Deaf twins going blind euthanized
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17
Like Tree8Likes

Thread: Deaf twins going blind euthanized

  1. #1
    Posting Addict boilermaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Rocky Mtns.
    Posts
    19,380

    Default Deaf twins going blind euthanized

    Deaf Twins Going Blind Euthanized - Yahoo! News

    Two deaf twin brothers in Belgium were euthanized by their doctor after realizing they were going blind and would be unable to see each other ever again, their physician says.

    The 45-year-old men, whose names have not been made public, were legally put to death by lethal injection at the Brussels University Hospital in Jette, on Dec. 14.

    The men, who were born deaf, had a cup of coffee and said goodbye to other family members before walking into hospital room together to die, their doctor told Belgian television station RTL.

    "They were very happy. It was a relief to see the end of their suffering," said Dr. David Dufour.

    "They had a cup of coffee in the hall. It went well and a rich conversation. Then the separation from their parents and brother was very serene and beautiful," he said. "At the last there was a little wave of their hands and then they were gone,"

    More than 1,000 people legally availed themselves of doctor-assisted deaths in Belgium in 2011, most of them were terminally ill cancer patients.

    The brothers are unique in that their illness was not terminal. Belgian law, however, allows doctors to euthanize "suffering" patients who are both mentally sound, over 18 and want to die.

    Belgian lawmakers are considering a law that would extend euthanasia to dementia patients and children, whose families and doctors consented.



    Should this be legal? Consenting adult men who desired to die.
    Audra
    DH Trey
    DD 8.03, DD 6.05, DS 3.07, DD 5.09, and DS arrived 6.17.12
    www.mamaginger.com

  2. #2
    Community Host Alissa_Sal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Debating Away on the Debate Board!
    Posts
    11,771

    Default

    I think in the case of people who are not terminally ill, they need to ensure that the person making the decision is mentally competent and has their affairs in order (the article says that they must be "mentally sound" so I think they are already doing it) and perhaps gets some counciling first to explore other options (for example, if someone is upset over their quality of life, are there ways that the quality of life could be improved?) But at the end of the day, I do believe that our lives belong to us, even up to deciding when to go if we so choose, and I don't think that someone should have to resort to a painful or frightening manner of committing suicide if that is what they truly want. I think if we've exhausted all other options and the person still wants to die, that is their right and being able to go peacefully with a medicine that puts them to sleep is far more humane then forcing them to hurt themselves with a gun or a razor or a rope.
    -Alissa, mom to Tristan (5) and Reid (the baby!)

    Got an opinion? We've got a board! Come join us for some lively debate on the Face Off! Debate Arena board.

  3. #3
    Posting Addict Rivergallery's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    9,756

    Default

    I would rather the drs not be involved in this way. I don't mind so much the dr writing prescriptions for things that would kill if taken at a certain dosage, and the person choosing to commit suicide. But I do not think the dr should be put into a homicidal position.
    DH-Aug 30th 1997 Josiah - 6/3/02 Isaac 7/31/03

  4. #4
    Community Host Alissa_Sal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Debating Away on the Debate Board!
    Posts
    11,771

    Default

    I don't really consider it "homicide" if the patient truly wants to go.

    Having said that, I don't believe that drs should ever be required to do this. I assume there would have to be a subset of drs who choose to do it, because they believe in providing a humane alternative to suicide.
    -Alissa, mom to Tristan (5) and Reid (the baby!)

    Got an opinion? We've got a board! Come join us for some lively debate on the Face Off! Debate Arena board.

  5. #5
    Community Host
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    13,518

    Default

    I am torn on this. I do not really think a doctor should be the one killing someone.

    Unrelated, I do not think being both Deaf and Blind means you have absolutely no quality of life. I know many Deaf people and some Deaf and Blind people. I recently met a Deaf Blind person that was so full of life. She spent half the time laughing and telling jokes. She is a motivational speaker that travels to different woman's conferences.

    ~Bonita~

  6. #6
    Posting Addict Spacers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    My avatar is the tai chi -- a symbol of the eternal cycle of life
    Posts
    16,465

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alissa_Sal View Post
    I think in the case of people who are not terminally ill, they need to ensure that the person making the decision is mentally competent and has their affairs in order (the article says that they must be "mentally sound" so I think they are already doing it) and perhaps gets some counciling first to explore other options (for example, if someone is upset over their quality of life, are there ways that the quality of life could be improved?) But at the end of the day, I do believe that our lives belong to us, even up to deciding when to go if we so choose, and I don't think that someone should have to resort to a painful or frightening manner of committing suicide if that is what they truly want. I think if we've exhausted all other options and the person still wants to die, that is their right and being able to go peacefully with a medicine that puts them to sleep is far more humane then forcing them to hurt themselves with a gun or a razor or a rope.
    This, exactly! And it's far more humane on their loved ones than stumbling onto a bloody mess or the anxiety of worrying & waiting for someone to come home. Tiven is doing a biography project on Helen Keller, and I have to admit that she was an amazing woman, but I personally wouldn't want to live in a dark, silent world. I'd rather wrap things up and go peacefully if I knew that was my fate.

