Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 73

Thread: Medically assisted dying vs. Catholic Hospitals

  1. #21

    Default

    A wild shybug appears, did someone say my name?

    If someone is in a lot of pain, and is going to die from a incurable illness (ie cancer) at the point that there is no hope, I have no problem with them choosing to die or not, as there going to die anyway, you're just making them deal with the pain longer.

    Personally, I find it the most humane thing you can do, under certain circumstances, is let them choose.

    I'm going to leave this hypothetical question, if a mouse is trapped in a mouse trap, and it's suffering and alive with a broken neck, would you kill it? or would you let it wriggle around in pain for the next 5 minutes, both are fucked up, but what is the most humane thing to do in that case? personally I would put it out of it's misery. The mouse will die anyway.

  2. #22

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by brabbit1987 View Post
    I don't know if I agree with this statement here. I think it was irresponsible to put it that way as it delegitimizes those who maybe going through depression that was triggered by something bad happening to them. It's almost like you are saying they can not be experiencing depression, and instead are just experiencing sadness. You most certainly can experience depression because of things going wrong, and I would say it's more likely to develop in those who are constantly going through bad things. Things don't need to be going right in order for what someone is feeling to be considered depression.

    Other wise you are suggesting I don't have depression and that would just make you just plain wrong. xD

    I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt and say you just worded this poorly and meant it to mean something else like, depression can also happen even when things are going right.
    To put it more succinctly, there are times when people can be sad or depressed due to situational circumstances. It's normal to feel that way and it's normal for those things to happen in our lives. Many people are able to move on from it. For example, my mother passed away last week and I have been feeling depressed about it. It is in contrast to the type of depression that people don't understand, for example when it becomes long term or there doesn't appear to be a reason for it. There is always a reason for it.
    Last edited by Starrunner; 4 Weeks Ago at 01:44.

  3. #23

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by Starrunner View Post
    To put it more succinctly, there are times when people can be sad or depressed due to situational circumstances. It's normal to feel that way and it's normal for those things to happen in our lives. Many people are able to move on from it. For example, my mother passed away last week and I have been feeling depressed about it. It was contrast to the type of depression that people don't understand, for example when it becomes long term or there doesn't appear to be a reason for it. There is always a reason for it.
    Right right, that explains it better ... thank you.

  4. #24

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by Shybug View Post
    A wild shybug appears, did someone say my name?

    If someone is in a lot of pain, and is going to die from a incurable illness (ie cancer) at the point that there is no hope, I have no problem with them choosing to die or not, as there going to die anyway, you're just making them deal with the pain longer.

    Personally, I find it the most humane thing you can do, under certain circumstances, is let them choose.

    I'm going to leave this hypothetical question, if a mouse is trapped in a mouse trap, and it's suffering and alive with a broken neck, would you kill it? or would you let it wriggle around in pain for the next 5 minutes, both are fucked up, but what is the most humane thing to do in that case? personally I would put it out of it's misery. The mouse will die anyway.

  5. #25

    Default

    I believe that Catholic churches should be allowed to operate within the conditions of their faith and beliefs, but if that's what they want to do and it goes against public law, they should also be willing to give up public funding.

    That said, I wonder how these assisted suicides will be carried out humanely? Here in the U. S., we can't execute prisoners on death row because the pharmaceutical companies will not sell the combination of drugs needed to kill another human being. So will the suffering patient be given an overdose of morphine? I understand that happens all the time in hospitals. It just isn't shared with the public. Typically, a patient dying of cancer is given morphine and other drugs to control the pain. As the disease advances, more and more is given until the patient is pushed through death. It probably is the most humane thing to do.

    Another thing which is done is to stop nutrients whether that is food, or other forms of nutrition. Our daughter in law is an RN and I'm sure she could enlighten us as to what happens behind closed doors. Once again, politicians and the media make an issue over something they know little about.

  6. #26

    Default

    The easy solution to this would be to buy out the church owned hospitals. At this point they only own the land and maybe some of the buildings.

  7. #27

    Default

    501C3

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/501(c)_organization

    in the USA, eventually in my opinion any 501c3 will need to be forced by legal action to offer/supply the same services to all persons regardless of race, color, religion, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, ancestry, age, veteran status, disability unrelated to job requirements, genetic information, military service, or other protected status. if not the 501c3 will be revoked/denied.

    it will take time, but my brothers and sisters and i are up for the fight.....

  8. #28

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by Shybug View Post
    A wild shybug appears, did someone say my name?

    If someone is in a lot of pain, and is going to die from a incurable illness (ie cancer) at the point that there is no hope, I have no problem with them choosing to die or not, as there going to die anyway, you're just making them deal with the pain longer.

    Personally, I find it the most humane thing you can do, under certain circumstances, is let them choose.

    I'm going to leave this hypothetical question, if a mouse is trapped in a mouse trap, and it's suffering and alive with a broken neck, would you kill it? or would you let it wriggle around in pain for the next 5 minutes, both are fucked up, but what is the most humane thing to do in that case? personally I would put it out of it's misery. The mouse will die anyway.
    I completely agree with your stance, Shy.

  9. #29

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by Maxx View Post
    Sanitized by liberal dogma, yes, in point of fact and effectiveness, no difference at all.

