Recently I have been getting more in touch with my creative side so if you are looking for something a little less depressing than euthanasia come to my blog to read short stories that will be sure to cheer you up!
Friday, July 29, 2016
Tuesday, May 31, 2016
Just Another Internet Hypocrite
I’m glad Heidi was able to admit her mistakes. Although the Hippocratic Oath is now more focused on what is holistically best for the patient, so they are required to euthanize a patient is it is in their very best interest. Although Heidi never really responded to my suggestion that a person should be able to die with dignity, I will still address her points fully.
The Netherlands is a place that the United States should look toward for guidelines on how to and how not to do physicians assisted suicide. Heidi’s blog post was quite misleading with regards to the Netherlands relationship with palliative care. It is true that palliative care in the Netherlands was delayed for a small amount of time and they were behind other countries in advancement.
Unfortunately, Heidi fails to mention that once the Netherlands began to catch up they far surpassed may other countries in the field of palliative care. A good explanation for this would be that pressure from the competition that euthanasia caused forced palliative care to become more appealing and consequently more effective for its patients. This is great because now people can have more equal options instead of either not having euthanasia at all or euthanasia being the best option in almost all cases.
The babies that have been euthanized by their parents and their doctors are in a better place. What really is wrong with ending a baby's suffering? Most parents do not want to let go of their children so it is really a selfless and compassionate act when they make the decision to end their child’s suffering. As for the trickle effect to others, that is an exaggeration. A child is able to object with words to the type of treatment it is receiving. They have a lot more control over themselves than babies do. The same goes for adolescents and adults. Let us not forget that the parents of the child determined that it should live past being a baby so the likelihood of them changing their minds is slim. And if they do then, by Netherlands law, there would have to be a full assessment where they are determined to meet certain criteria to be eligible for euthanasia.
I would also like to point out that we do not have to be like the Netherlands. They did it first so we can learn from their successes and their failures. We can make stricter rules or even looser ones based on the foundation of their codes. I think Heidi has a hard time dealing with options. This is evidenced by her moral attack on me and anyone who thinks like me. Maybe god is smiling down on our attempts to relieve his children’s suffering instead of condemning us for it. I believe that god will instead reward us for our efforts of keeping all his children safe from pain and disappointment.
Finally, I am a supporter of a person’s right to choose to die if they want. Who are you, Heidi, to tell someone that they do not control? You objected to a baby being murdered by its parent’s decision for euthanasia because it did not have a choice, yet you would rob an adult of the choice to end their life.
The Netherlands is a place that the United States should look toward for guidelines on how to and how not to do physicians assisted suicide. Heidi’s blog post was quite misleading with regards to the Netherlands relationship with palliative care. It is true that palliative care in the Netherlands was delayed for a small amount of time and they were behind other countries in advancement.
Unfortunately, Heidi fails to mention that once the Netherlands began to catch up they far surpassed may other countries in the field of palliative care. A good explanation for this would be that pressure from the competition that euthanasia caused forced palliative care to become more appealing and consequently more effective for its patients. This is great because now people can have more equal options instead of either not having euthanasia at all or euthanasia being the best option in almost all cases.
The babies that have been euthanized by their parents and their doctors are in a better place. What really is wrong with ending a baby's suffering? Most parents do not want to let go of their children so it is really a selfless and compassionate act when they make the decision to end their child’s suffering. As for the trickle effect to others, that is an exaggeration. A child is able to object with words to the type of treatment it is receiving. They have a lot more control over themselves than babies do. The same goes for adolescents and adults. Let us not forget that the parents of the child determined that it should live past being a baby so the likelihood of them changing their minds is slim. And if they do then, by Netherlands law, there would have to be a full assessment where they are determined to meet certain criteria to be eligible for euthanasia.
I would also like to point out that we do not have to be like the Netherlands. They did it first so we can learn from their successes and their failures. We can make stricter rules or even looser ones based on the foundation of their codes. I think Heidi has a hard time dealing with options. This is evidenced by her moral attack on me and anyone who thinks like me. Maybe god is smiling down on our attempts to relieve his children’s suffering instead of condemning us for it. I believe that god will instead reward us for our efforts of keeping all his children safe from pain and disappointment.
Finally, I am a supporter of a person’s right to choose to die if they want. Who are you, Heidi, to tell someone that they do not control? You objected to a baby being murdered by its parent’s decision for euthanasia because it did not have a choice, yet you would rob an adult of the choice to end their life.
