Brittany Maynard: Her Final Goodbye
[guest post by Dana]
People magazine is reporting that Brittany Maynard, the 29-year old woman suffering from Stage 4 brain cancer who wrote a controversial essay about her decision to die with dignity, has ended her life:
“Goodbye to all my dear friends and family that I love. Today is the day I have chosen to pass away with dignity in the face of my terminal illness, this terrible brain cancer that has taken so much from me … but would have taken so much more,” she wrote on Facebook. “The world is a beautiful place, travel has been my greatest teacher, my close friends and folks are the greatest givers. I even have a ring of support around my bed as I type … Goodbye world. Spread good energy. Pay it forward!”
Last month she told People:
“For people to argue against this choice for sick people really seems evil to me. “They try to mix it up with suicide and that’s really unfair, because there’s not a single part of me that wants to die. But I am dying.”
May God comfort her husband and family and keep them close. And may Maynard know the peaceful rest she sought.
–Dana
Hello.
Dana (8e74ce) — 11/2/2014 @ 6:46 pmSaying bye bye on Facebook falls something short of passing away with dignity I think
But that’s me
happyfeet (e96d71) — 11/2/2014 @ 6:48 pmI sort of agree with you hf, but she was prolly trying to give her life, and choice, some meaning. If it comforted her, then who are we to say otherwise?
Gazzer (cb9ee2) — 11/2/2014 @ 6:58 pmBut she just said the other day she wasn’t going to end it on
November 1.
http://time.com/3547454/brittany-maynard-releases-emotional-new-video/
Sammy Finkelman (7bb55f) — 11/2/2014 @ 7:01 pmjust my two cents is all
she’s brave and smart and handled all of this very well
but me I’m not a big aficionado of the book of face
happyfeet (e96d71) — 11/2/2014 @ 7:03 pmI had last heard that she was going to postpone, sad to see this.
In the linked article:
“And then beyond that, to encourage people to make a difference,” she said. “If they can relate to my story, if they agree with this issue on a philosophical level, to get out there and do what we need to do to make a change in this country.”
This was not a personal and private affair, this was her making a statement,
both encouraging others to make this course of action easier,
and likely at some level looking for validation.
Whether she knows the rest she sought or not I do not know, and my desires for her mean nothing.
For thousands of years most physicians took an oath not to participate in this,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/2/2014 @ 7:05 pmas they had also taken an oath not to facilitate an abortion,
and as society in general thought that marriage was between a man and a woman.
Happyfeet,
My guess is that because she penned her original letter at CNN’s website, she intended for this to be a very public matter. Her mission was to reactivate the Death With Dignity discussion in states like California where it is not legal. Because of her letter and the debate that ensued, I’m sure she garnered a tremendous amount of support and compassion, therefore, it seems very understandable that she would make a public goodbye. I’m sure a great number of people, both who knew her in person and online, will be hit hard by her passing. Anytime someone so young dies, it seems to hit harder than when an elderly person dies. And of course, her unique circumstance make it all the more unsettling.
Dana (8e74ce) — 11/2/2014 @ 7:09 pmPrayers for all, this holiday season, especially to those here – who have lost dear ones to them.
EPWJ (e8c813) — 11/2/2014 @ 7:12 pmI think she did everything she possibly could to convince people in her own words that leaving this world was her choice. She wanted people to know that it had been thought out, that she had not been coerced by anybody, and that her family should not be made to feel any guilt or shame.
Last week with her family along she fulfilled her bucket list of seeing the Grand Canyon. Anyone who has ever been to the Grand Canyon in person knows that is a very beautiful and spiritual place. Vaya con Dios, Brittany.
elissa (e41694) — 11/2/2014 @ 7:13 pmCould she not have arranged for her organs to be harvested or something?
Michael Ejercito (4775b5) — 11/2/2014 @ 7:17 pmOne cannot make another person feel guilt or be free from guilt.
One can pressure, one can enlist pressure from others,
but feelings of guilt, or lack thereof, are literally in the mind of the beholder.
