people are under 70.

I assume you just picked an arbitrary age for the cut-off requirement, but as I just explained, age shouldn't be a deciding factor.

It's referring to this post:

Playing devils advocate here seeing as it is all one-sided currently.

Should people over 70, severly disbaled people and those in long hospital care (say 1 year or above) be euthanised? Currently these people use up a large amount of our hospital and economic resources which could be better spent saving a persons life who has a future (dare i say it) and spent devloping and looking into cures for cancer etc. Surely it would be better of devloping cures for motor neurone disease to aid people in the future than spending money now trying to draw out every drop of life from a person currently with the disease.

Not being euthanised if you're over 70, disabled AND in hospital long-term, those were just three suggested categories, of which people may fall into one or other of them and thus be suitable for compulsory euthanasia.

 

[DeletedUser]

I know, but unless he can provide some solid evidence that those people do take up as many economic resources as he makes out to be, it's a moot requirement.

Compulsory Euthanasia is just a fancy term for population control, and if we were really interested in saving economic resources we would be compulsory euthanising every old person in a home, as they don't contribute much or anything to society apart from when their family visits. As well as getting rid of other materialistic and symbolic things such as funerals, etc, because in the end they don't "accomplish" or "contribute" anything. The whole society would have to be revamped in order to justify that reasoning.

That being said, I still think Euthanasia shouldn't be compulsory under any circumstances, unless it was taken to the extreme and we had to cull the population for future survival of our race in a post-apocalyptic world.

 

[DeletedUser]

I agree, I don't think euthanasia should ever be compulsory, I'm just confusing myself. Besides, as you said before, this thread is about whether euthanasia in general is 'right or wrong', not compulsory euthanasia.

Edit: I've already repeated myself a couple of times about my opinions on compulsory euthanasia, that nobody should have the right to decide whether another person lives or dies. Apart from that, I'm not sure what else I can discuss about it, as it's basically forced suicide, or murder.. so I guess I'll just leave the thread alone for now.

 

[DeletedUser]

Compulsory Euthanasia is still a topic we can touch on as long as we don't make just about that. I just think it's going too far and isn't properly justified. Furthermore, who would determine those categories? You're pretty much putting a value on a person's life if you're stating that are not contributing if they fit X categories and should thus be killed.

If you're setting those sorts of guidelines, you're still playing God as I outlined in a previous post. It's the same creature, just dressed differently.

 

[DeletedUser345]

I know, but unless he can provide some solid evidence that those people do take up as many economic resources as he makes out to be, it's a moot requirement.

'The annual cost of long-term care is estimated between $97,000 and $180,000.[92] This gives an annual cost of between $1 billion and $7 billion for all PVS patients in the United States!'

Source

'Average weekly fees in a UK residential home are £479, according to the researcher Laing & Buisson, and £669 for a nursing home.'

Source

479 x 52 = £24,908 annually for caring for the elderly in a residential home.

669 x 52 = £34,788 annually for caring for the elderly in a nursing home.

'Although some disabled people reported extra costs above the
averages shown in the chart, there were few very high figures. Our
own (PSI) re-analysis of the OPCS data shows that the estimated
numbers with above-average costs are as follows (McKay, 1990):

£10 - £20 840,000
£20 - £30 190,000
£30 - £50 70,000
£50 or more 30,000'

Source

*So that averages at around £22 per week. £1144 per year.**

*This is the weekly extra costs for simply disabled people, it would be higher for those that are severly disabled.

**Doesn't include treatment costs.

 

[DeletedUser]

'Average weekly fees in a UK residential home are £479, according to the researcher Laing & Buisson, and £669 for a nursing home.'

Just to pick up on that one point before I leave the thread.. in most cases, if not all, of a person staying in a UK residential care home for the elderly, fees are paid by the person themselves, or their relatives. The Government does not pay the fees for them, so it's not directly a drain on the economy. The argument for euthanisation of the elderly due to the drain on the economy is likely one that should instead be focused upon whether or not the elderly receive a pension.

 

[DeletedUser]

Wouldn't prisoner's be a better candidates for compulsory euthanasia in that regard? They are not contributing anything to society and the poor excuse of manual labour they do for society does not even come close to the upkeep required to keep them fed, housed, etc. I don't think $7b is that much to provide for a country's entire elderly populace.

Some figures:

In California in 2009, it cost an average of $47,102 a year to incarcerate an inmate in state prison. From 2001 to 2009, the average annual cost increased by about $19,500.

Housing the approximately 500,000 people in jail in the USA awaiting trial who cannot afford bail costs $9 billion a year.

In Broward County, Florida supervised pretrial release costs about $7 a day per person while jail costs $115 a day. The jail system costs a quarter of every county tax dollar in Broward County, and is the single largest expense to the county taxpayer.

