Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I wrote a small piece on planned death

hintjens.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 110 posts

Re: I wrote a small piece on planned death

#91

Post by throwaway324324 »

exolymph wrote: post #77
throwaway324324 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your stepfather apparently violated your mother's directive based on the desperate belief that his spouse could recover, and she did not. This is absolutely tragic. Then your stepfather presumably refused kill his spouse (due to hope, moral beliefs, cowardice, etc.) by unplugging her from standard, non-extraordinary life-support. She eventually died a painless death. For which of these does he deserve to suffer for,…

> I also absolutely do not want anyone to euthanize me if I somehow end up semi-vegetative. Just out of curiosity, why not?

Because I would be participating in killing a living human. It's our duty to avoid intentionally doing that, even if it really hurts.

Technically it's the same reason that I don't want someone to euthanize me right now. The value of my life does not derive from feeling happy or otherwise using my senses. Nothing important changes when I have brain damage (or cancer, or depression). All I have to do is be human, and my life has a certain type of value that makes it wrong for anyone to intentionally end it.

If I try to build in loopholes, or start messing with semantics, or if I compromise because something is going to hurt, I end up being unable to act from reasoned moral principles, which is something else I value.

(I have a similar curiosity, if you'd oblige, about what makes euthanasia any different from simple suicide - I actually asked that earlier, but all I got was downvotes.)

Re: I wrote a small piece on planned death

#92

Post by alatkins »

mindfulgeek wrote: post #88

I watched my father die of cancer when I was in my early 20s. He went through a bone marrow transplant -- twice. The first time he was sick and it was hard, but he was cancer free for a few months and managed to walk me down the aisle at my wedding. When the cancer came back, he had very little chance of surviving. He opted for full blown treatment, against everyone's recommendations (and my mother's wishes). His bod…

Thanks so much for sharing this and congratulations on your recovery.

Re: I wrote a small piece on planned death

#93

Post by ryanlol »

chris_wot wrote: post #78
ryanlol wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't help but point out how ironic comments like this are.

If you think that's ironic, consider how ironic it is that I'm now posting about how ironic I find your post to be about responding to an ironic post.

What's ironic about my post? I never implied that I agreed with goldenkey.

Re: I wrote a small piece on planned death

#94

Post by hadagribble »

throwaway324324 wrote: post #91
exolymph wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I also absolutely do not want anyone to euthanize me if I somehow end up semi-vegetative. Just out of curiosity, why not?

Because I would be participating in killing a living human. It's our duty to avoid intentionally doing that, even if it really hurts. Technically it's the same reason that I don't want someone to euthanize me right now. The value of my life does not derive from feeling happy or otherwise using my senses. Nothing important changes when I have brain damage (or cancer, or depression). All I have to do is be human, and m…

Thanks for that explanation. I can't speak for the OP (or anyone else), but my take on the difference between them is that euthanasia is suicide, but only once all other options have been exhausted.

I don't see "simple suicide" (i.e. not in the face of terminal disease) as immoral or wrong. The tragedy though, is how often it happens because of poor social support systems, such as lack of access to mental health support systems or, in some parts of the world, bad debts to loan sharks.

These are often relatively spur of the moment, avoidable situations and, IMO, more of an indictment of society than a moral failing of the person. Euthanasia is different in that it is usually a well-considered decision, once there is little hope of any change for the better. I don't see any value in forcing people to live through misery without anyone having a clue on how to improve their life.

(I don't expect you to necessarily agree with this point of view, but I hope it helps understand another perspective.)

Re: I wrote a small piece on planned death

#96

Post by SpikeDad »

throwaway324324 wrote: post #91
exolymph wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I also absolutely do not want anyone to euthanize me if I somehow end up semi-vegetative. Just out of curiosity, why not?

Because I would be participating in killing a living human. It's our duty to avoid intentionally doing that, even if it really hurts. Technically it's the same reason that I don't want someone to euthanize me right now. The value of my life does not derive from feeling happy or otherwise using my senses. Nothing important changes when I have brain damage (or cancer, or depression). All I have to do is be human, and m…

>Because I would be participating in killing a living human. It's our duty to avoid intentionally doing that, even if it really hurts.

Says who? You? When did you get elected my keeper? Stay alive all you want but keep your morality to yourself.