Even when one wants to control the circumstances of their death, the effects of their death are not in their control.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/2/2014 @ 7:18 pmThis is a terrible tragedy for this young woman and her family and loved ones.
This appears to have been her choice. She seems to have made this decision when she was evidently lucid and was quite aware of her most likely prognosis. And it was not something many people would want to face.
I fear that too many people will try to use this event to justify and expand euthanasia under some euphemism and that ultimately, like in so many other places, euthanasia will be imposed on people against their will and without their knowledge or consent. This is evidently quite common in Holland and other places.
I don’t want some doctor I don’t know deciding that it is time for me to die. And these laws take us well down that slippery slope.
I don’t think suicide is an option that I would choose but I haven’t faced the circumstances this young woman faced. She escaped from something horrible. I hope she found something better.
WarEagle82 (b18ccf) — 11/2/2014 @ 7:22 pmAll those years ago when I survived cancer the deal was you would get a second opinion. Or a third. The doctor who made your original diagnosis would give you a prescription for pain killers. And carefully instruct you as to lethal doses were. Nobody interfered with your choice. As long as everybody kept their mouth shut.
f1guyus (647d76) — 11/2/2014 @ 7:22 pmIn one way “death with dignity” is a misnomer. Death is a tragedy that was not the original intention.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/2/2014 @ 7:25 pmThis is not “humanizing” the process of dying, it is “medicalizing” it, the new field of clinical thanatology.
That is understandable. Medical malpractice suits are still quite a threat.
Michael Ejercito (4775b5) — 11/2/2014 @ 7:25 pmNothing like manipulative emotional blackmail aiming to empower a State (California), which already subscribes to the belief that their citizens are too numerous and are a virus like plague upon “mother earth”, to sanction “mercy killing” when the price tag to live gets a bit over government health care’s approved per person allotment.
No nothing like that at all whatsoever.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 11/2/2014 @ 7:26 pmShe shouldn’t have made it a publicity event.
Instead she was the poster child for a movement that won’t let others choose. She wasn’t coerced precisely because it’s almost universally illegal. Once it’s legal, the coercion starts.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2686711/Dont-make-mistake-As-assisted-suicide-bill-goes-Lords-Dutch-regulator-backed-euthanasia-warns-Britain-leads-mass-killing.html
http://www.nationalrighttolifenews.org/news/2014/07/dutch-ethicist-assisted-suicide-dont-go-there-2/#.VFb09Cgym74
The right to die becomes the duty to die in short order. Only somebody who is selfish and cruel would try to stick around, be a burden, and make their families go through the pain of watching them suffer.
When the noble choice is so obvious!
Steve57 (c1c90e) — 11/2/2014 @ 7:27 pmCould she not have arranged for her organs to be harvested or something?
Michael Ejercito (4775b5) — 11/2/2014 @ 7:17 pm
I don’t know if having any type of cancer makes one not a candidate as a donor, or only for cancers that have a propensity to metastasize, and I don’t know if there would be issues involved in the timing of the organ harvest.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/2/2014 @ 7:30 pmI realize this isn’t where Michael was going with this. But since it’s come up, how about the lethal suicide dose? Would that possibly have an effect on whether or not one remained a candidate for organ donation.
Steve57 (c1c90e) — 11/2/2014 @ 7:33 pm@ Steve57,<
Was it a publicity event or an opportunity to work toward a cause she truly believed in? To me they are two separate things. (Whether I agree with the cause or not, is beside the point).
Dana (8e74ce) — 11/2/2014 @ 7:45 pmCould you explain how they are different things, Dana.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/2/2014 @ 7:50 pmPerhaps in her case it was both.
She was trying to make a point and not simply call attention to herself, but she was calling attention to herself to make her point.
Steve57 (c1c90e) — 11/2/2014 @ 7:33 pm
I doubt if the amount of barbiturate in any one organ would have been enough to cause toxicity in an organ recipient, but I am just guessing.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/2/2014 @ 7:55 pmI do not know the details of how a person is pronounced dead or brain dead and then the organs are harvested. I’m guessing she would need to be “dead long enough” to clarify that it was not the organ harvesting that caused her death.