    If you believe in God and miracles, there is no such thing as a hopeless case. If you don't.... well you have to go through tortuous humanist gyrations to differenetiate.




    The Canadian Supreme Court, I presume, not the U.S.

    I won't go further, other than to point out that you either believe a person has the right to make their own decisions or they don't. You seem to be stuck in the middle somewhere.



    Once again, words mean things. Tax exempt is not the same as publicly funded. Mandatory, permissible, legal, approved, and accepted are all different words. Pretending that mandatory and permissible are the same thing is at best disingenuous.
    Maxx, do you really think it's morally fair to prolong the agony and ravages of incurable diseases upon those suffering with terminal illnesses? Is it right they should have to face each day writhing in pain and pumped full of medication, adding nausea onto the pain until the day they die? You talk about religious values, yet you condemn them to spend the remainder of their living days in hell. How many family members have had to stand by helplessly, watching a vicious disease ravage the body of their loved ones, destroying the person they loved, and having them ripped apart from the family piece by piece until the final moments? Why should they live in excruciating agony to satisfy someone else's religious beliefs and false hopes that maybe a miracle will happen? Any institution that would justify that treatment of a terminally ill person and their family through such prolonged torture (and torture is exactly what it is), is cruel and heartless.

    There are so many differences between suicide and assisted dying, to the point where it is ludicrous to attempt to make the comparison. Suicidal people do not want to die, they just can't live with the pain they are feeling. Many suicides are impulsive, violent, and are a result of mental illness such as schizophrenia or severe depression. This is treatable. It is not comparable to a sober, methodical, medically supervised procedure with extensive safeguards in place. In addition, while suicide is motivated by feelings of hopelessness, the law for the legalization of medically assisted dying has been brought about by hope. Having the option available can help provide relief from the terror that comes with a terminal cancer diagnosis. It can allow dying people to spend their remaining days with a better quality of life knowing they can choose the timing of their death rather than face an indeterminate number of days writhing in pain and agony before they leave this world.

    If you really want to understand the difference between suicide and medically assisted dying, just think of the impact on the family when the death occurs. You likely don't know the feeling of coming home at the end of the day to find the body of your partner in the basement after taking his life. Believe me, there are feelings of guilt for not being there, for having missed the clues, for not seeing the pain that was there, and for all those things you never got to say if only you had known. These are the feelings that suicide survivors have to live with for the rest of their lives. Contrast this to a medically assisted death: The family is involved in the method and timing of the death. The loved is surrounded by family members and friends at the time of death, and there is an opportunity to say goodbye to the loved one and let them go. There is no prolonged agony or the risk that the loved one will pass away unexpectedly and that family are not given a chance to be present in the final moments. As a person suffering from depression all my life, I have struggled to live. However, if I were diagnosed with an incurable terminal illness, I would not want to put my family through an indeterminate period of pain, agony, and uncertainty. It prolongs the agony and puts their lives on hold until the end. It's a choice that should be available to those who seek it.
    Last edited by Starrunner; 4 Weeks Ago at 02:55.

  10. #30

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by dogboy View Post
    I believe that Catholic churches should be allowed to operate within the conditions of their faith and beliefs, but if that's what they want to do and it goes against public law, they should also be willing to give up public funding.

    That said, I wonder how these assisted suicides will be carried out humanely? Here in the U. S., we can't execute prisoners on death row because the pharmaceutical companies will not sell the combination of drugs needed to kill another human being. So will the suffering patient be given an overdose of morphine? I understand that happens all the time in hospitals. It just isn't shared with the public. Typically, a patient dying of cancer is given morphine and other drugs to control the pain. As the disease advances, more and more is given until the patient is pushed through death. It probably is the most humane thing to do.

    Another thing which is done is to stop nutrients whether that is food, or other forms of nutrition. Our daughter in law is an RN and I'm sure she could enlighten us as to what happens behind closed doors. Once again, politicians and the media make an issue over something they know little about.
    My parents both died of cancer long ago. I have much bitterness and regret over my own stupidity in putting too much faith in doctors. Not because my parents died, but because of what looks in hindsight as misguided treatment near the end of their lives.

    Anyhow, long story short, I agree with your entire post. The only point I would clarify for the sake of this thread is that what we are talking about here is not necessarily suicide. I think it would be more accurately described as simply, medically assisted death, and I agree it "happens all the time in hospitals". This is based on personal experience, being related to someone in a medical field, and my own doctor who claims Medicare would rather see me die than pay for procedures to extend my life.

Similar Threads

  1. Assisted care for incontinence
    By Barbara in forum Incontinence
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 17-Jul-2015, 07:43
  2. Hospitals
    By Fluffyboy in forum Incontinence
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 12-Aug-2014, 16:43
  3. Diapers in SA hospitals.
    By Luckyfish in forum Diaper Talk
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-Apr-2012, 23:08
  4. Choosing to die documentary and assisted suicide
    By Y00kz in forum Mature Topics
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 01-Jul-2011, 09:18
  5. Catholic diaper tradition?
    By yourhuggies in forum Diaper Talk
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 25-Mar-2010, 02:22

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
ADISC.org - the Adult Baby / Diaper Lover / Incontinence Support Community.
ADISC.org is designed to be viewed in Firefox, with a resolution of at least 1280 x 1024.