As of 2007 the cost of medical care for inmates was growing by 10 percent annually.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States#Cost

I'm not trying to derail this into a death penalty thing; I'm just trying to point out that euthanasia for economic resource management isn't something that should be considered unless there were no other way to ensure the survival of our race. You're effectively putting a value on life if you're saying "right, if you're X and Y and Z then you get euthanised because you're not valuable / worth our time / effort anymore."

 

[DeletedUser]

I personally think that Euthanasia should be made legal in all countries.

However, a think that in order to do this, you must send in an application form to the government so they can assess the problem.

Then, if there is any proper cancelling that can be provided or the reasons are those of little significance to the persons life, Euthanasia should not be provided.

However, if the problems are severe and in most cases, unfixable, Euthanasia should be provided. Also, it saves the government more money than it does for anybody who may be mentally ill and commits and suicide bombing.

 

[DeletedUser]

Also, it saves the government more money than it does for anybody who may be mentally ill and commits and suicide bombing.

What does suicide bombing have to do with euthanasia?

Do you really think that people who commit acts of terrorism by blowing themselves up would not have done so, if euthanasia were available to them?

Heh..

 

[DeletedUser]

I clearly stated that this person may be mentally ill and therefore unpredictable.

 

[DeletedUser]

I clearly stated that this person may be mentally ill and therefore unpredictable.

It's not the mentally ill who are involved in suicide bombings..

(Well, arguably it is, but not as you mean it)

 

[DeletedUser]

I personally think that Euthanasia should be made legal in all countries.

However, a think that in order to do this, you must send in an application form to the government so they can assess the problem.

Then, if there is any proper cancelling that can be provided or the reasons are those of little significance to the persons life, Euthanasia should not be provided.

However, if the problems are severe and in most cases, unfixable, Euthanasia should be provided. Also, it saves the government more money than it does for anybody who may be mentally ill and commits and suicide bombing.

The government should not have the right to say if I'm allowed to undergo Euthanasia or not. The only decision they should be making is whether it is legal or not, with safeguards in place to ensure no other issues arise such as murder allegations, but the decision itself should only be available to the person(s) in question and not another body or organisation.

All suicide bombers are not mentally ill. They might be, but, the fact is that they just have different beliefs and just because their beliefs differ from yours does not mean they should be labelled as mentally ill. Furthermore, there is a lot of apparent manipulation to get people to suicide bomb so sometimes it is other motives causing them to perform such acts.

 

[DeletedUser]

Hehe, I love this. Yeah, let's grab the elderly, mentally ill, criminal, and the peeps not contributing to society, and euthanize ... Congress.

 

[DeletedUser345]

Hehe, I love this. Yeah, let's grab the elderly, mentally ill, criminal, and the peeps not contributing to society, and euthanize ... Congress.

Well it did get the debate flowing a bit more seeing as nobody will come out and say euthanasia is wrong.

 

[DeletedUser]

Well it did get the debate flowing a bit more seeing as nobody will come out and say euthanasia is wrong.

Euthanasia is wrong.

but not really.

 

[DeletedUser]

Oi, don't get me wrong. I'm all for mandatory euthanasia if it get's rid of Boehner and Bachmann.

 

[DeletedUser]

I see Euthanasia as something similar to smoking drinking and joining the military. All of the listed are bad for your health ( one at least is useful to your country) If you are old enough to make the decision to harm yourself through smoking you should be old enough to decide to end your life. If the person whose life it is does not value their own life why should I value it ( stop them from ending it?). Suicide is messy business, the chances of messing it up are high and who wants to be half successful at committing suicide? I mean the person probably already feels horrible about their life do they really need added failure? Of course there should be a check of their mental health and a required waiting period so it cannot be an on the whim decision that they will not regret later ( being dead can do that to you). Add in the argument of overpopulation and it seems like a good idea, so lets make the government happy and tax it as well, after all they tax gambling alcohol and smoking.

Regarding compulsory Euthanasia of mentally Ill or elderly ect, I would call on the slippery slope argument, you start doing it to them and it becomes accepted, then maybe we get a corrupt government and all of a sudden you ad in people based on race religion ect.
I personally would be arming myself if this ever occurred.

As for compulsory Euthanasia of inmates this is a a horrible idea, I like to think of them as a free labour force, they get free training which is valuable in exchange they have to work to pay their incarceration expenses at the same time you are employing Prison guards ect, everybody wins.

Regarding the expenses of the elderly, I disagree that you are saving any money by getting rid of them. They require caretakers who make money, people who earn money pay taxes, where I live unemployment is high, I would not want to do anything that destroys the little jobs we have left. Most of us spend our lives working, and finally we get to enjoy life at retirement, if I am going to end up killed because I am old I may as well quit my job enjoy life until I run out of savings and then opt out early. Unless of course you want to get rid of the homeless to, in that case I will just opt out now but I probably could not afford the taxes so I would have to do it illegally.