But again, I’m only guessing out loud here what comes to mind.
Maybe Mike K as a surgeon can tells us more.
It’s likely a distinction without a difference. It’s not like she was trying to get publicity to score a reality show, after all.
Gazzer (cb9ee2) — 11/2/2014 @ 7:56 pmThat is best done by refraining from calling people who disagree with you evil. As papertiger correctly observes, this (as well as other of her statements) are nothing more than “manipulative emotional blackmail.”
Which is where I see her crossing the line between working for a cause and turning the event into a publicity stunt.
I am perfectly willing to cut her all kinds of slack. She was clearly in a vulnerable emotional position. I hope her soul finds rest.
But then that’s my point. People in her state are in a vulnerable emotional state. Which means they can be pressured. In her case, by the euthanasia/assisted suicide lobby. In Holland and other places where euthanasia and/or assisted suicide is legal, by the prevailing public perception that if you don’t choose to end your life prematurely you are choosing an undignified, selfish option.
Pressure. Also known as coercion.
Steve57 (c1c90e) — 11/2/2014 @ 7:57 pmI think the nobility of fighting for a cause is linked to the nobility of the cause.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/2/2014 @ 7:58 pmI am not going to hover by a person’s bedside 24/7 to make sure they are not “euthanized” per their choice,
but I think the effort to normalize euthanasia is not a noble one.
Which is why the effort has to be advanced by labeling opponents of that normalization “evil.”
It’s important to apply that label early and often so it sticks. So people are intimidated from pointing out after euthanasia is normalized that it ceases being a choice. I.E. “involuntary euthanasia” as it’s called in Holland. Euthanasia without the patient’s permission. Sometimes against the patient’s previously expressed wishes.
So that the only people objecting to the practice of what remains murder are the evil people who were against legalizing euthanasia and/or physician assisted suicide in the first place.
Steve57 (c1c90e) — 11/2/2014 @ 8:08 pmMD, Steve57-
elissa (e41694) — 11/2/2014 @ 8:11 pmI know someone who works at a shelter for big cats (lions, tigers) which have been given up by owners or confiscated by the feds. They feed these cats deer which have been killed on the highways. Several years ago there was a terrible accident when a horse trailer tipped over on the highway. Two horses were so severely injured that they were humanely euthanized by injection at the accident site. They were then taken to the cat sanctuary as meat for the lions. A day later several cats became ill and nearly died from eating the horse meat. The sanctuary had unfortunately assumed the horses had been killed from trauma of the crash like the deer are. The cats ultimately survived but it was a very expensive and scary lesson to learn about feeding euthanized animals to other animals. I think harvesting and transplanting organs between humans in a similar situation might carry significant risk.
I know this has been terrible for Brittany Maynard and her family. It’s hard to deal with death, but especially at such a young age. Young people, especially, might need to feel that something good and important came from dying so young. Maybe that’s what motivated her to publicize her decision and her death. I hope she made the right choices, both in her death and her cause.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 11/2/2014 @ 8:23 pmIt would help to clarify terms here, maybe. Is it “euthanasia” to you because of the drugs she used? You say you sympathize with her plight and that you knew she would die horribly and in pain within weeks or a couple months, anyway. You say you believe she was lucid and understood her own prognosis. Yet you say she is advertising or trying to “normalize” euthanasia. So, is it the specific method by which she is choosing to end her life that is freaking you out? Would walking into the lake with rocks in her pockets or going to sleep in the car by carbon monoxide be less “evil” as far as you are concerned? Would that be euthanasia? Are there any differences between suicide and euthanasia, and if so what are they?
elissa (e41694) — 11/2/2014 @ 8:33 pmMD and Steve57 are the commenters most plugged into the euthanasia narrative. So, I imagine it’s obvious, but my 28 was primarily directed to them. Of course, I’d be happy to hear anybody else’s opinion on this very interesting but sad story.
elissa (e41694) — 11/2/2014 @ 8:41 pmOf course she committed suicide. Why would she deny it?