Re: I wrote a small piece on planned death

#97

Post by throwaway324324 »

SpikeDad wrote: post #96
throwaway324324 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because I would be participating in killing a living human. It's our duty to avoid intentionally doing that, even if it really hurts. Technically it's the same reason that I don't want someone to euthanize me right now. The value of my life does not derive from feeling happy or otherwise using my senses. Nothing important changes when I have brain damage (or cancer, or depression). All I have to do is be human, and m…

>Because I would be participating in killing a living human. It's our duty to avoid intentionally doing that, even if it really hurts. Says who? You? When did you get elected my keeper? Stay alive all you want but keep your morality to yourself.

My answer actually didn't mention anything about watching over you to ensure that you don't inject lethal poison. I was talking about why I personally would not kill myself or ask anyone else to.

But yes, if I think it's wrong to intentionally kill a human, it follows that I neither want my government supporting it, nor for others to mistakenly think it's fine. Morality isn't something to "keep to yourself".

Presumably you think it's fine to intentionally kill, in certain special cases? Could you do the opposite of keeping your morality to yourself, and tell me what your exceptions are? (I'm wondering, for example, if it is just consent? If so, can someone buy that consent?)

Re: I wrote a small piece on planned death

#98

Post by mbrutsch »

throwaway324324 wrote: post #73
mbrutsch wrote: post #42

My mother had a DNR. She contracted meningitis, and died. She was resuscitated, suffered severe brain damage, and lived another 2 years as a semi-vegetable before dying in her sleep after choking on her own vomit. If I believed in such things, I would hope my stepfather is in Hell. edited for spelling

Your stepfather apparently violated your mother's directive based on the desperate belief that his spouse could recover, and she did not. This is absolutely tragic. Then your stepfather presumably refused kill his spouse (due to hope, moral beliefs, cowardice, etc.) by unplugging her from standard, non-extraordinary life-support. She eventually died a painless death. For which of these does he deserve to suffer for,…

Choking to death on your own vomit is what you consider a painless death? I hope you have a painless death.

> A DNR is not an order to cease basic life-support post-resuscitation.

And no one said it was; no one even hinted at it.

> For which of these does he deserve to suffer for, more than he has already?

The first, the violation of her express written wishes that led to her "painless death".

Sadly, he's dead, which means his suffering has ended. The rest of us get to continue remembering until we too pass.

Re: I wrote a small piece on planned death

#99

Post by throwaway324324 »

hadagribble wrote: post #94
throwaway324324 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because I would be participating in killing a living human. It's our duty to avoid intentionally doing that, even if it really hurts. Technically it's the same reason that I don't want someone to euthanize me right now. The value of my life does not derive from feeling happy or otherwise using my senses. Nothing important changes when I have brain damage (or cancer, or depression). All I have to do is be human, and m…

Thanks for that explanation. I can't speak for the OP (or anyone else), but my take on the difference between them is that euthanasia is suicide, but only once all other options have been exhausted. I don't see "simple suicide" (i.e. not in the face of terminal disease) as immoral or wrong. The tragedy though, is how often it happens because of poor social support systems, such as lack of access to mental health supp…

Thanks - yeah, I agree, we need better palliative care, better social support in general. I understand your perspective, but I do have trouble following it through - I need to be able to say "at this point, a life loses that value, and it becomes permissible to kill". I don't see that happening with consent, because dueling to the death is rightly illegal. I also don't see how we can get somewhere by counting up something (like suffering, failure to contribute back to society, whatever) that then makes it permissible to kill a person. And if I try to combine both, I end up with rules that are still problematic, but make it easier to kill the elderly, the dying, and other vulnerable people, which is a bad sign.

Re: I wrote a small piece on planned death

#100

Post by throwaway324324 »

mbrutsch wrote: post #98
throwaway324324 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your stepfather apparently violated your mother's directive based on the desperate belief that his spouse could recover, and she did not. This is absolutely tragic. Then your stepfather presumably refused kill his spouse (due to hope, moral beliefs, cowardice, etc.) by unplugging her from standard, non-extraordinary life-support. She eventually died a painless death. For which of these does he deserve to suffer for,…

Choking to death on your own vomit is what you consider a painless death? I hope you have a painless death. > A DNR is not an order to cease basic life-support post-resuscitation. And no one said it was; no one even hinted at it. > For which of these does he deserve to suffer for, more than he has already? The first, the violation of her express written wishes that led to her "painless death". Sadly, he's dead, which…

Suffocating while "semi-vegetative" is assumed to be painless, much like we assume euthanasia to be painless.

In any case, I'm sorry about your mother. There's not much I can say about your stepfather, except that you probably shouldn't hate him for trying to hold on to someone he loved.

Post reply on HN