    And the problem with "assisted" suicide is that doesn't always work. The human body usually vomits up an overdose of ingested drugs so that's not a good option. With injected drugs, there have been cases where the person lost consiousness before the syringe was fully emptied, leaving the assister in the position of either having to finish the job or risk having the person wake up, possibly with brain damage or major organ damage. Far better, I think, to have a willing participant do the job properly the first time.
    wlillie likes this.
    David Letterman is retiring. Such great memories of watching him over the past thirty-two years!

  7. #7
    Posting Addict smsturner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Hamilton, NY
    Posts
    5,863

    Default

    As long as it can be proven they are mentally sound, I think it should be their right.
    It's smart for a dr to be involved so it can be done safely, and painlessly.

    I'm all for the rights of sound-minded adults to do anything that doesn't hurt anyone else. (most anything. lol)
    JorgieGirl likes this.
    Susan, dh Tom, dd Megan, ds Marcus, ds #2 coming Feb, 2014

    Lilypie Maternity tickers

    I never knew until that moment how badly it could hurt to lose something you never really had. - Missed Miscarriage at 10 weeks - 3/26

  8. #8
    Posting Addict KimPossible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    20,106

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smsturner View Post
    As long as it can be proven they are mentally sound, I think it should be their right.
    It's smart for a dr to be involved so it can be done safely, and painlessly.

    I'm all for the rights of sound-minded adults to do anything that doesn't hurt anyone else. (most anything. lol)
    So what if the individual choosing this had dependents?

    just musing...thats the only thought that I came up with last night. Someone who is not terminally ill, is sound of mind, might be suffering in some manner, but has dependents.

    Maybe its not enough to make it illegal or anything, but i question the ethics of the situation.
    Last edited by KimPossible; 01-15-2013 at 03:25 PM.

  9. #9
    Posting Addict smsturner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Hamilton, NY
    Posts
    5,863

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KimPossible View Post
    So what if the individual choosing this had dependents?

    just musing...thats the only thought that I came up with last night. Someone who is not terminally ill, sound of mind, might be suffering in some manner, but has dependents.

    Maybe its not enough to make it illegal or anything, but i question the ethics of the situation.
    Hmm... I hadn't thought of that. I guess it would have to be handled through the legal system to transfer the guardianship.

    (I guess the pollyanna in me is thinking that no one with kids would want to leave them to fend on their own, and would make sure to make these arrangements first...but not everyone works that way!)


    And to add to my first thought, I would want some type of counseling to be mandatory before it's done.
    Susan, dh Tom, dd Megan, ds Marcus, ds #2 coming Feb, 2014

    Lilypie Maternity tickers

    I never knew until that moment how badly it could hurt to lose something you never really had. - Missed Miscarriage at 10 weeks - 3/26

  10. #10
    Posting Addict Spacers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    My avatar is the tai chi -- a symbol of the eternal cycle of life
    Posts
    16,465

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KimPossible View Post
    So what if the individual choosing this had dependents?

    just musing...thats the only thought that I came up with last night. Someone who is not terminally ill, is sound of mind, might be suffering in some manner, but has dependents.

    Maybe its not enough to make it illegal or anything, but i question the ethics of the situation.
    I'd say non-terminal parents with dependent minor children would probably be out of luck because it wouldn't be in the children's best interest to lose a parent. We as a society don't allow parents to easily skip out on the responsibility to raise & support one's children. Life insurance doesn't usually pay out in cases of suicide so I don't think it would have to pay out under legal euthanasia if the person didn't already have a terminal illness that would otherwise be covered. If the parent has lost custody of the children for some reason, drug addiction or poor parenting due to mental illness or something else that might also make someone consider ending their life, then that's another story because they've been proven an unfit parent. And I think it would be better for a child to have good memories of their lost parent, not remembering them at the end in so much pain or out of it mentally from pain meds. The required counseling in Belgium includes immediate family members so at least the kids will have professional help in understanding what is happening and processing their grief.
    Last edited by Spacers; 01-15-2013 at 03:43 PM. Reason: forgot a whole sentence in the middle!
    David Letterman is retiring. Such great memories of watching him over the past thirty-two years!

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
v -->

About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Sitemap | Terms & Conditions