The Death of Your Morals and the loss of your soul
While Heidi was correct that I had part of the Hippocratic Oath wrong, the essence that a physician is not supposed to harm their patient is there. Heidi was mostly grasping at straws with her initial statement. As for the morality of Euthanasia, there is a country we can look toward is the Netherlands. Euthanasia has been legal there since 2002.
The acceptance of Euthanasia in the Netherlands had a negative effect on their development of palliative care. It took longer for the Netherlands than many other countries to implement and improve palliative care for patients. This was because there was no reason for a person to need palliative care if death was readily available to them. This caused people to trying to aggressively fight an illness when they had no chance to survive. A large problem with this lack of will to fight against terminal illness is that is a slippery slope to other things.
Around 650 babies per year are being murdered due to the Netherlands law of physicians assisted suicide. These are not always babies who will never make it to their first birthdays anyway. Some of these babies are deemed to be in too much pain or condemned to a life of suffering due to a disability that they were born with. Many of the Netherlands citizens are upset and fighting about whether or not the law that they have had in effect for so long is moral. It is just one step from killing disabled newborns to killing disabled children and then on to adolescents and adults. Becoming familiar with taking the easy way out in situations such as these is a dangerous precedent to set. The most terrifying thing about the situation in the Netherlands is that these babies have zero ability to consent so their parents and the doctors have complete control over their right to live. No human being should wield control over another human being’s right to live. Even former supporters of euthanasia in the Netherlands have switched sides because they realize that it is immoral even for their standards.
One thing that cannot be denied is that the lord will never forgive those who senselessly murder his children without remorse. In the bible, it is stated simply in Exodus 20:13. Killing is wrong and god will punish those who do not follow his law. Is a short while of ease in this life worth an eternity of suffering in hell? I do not think so and I feel that people like Heidi do not understand the consequences of their liberal and underdeveloped theories. A topic of death is not the right point for someone who is involved with today’s society’s lack of moral integrity to comment on. I believe it is things like this that will bring the terrible curse of the rapture on the world and at that point the Heidi’s of the world will see the consequences of their actions.
The acceptance of Euthanasia in society will be the beginning of the end.
The acceptance of Euthanasia in the Netherlands had a negative effect on their development of palliative care. It took longer for the Netherlands than many other countries to implement and improve palliative care for patients. This was because there was no reason for a person to need palliative care if death was readily available to them. This caused people to trying to aggressively fight an illness when they had no chance to survive. A large problem with this lack of will to fight against terminal illness is that is a slippery slope to other things.
One thing that cannot be denied is that the lord will never forgive those who senselessly murder his children without remorse. In the bible, it is stated simply in Exodus 20:13. Killing is wrong and god will punish those who do not follow his law. Is a short while of ease in this life worth an eternity of suffering in hell? I do not think so and I feel that people like Heidi do not understand the consequences of their liberal and underdeveloped theories. A topic of death is not the right point for someone who is involved with today’s society’s lack of moral integrity to comment on. I believe it is things like this that will bring the terrible curse of the rapture on the world and at that point the Heidi’s of the world will see the consequences of their actions.
The acceptance of Euthanasia in society will be the beginning of the end.
The Right to Live Your Life
First, let me address the gross inaccuracy that is Heidi’s assessment of the Hippocratic Oath. It never says, “first do no harm” in the oath. In fact, the word harm is not mentioned at all in the whole oath. We are no longer in the times of the Greek who originally made the oath. We are a progressive society and because of this our codes have changed. We are also in the age of the internet and proper research should go into a project before it is released to the public. It is common that inaccuracy undermines the credibility of a post and its author.
Second, palliative care is a great option for many people. Especially those with non terminal illnesses who are well enough to be cared for outside of the hospital. In spite of this, I become bothered when it is used as a method of denying people a choice. In palliative care, people still have to deal with astronomical pain. The palliative staff works very hard to manage a patient's pain levels because it is a huge part of their job the problem is that there are many different types of pain and managing is not the same as relieving. Why allow someone to live with constant but manageable pain when they wish to relieve all their suffering?”
Third, I agree that palliative care and extended hospital stays are extremely expensive. Just like a stay in the hospital it can saddle a patient and their family with bills that can negatively impact the overall wellbeing of everyone. I do not agree that it should be a factor in whether or not people should be allowed to do decide what happens to themselves when they are sick. What is wrong with a patient deciding to allow their family to suffer a little less when they are gone by mitigating hospital bills? Where is the moral compass that decides that letting go is somehow wrong? A patient placing their family’s lives before their own is more noble than tragic. It is quite condescending to assume that a person is being forced instead of being given another choice that they have the capacity to decide on.