Elizabeth Rivera (ef8f4c) — 11/2/2014 @ 8:46 pm#5 Md in Philly:
orcadrvr (2977be) — 11/2/2014 @ 8:55 pmelissa, the difference between euthanasia is who commits the killing act. If a person kills ones self it’s suicide. Medical euthanasia is when a doctor kills the patient.
When a doctor administers the lethal drugs it’s euthanasia. When the doctor prescribes them but the patient must administer the drugs it’s physician-assisted suicide.
In Oregon, euthanasia is illegal but physicianf-assisted suicide is legal. In Holland physician-assisted suicide is illegal but euthanasia is legal.
Steve57 (c1c90e) — 11/2/2014 @ 9:03 pmWho is freaking out?
And when I’ve used the word evil, it was to object to the term being preemptively applied to me.
But, yes, If I were to come up with ways to describe a movement that invents a euphemism for plain old murder, i.e. to be deprived of one’s life against one’s will, I’d have to say that the practice of “involuntary euthanasia” is evil.
Steve57 (c1c90e) — 11/2/2014 @ 9:09 pmHow would you describe “involuntary euthanasia,” elissa?
Steve57 (c1c90e) — 11/2/2014 @ 9:10 pmWhat I was thinking is if there was a way to selectively kill the brain while leaving the rest of the body alive. Then the organs could be harvested.
Michael Ejercito (4775b5) — 11/2/2014 @ 9:23 pm==How would you describe “involuntary euthanasia,” elissa?==
Well, with respect to humans mostly I’d call it murder. Although probably sometimes I’d call it administering a humane coup de grace on the field of battle (for a gravely and mortally wounded colleague for instance). However, this post is not about involuntary euthanasia of any sort. It is about Brittany–one specific human being–and her incurable brain cancer, and her family, and her choices. And she committed suicide.
elissa (e41694) — 11/2/2014 @ 9:28 pmOne thing I and Brittany Maynard agree upon is that this has never just been about one specific human being and one particular choice at one time and in one place.
As far as I can tell, neither is this thread.
If I’m wrong, judging by the other comments on this thread I’m in good company.
Steve57 (c1c90e) — 11/2/2014 @ 9:36 pmBelgium has had several cases of organ donation after physician-assisted suicide, and this report indicates it is “performed according to the regular protocol” so I don’t think the euthanasia drugs cause the organs to be excluded for donation. But the first link says most Belgians who want physician-assisted suicide/euthanasia do so because they have cancer, and that is likely Stage IV cancer that has spread throughout their body. According to the American Cancer Society, the UNOS guidelines recommend against organ donation from donors with “actively spreading cancer.”
DRJ (a83b8b) — 11/2/2014 @ 9:46 pmWhat I was thinking is if there was a way to selectively kill the brain while leaving the rest of the body alive.
Asphyxia. Cutting off oxygen to the brain. You see it with cases of near drowning. But it works best with children. The younger the better. Although there was one case of a 17-year old that I read.
I wonder why Brittany did not volunteer to be exposed to Ebola and be monitored for the exact minute when the the disease became active. There would be all kinds of thing that could have been learned such as the critical viral load in the tissues, which would have been monitored with blood with regular, scheduled blood draws and biopsies of the various organs and bone marrow. A true contribution to science.
Sigh. Shut up you f***ing ghouls. Let the girl rest in peace.
nk (dbc370) — 11/2/2014 @ 11:39 pmIn her case, by the euthanasia/assisted suicide lobby. In Holland and other places where euthanasia and/or assisted suicide is legal, by the prevailing public perception that if you don’t choose to end your life prematurely you are choosing an undignified, selfish option.
As in so many cases, in so many instances, something that at the core may have value or worth is corrupted by the left. Euthanasia would have been a humane thing for someone like Maynard, but when the pro-amoral, big-government, do-your-own-thang crowd gets its hooks into such a controversy, the well-known saying of “the road to hell is paved with good intentions” takes on new meaning.
Mark (c160ec) — 11/2/2014 @ 11:48 pmI was going to go with hold her head in a bucket of water, but I’ll go with nk’s answer.
Goodbye Maynard. I heard of you.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 11/3/2014 @ 12:44 amEuthanasia won’t be voluntary for very long.
