301–310 of 655 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He’d be dead either way, the question is if having those three years were a net improvement to his life
3 years living vs dying is a 3 year net improvement on life. Such silly statement. By your logic we should kill everyone at their peak.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't seem pleasant for the person themself either. Constant frustration, gaps in your memory growing ever larger, disorientation, loss — periodically augmented by brief flickers of recollection of what you used to be — and yet no one can legally end your misery, because you can likely no longer unequivocally consent to euthanasia or assisted suicide, even if you explicitly signed a declaration that you did not…
It’s still absurd despite what you say that we are implying that we should euthanize another human because they have become difficult to manage due to illness. Where do we draw the line?
You are shiftinf the topic. This is about self-euthanization, assisted suicide. Not others.
> Where do we draw the line?
As written elsewhere, having to draw a line does not mean that the only reasonable conclusion is to make it illegal in general. It's a hard topic without easy answers. "Don't allow it" is an easy answer that doesn't do justice to the topics complexity.
A good friend of mine passed away a year ago with an incurable disease, diagnosed 3 months before his death, and it was essentially guaranteed that he'd have to endure unbelievable suffering during the last weeks of those months. He didn't have the choice to end it early. It was heartbreaking.
I for my part hope that I can choose myself when the time has come.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can quite easily draw a line that society does not get to force someone to live a tormented existence in spite of their prior declaration that they do not want to be tormented. “It shouldn't be that way” is not an excuse to torture people through your moralizing indifference to the fact that it is that way.
I've wondered about this for my hypothetical future self. Currently? I'd say that I wouldn't want to live with dementia, but what if my "demented self" (kinda hate the phrasing, sorry) in the future wants to live, or doesn't remember they don't want to live? Do I have a say over the life of someone who doesn't remember they were me?
He said that alone made life worth living, for him and them, but once any deteriorating conditions rendered him permanently unable to participate in this weekly activity then he felt it was time to go.
Maybe having a pre-set condition like this is less arbitrary, and also allows everyone involved to understand as the time comes closer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've wondered about this for my hypothetical future self. Currently? I'd say that I wouldn't want to live with dementia, but what if my "demented self" (kinda hate the phrasing, sorry) in the future wants to live, or doesn't remember they don't want to live? Do I have a say over the life of someone who doesn't remember they were me?
You don’t have a say over your future you because your future you is not the same person as you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't necessarily agree with this take but I'd say it's probably because we're only willing to let people who are close to death "make a mistake." Eg maybe a 16 year old who wants to end their otherwise healthy life might, 20 years later, be glad they didn't. That seems less likely with someone who is almost certainly going to die (and probably painfully to boot) "soon".
> maybe a 16 year old who wants to end their otherwise healthy life might, 20 years later, be glad they didn't. Equally, they might spend decades of their life in misery wishing that they had been able to.
What's downvote-worthy about this comment?
It's in response to mine, and even though I don't really agree with it, I don't see what's so objectionable that it needs some sort of admonition?
Some of its wording is weird, like mentioning his wife dying in the same context of two other partners with no explanation. The original is a much better read.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> maybe a 16 year old who wants to end their otherwise healthy life might, 20 years later, be glad they didn't. Equally, they might spend decades of their life in misery wishing that they had been able to.
You're correct, and I'm generally in favor of the right to die. I watched a documentary where they interviewed a bunch of people who attempted suicide and talked to them about the entire experience and mental state. Out of the maybe ten that they interviewed, only one said that he wished it had worked. That doesn't mean it's only 10% though... they didn't get to interview the ones that succeeded.
I had an old teacher who died almost a year ago. Great guy, very sociable, knew everyone in the little town he lived in. Kept in touch with a lot of students. Good neighbour, friendly guy who'd talk to everyone. He got Alzheimers. He started forgetting stuff, and it frustrated him. He got caught driving dangerously, and cursed the doctor who took away his license. He argued with me about the state of some chicken he…
Sounds like LinkedIn story to me. Written by claude trying to drive a point home.
All I can say is that I didn't, and thank you for implying that it was so well written that it could only have been authored by a machine that has all of humanity's cultural output to hand.