A killer set on killing will kill anyway, so maybe we could pair them up and have both happy?
The "they will do it anyway" argument is as absurd as it is dangerous.
Heh, it's not like it backfired in the past at all, is it?
A killer set on killing will kill anyway, so maybe we could pair them up and have both happy?
The "they will do it anyway" argument is as absurd as it is dangerous.
Heh, it's not like it backfired in the past at all, is it?
If we look at it from a utilitarian angle.
Euthanasia - The one who apply to euthanasia get what one want - Those who assists get paid to do what that person sign up to do.
Other way - The one who commit suicide other way get what they want. - Those who witness got shocked. - Those who "clean up" get paid to do what that person sign up to do, but less amused than those who assist euthanasia.
I am not saying enabling euthanasia for all and granting access to it easily. However, for those who suffer so badly it could be one of the escape hatches.
I differ, considering life as sacred, and worried though not surprised of how we're moving as a society from holding life as sacred, at least in appearance, to overtly disregarding it in this manner. On the other hand, as I mentioned in a different reply, I have a big difficulty trusting doctors and their "nothing else to be done".
If yes, then we should have places where one can go and absolutely get destroyed by meth or fentanyl or whatever's your choice.
I'm afraid the only difference between both cases is the economic burden they cause or not. The one with drugs increases it, while euthanasia decreases it. That makes me suspicious.
https://www.uniting.org/community-impact/uniting-medically-s...
These exist in a number of countries and are seen to have favourable outcomes:
https://adf.org.au/insights/medically-supervised-injecting-c...
I read your argument and it seems like you're not actually considering the point of view from the woman who no longer wants to live.
You can read my other replies for more context, but what I see as a problem here is that all this will normalise death. By enabling it, we're one step closer of people resorting to this more easily, and having people that could recover just giving up early.
And yes, my stance is biased, I don't trust doctors that much.
No one healthy and of sound mind will choose to die. It isn't called "survival instinct" for nothing. This will not normalise death, it will not become a fad to die just because it's easy to do so. Despite the US having a very widely available and quick way to commit suicide (guns), the suicide rate in the US is not so much higher than in Germany - where it's more difficult to obtain guns.
I think legalising euthanasia is an act of love. It prevents unnecessary suffering for those who suffer the most, but only if those who suffer explicitly request it and under extremely strict regulations - like they do in the Netherlands.
I think your position about this is typical, but it's also (I think) primarily reasoned from the perspective of society, and not from the perspective of someone who is suffering.
Death is normal. You are going to die. I am going to die. We are all going to die.