This brings me to my own point. I believe that a person should be able to die with dignity and on their own terms. When death is inevitable it causes depression which causes the whole process to speed up and become exponentially worse. A benefit that can be received from euthanasia is the ability to keep going because the patient knows that when the time comes they will die exactly the way they want to. For example, a person with terminal cancer who loves their job and in the beginning can still go to work every day. The patient decides that once he or she cannot work they will end their life. This ability to keep one's dignity can extend their life by allowing them not dwell on the future of their sickness and by giving them control of their circumstances.
In conclusion, Euthanasia is the best option for certain patients and they should have the right to make their own decisions about their life and death.
The Right to Live
Most of the world can agree that killing is wrong. There is even a special word for it; murder. If someone was to be labeled a murderer he or she would be judged harshly by society and receive swift and severe punishment. That is why I do not understand this new right to die movement. Euthanasia, physicians assisted suicide especially, is very clearly defined as wrong by our society and by our laws. A doctor who provided a patient with the way to kill themselves or one who administers a lethal drug is in effect a murderer. Besides murder just being considered wrong, there are many other reasons why euthanasia should not be allowed to be ratified as a policy.
Every doctor takes the Hippocratic Oath and among other things they promise to, “first do no harm.” I believe that most people would agree that when a person has been murdered they have been harmed. A murderer still gets convicted if they kill an elderly person who is near death. We still consider them as having done harm. So why would it be any different for a doctor?
In addition, there is an alternative option to physicians assisted suicide. There is no need for a person’s suffering to be so unbearable that they should die prematurely. Palliative care is the solution for this suffering. Many people have heard of hospice and many have said that it has greatly relieved the suffering of the patient and of the family that is with the patient through their illness. If a person can live a mostly peaceful life in palliative care, why would anyone think it right to rob them of this final peace in life? With palliative care, people can even leave the hospital and go home to be surrounded with their friends and family as they say their goodbyes. Nurses will be there and can work with their families to give the patient the best care possible.
Frequently, it is cited that the cost of treatment for the ill is astronomical and places a huge burden on a family once a person passes. Because of this, many think that although palliative care is nice it is just too expensive. Unfortunately, this expense makes euthanasia even more immoral than it would be if all treatment cost the same. Palliative care is cheaper than a patient staying in the hospital for the duration of their illness but euthanasia is much cheaper than palliative care. If euthanasia were to become legal a person would be presented with their options and could choose to give up solely for the purpose of saving their loved ones money. A person having to choose between their life and the financial stability of their family while they are on their death bed would, without a doubt, cause some, who would fight otherwise, to give up.
In conclusion, the right to die movement and its celebration of euthanasia are quite immoral based on our laws and on our social stigmas. It should not be allowed and right to die believers should be ashamed of themselves and give up this fight.
Every doctor takes the Hippocratic Oath and among other things they promise to, “first do no harm.” I believe that most people would agree that when a person has been murdered they have been harmed. A murderer still gets convicted if they kill an elderly person who is near death. We still consider them as having done harm. So why would it be any different for a doctor?
In addition, there is an alternative option to physicians assisted suicide. There is no need for a person’s suffering to be so unbearable that they should die prematurely. Palliative care is the solution for this suffering. Many people have heard of hospice and many have said that it has greatly relieved the suffering of the patient and of the family that is with the patient through their illness. If a person can live a mostly peaceful life in palliative care, why would anyone think it right to rob them of this final peace in life? With palliative care, people can even leave the hospital and go home to be surrounded with their friends and family as they say their goodbyes. Nurses will be there and can work with their families to give the patient the best care possible.
Frequently, it is cited that the cost of treatment for the ill is astronomical and places a huge burden on a family once a person passes. Because of this, many think that although palliative care is nice it is just too expensive. Unfortunately, this expense makes euthanasia even more immoral than it would be if all treatment cost the same. Palliative care is cheaper than a patient staying in the hospital for the duration of their illness but euthanasia is much cheaper than palliative care. If euthanasia were to become legal a person would be presented with their options and could choose to give up solely for the purpose of saving their loved ones money. A person having to choose between their life and the financial stability of their family while they are on their death bed would, without a doubt, cause some, who would fight otherwise, to give up.
In conclusion, the right to die movement and its celebration of euthanasia are quite immoral based on our laws and on our social stigmas. It should not be allowed and right to die believers should be ashamed of themselves and give up this fight.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)