Euthanasia

What does Sup Forums think of euthanasia and right-to-die laws?

Should people be allowed to end their lives in a controlled, dignified manner with the assistance of a doctor? Instead of needing to become an hero (which runs the risk of backfiring/failing)?

Personally, I'm 100% in favor of letting people do it as long as they prove they are capable of understanding the consequences.

The world is overpopulated as-is and if someone wants to shuffle off this mortal coil and lessen the burden on everyone else then we should at the very least provide them with a sensible, dignified way of doing it.

There's no such thing! Our bodies break down, sometimes when we're 90, sometimes before we're even born, but it always happens and there's never any dignity in it! I don't care if you can walk, see, wipe your own ass... it's always ugly - ALWAYS! You can live with dignity; we can't die with it!

Whether you think it's dignified or not is not what's important.

What's important is that people should have the power to decide what to do with their lives.

Bump.

Switzerland has an interesting stance. They don't allow euthanasia, but apparently will provide lethal drugs to those who qualify for them, even foreigners.

So you have people traveling there from all around the world just so that they can die.

Yes we need euthanasia and no more youth from Asia.

If you want to die go jump from 10th floor
County shouldnt spend its taxes to satiate your self-destructive ugres

I think it should be available on demand. No restrictions.

t. tranny

It's not self destructive though. In the US its really strict.

too much to read

Euthanasia for mentals like autists and down syndromes should be compulsory.

Then they'd have to spend money scraping your ass off the pavement.

Maybe it should be involuntary in cases like yours.

I'd just like to remind you that the holocaust started as euthanasia. What's stopping a doctor from killing you and then forging the paperwork, obtaining legal immunity against murder charges? If you want to kill yourself you should be able to do it on your own. I don't trust a law that grants someone else the power to kill me. It never ends well.

>provide them with a dignified way of dying reeeee
>no one dies dignified
>you don't need dignity, provide them with a way of dying reeee
I suggest the ovens, why not burn their useless bodies so they can keep us warm, that's a pretty dignified way of dying, I'd say.

As long as the dying party consents and is legally declared to be in understanding of the consequences, who gives a shit? I don't think the Jews were consenting to getting gassed en masse so that isn't really a valid comparison.

>one Doctor copy pastes shekelsteins euthanasia paperwork 6 million times
>holocaust becomes legal

You kid, but I'm sure there are people who'd be happy to put their bodies to use in return for being able to safely end their lives. Think of all the organs that could be used for transplants.

It costs too much. All this controlled bullshit, if they want to die, all it takes is two bullets through the heart and one through the skull.
I want to be in favour, but it costs us too much as a society, on top of that, when someone fails to an hero, he specifically should be jailed in an institution where he cannot kill himself, because literal trash who's too incapable to kill itself doesn't deserve to die, but that's just my opinion.
Also, overpopulation is a bullshit argument, we have too many chinese, indians anfld Africans doing literally nothing and wasting resources, if anything it'd be way better to get rid of "overpopulation" than let some old faggot living in the backwoods of literal nowhere kill himself.

But, if they want to go so badly, why not do it in a dignified way though? Force them into a coma, wait until you actually need those organs, and then go on to harvest, that way they'll always be fresh, the owner of those organs dies, which is the main point, and someone else lives, which is great aswell. Why let them kill themselves if we can force them to be useful? They wouldn't even notice that their bodies are just cattle, and it's not even their problem. Literally everyone wins.

I'll adjust my stance, organs are quite valuable. We could sell some of those comatose harvests and make a hefty profit, they wouldn't care, they're going to die as they wish anyways. They also wouldn't be a disgusting burden on society.

>prove they are capable of understanding the consequences.
how do you intend to do that?

What if someone says they want to die so they can go to heaven/hell. would an athiest doctor deny them the right to die?

As long as they understand that they're going to die and it can't be reversed, what's the problem? It's unchristian as fuck, but it's really useful to keep them comatose and alive until their purpose has been fulfilled.

Dr. House take your fedora tipping philosophies back to Plebbit.

if someone is somehow too stupid to kill themselves they deserve a long life in agony

The doctor would obey whatever the law says they should do, hence the focus on euthanasia LAWS. Their personal beliefs are irrelevant.

The person requesting euthanasia would get assessed by a team of psychiatrists. That's how it's done in the countries where it's currently legal.

Euthanasia is full on legal in the Netherlands and no such things happen. As the elderly have to actually sign shit and give consent. It's pretty much impossible to fake that shit.
The problem lies in whether we should trust an elderly's consent when he has for example dementia.

Nonetheless, I'm completely for euthanasia. No need to force people to live when they don't want to and they have no future.

>only the nazis were resposible for people dying in camps during and after ww2

:^)

I really do think it should be legal. If people are worried it's going to be abused, just set some requirements. If someone says I seriously want to do this, put them on a register, make them attend psych evaluations to prove they're able to make their own decisions and force them to go to a meeting every 6 months for 2 years or so to make sure they still want to to it.

Put a ton of hoops in the way if you feel like you have to because of muh morality and if people make it to the end force them to be organ donors and have all of their funerary arrangements taken care of. People will still jump for the chance.

The difference between euthanasia and doing that is that euthanasia laws have a greater chance of actually being enacted. Your own country has it legalized in fact, and it is a topic being actively discussed in others.

Why do we kill them though? Or allow that to happen? The government is allowed to make decisions on our bodies as the recent "you're all going to be organ donors now because we want you to be unless you actively go through a shitload of effort to not be an organ donor" had proven. So why not instead of killing them, keep them comatose and use their organs as we see fit. Sell half their lungs and liver and we might make a profit?

>2016
>not blindly following the allied propaganda
ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?

In cases of terminal, degenerative illness I can't really see any reason why it should not be legal. You shouldn't be able to off yourself because you feel sad but I know that I for one would chose ODing on an opiate over parkinsons/ALS/going through dementia

It shouldn't be. Euthanasia should have a lower chance of being enacted than mine proposals. Euthanasia by itself is selfish, you use taxpayers money to off yourself and then your body gets burried or burned. Great, you've literally done nothing but waste money, time, and expertise. If you actually allowed the government to put those bodies to use. What does it matter that you're not dead yet, you're going to be, and you won't notice a thing. You're helping others by saving their lives through your organs, and if we can sell them :^), it doesn't cost that much either. Literally what's the problem with it?

What if you've tried all the common avenues of dealing with mental illness, like anti-depressants and therapy to no avail? Sure, it shouldn't just be done to every sap who's having a bad day, but what if it's proven to be a chronic condition?

>it shouldn't be

But it is.

You gotta take the current state of affairs into account, man. From a purely ethical point of view I don't necessarily disagree with you, but you gotta take a pragmatic approach to these sorts of things, and I honestly still think pro-euthanasia laws would be a net benefit to society. Sure, it costs money for the drugs, but would be more profitable in the long term.

One step at a time, user.

comatose patients tend to not suffer from whatever bullshit they're suffering from. Stop talking about letting them selfishly kill themselves and make sure they end up doing something useful, sensible, and most of all dignified for the rest of us whom they leave behind.

I'll agree, I don't oppose euthanasia, but when we're talking hypothetically, as should be on a chinese computer expert forum, we should consider a range of options at the very least.
Euthanasia acceptable.
Comatose organ plants good.
The only real question remains, what's best?