Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Arts & HumanitiesPhilosophy · 1 decade ago

Anyone Pro-Assisted Suicide?

Assisted suicide occurs when someone, usually those suffering from an incurable illness or chronic intense pain, intentionally kills themselves with the help of another individual.

For example, a doctor may prescribe drugs with the understanding that the patient plans to use them to overdose fatally. Or a doctor may insert an intravenous needle into the arm of a patient, who then pushes a switch to trigger a fatal injection.

What are some good arguments supporting assisted suicide?

7 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Best Answer

    By most legal definitions, murder requires a malicious intent. If another persons' death is an accident or not malicious, it can NEVER be murder. Consider the not-entirely-dissimilar case of killing someone to defend someone else. It can be manslaughter, or fall under other laws, but murder is simply out of the question.

    It also bears mention that in many, many places suicide itself is NOT illegal. In America, for example. There may be other round-about ways in which authority gets itself involved (questions about the persons' mental health or using 'common law' or 'public welfare' rulings) but all the specific laws about suicide have been pretty much repealed. To an extent, a person can starve themselves to death even in jail or a hospital and there isn't a whole lot that can be done about it.

    So - you may ask - if killing yourself is legal, why is assisting not? The answer lies in the practicality of the situation involved. How do we KNOW a suicidal person is of sound mind, that they explored options, that they wanted to die in a particular way? How do we protect them from self-interested parties who want to 'rid themselves of a burden' or the like? After a person is dead, it can become difficult (if not impossible) to determine the truth of the matter. And we CERTAINLY don't want people pushing others INTO suicide.

    In this way it's no different from some other laws. It is, for example, perfectly legal for two teenagers to have sex in most places, but completely illegal for a third party to record it. How do we know the third party wasn't orchestrating the event?

    All of which explains why things are the way they are, but doesn't go far on the question of whether this is the way things SHOULD be.

    There are those who argue that anyone who wants to commit suicide is by definition not in their right mind. There are those who would point out that many people who want suicide and are prevented later change their minds and are glad they were stopped. And there are those who suggest that it is in society's interest to prevent people from killing themselves because those people may still be of use to society.

    All of which might be reasons to prevent suicide itself... but it seems to me that if we allow the suicide then we must allow assistance in it. For some people, forbidding assistance IS to forbid suicide - how can a paralyzed or dramatically weak person kill themselves? Is it fair to allow the healthiest people to kill themselves but prevent the least healthy from doing so? If anything, that's completely backwards!

    Allow both or forbid both. Fence-sitting is only creating unfairness.

  • 1 decade ago

    Yes. Especially after watching my grandpa slowly whither away. He spent the last few years of his life surrounded mostly by strangers in a nursing home with no legs and 1 arm. He tried to kill himself several times by refusing to eat but they always ended up forcing him to eat with feeding tubes. This happened at least a few times before he was finally successful. And he went through years and years of pain and also lost all sense of dignity because some politicians in Washington who never ever met him decided that they knew better then he did whether he should be able to end his suffering or not.

  • 1 decade ago

    i am for it mainly because i believe that it is the right of every human being to choose for themselves quality or quantity of life.provided they are in their normal state of mind. - notice the "their " and not societies view of what normal is. being in pain 27/4 but being kept alive via drugs, machines does not affect mental state , their feelings of how they want to live. if a person is unable to move, to execute their wishes then i believe help should be given. society intervenes because they feel it is morally wrong, that they will be blamed, they are basically covering their own asses and some just dont want to let go of poor old grandma who is suffering a degenerative muscle , cns disease that makes her totally dependent and probably very sad to still be alive. years ago there was a woman i knew slightly , by age 35 she had a phd in 3 fields, full of life, at 36 she was a quadriplegic with only her facial nerves, vocal cords (barely functioning) over the course of a year she tried to kill herself by eating a face cloth that was left too close to her head, she tried to throw her wheelchair (breath automated) down a flight of steps. finally she succeeded by rolling herself into an untended fireplace and catching fire. i think its sad that she was kept alive against her wishes just because someone couldn't let go .

    Source(s): personal opinion.
  • 1 decade ago

    100% yes. Anyone should be able to choose whether they want their existence to continue or not. And I believe that there should be specialized places where they can go to do it painlessly and quickly, as opposed to people attempting to commit suicide on their own and only causing themselves massive harm/damage with a possibility of failure. Now, of course there would have to be certain clauses and laws put into place for life/health insurance matters and such, but I truly believe these places should exist. Who are we to say when someone should or should not be able to make their own choice about living or dying?

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    I see no reason to needlessly extend the torture of the terminally ill. When you've lived with enduring pain for long enough, it seems evil to deny somebody the right to terminate their suffering and to be assisted by somebody they love.

    I am Pro. It horrifies me that anybody would oppose it in favour of somebody else suffering.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    I'll answer your last question first. Eliminating indescribable pain and suffering. Dignity of person. I am in favor of this because of my responses to your later question.

  • 1 decade ago

    Euthanasia, sure. It is better to have help killing yourself because you maximize the chances of dying. hahahahahahahaha

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.