Art Deco (ee8de5) — 11/3/2014 @ 3:44 amLast year I was diagnosed as having Parkinson’s. I have an IQ of 172. My work requires the use of my brain. My brain is a part of my identity. Because of past abuse, I have to be in control. With help, less now than in the past, but not being in control is depressing to me. It is terrifying to be reminded every time my hand shakes, food falls off my fork, or I have to write that I’m not on control and that in the future I may be one of the 40% of Parkinson’s patients that looses their mind and suffers from dementia. While Parkinson’s in itself won’t kill me, Parkinson’s will still be responsible for my death. I’m depressed and suicide sometimes looks like an easier way out. I don’t need to kill myself, I need help with my depression.
The medication has so many side effects that it is better for me not to take them at all. Lucky for me I’ve been prayed for and most of my tremor is gone so I’m off all medication. And while medication can reduce the affects of Parkinson’s, it doesn’t slow the progression of Parkinson’s. Deterioration continues at the same pace whether I’m on drugs or not. My hand still shakes, just not as much. I still have to be careful walking because sometimes I’m not very steady on my feet.
Steve57 has documented on this post and on other posts the abuses of “death with dignity” which I don’t think is dignified at all. That is a slippery slope I don’t want to pursue. I don’t want to be told I should die because my quality of life will be diminished or for the good of my family. How about life with dignity.
Brittany Maynard didn’t need to commit suicide, she needed help with her depression and fear of the future.
Tanny O'Haley (066e8f) — 11/3/2014 @ 3:54 amSo, is it the specific method by which she is choosing to end her life that is freaking you out?
elissa (e41694) — 11/2/2014 @ 8:33 pm
Why is this so hard, and why do you call it freaking out?
Choosing to kill oneself or be killed as a primary motivation is what I see as objectionable.
As a matter of public policy and why my view of morality should be adopted by the majority and not another view of morality*, I give the observed data that wide acceptance of euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide leads to its abuse, and increasingly so on larger scales, not just a rare incident.
To the degree she wanted to make a public statement about her personal beliefs, so will I.
Her emphasis was on the momentary, with no thought to what happens next. In fact, I would say the decision she made was not done with informed consent, and the physician assisting her did not give information for her to make informed consent.
As God’s mercy and grace allows, I do not make decisions based on momentary factors. If I did, my life would look very different, and not for the good.
I believe and understand that there is a God who is interested in and rules over the affairs of men, women, and children;
and that whatever happens in this life
is but a momentary affliction
not worth comparing to the glory to be revealed to us,
and that the worst life on earth will seem to be as “one night in a bad motel”
on the other side of eternity.
*Somebody’s morals are always being practiced and enforced by the majority of a society. Sometimes it is the morals of the majority opinion, sometimes it is the morals of an individual tyrant, sometimes it is the morals of a powerful oligarchy, whether officially organized as such or not.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/3/2014 @ 4:58 amOne cannot get a working result in the physical world if the “solution” defies fundamental underlying principles.
The big question is how much is there to the universe that is not readily observable and what are the principles that govern those spheres of reality.
Ms. Maynard’s view of the universe essentially denies there being anything of any consequence other than what we can perceive with our senses in real time. If that is not true, then actions that depend on that premise in order to “work” will not, in some form or another.
If there is something to a human more than the physical, a mind that understands the concepts of truth and falsehood, compassion and meanness, beauty and ugliness, how will that entity change over time, when time is measured in thousands and thousands of years, or even eternity? In The Weight of Glory, C.S. Lewis makes the claim that a human soul has a trajectory, either to become something more and more glorious as to be too beautiful to be human as we understand it, or something increasingly hideous, “something one only hints at in nightmares”*, that doesn’t look anything like a human at all.
As I see it, those are the two fundamental options with many sub-options. One view relies upon the idea that mankind can make our own destiny, our own history (as in “we are on the side of history”), and that it will be wonderful once we reach it; and the other seeks to live up to what we were meant to be (in our best moments).
What has experience taught us about the relative merits of those ideas?
*Not a direct quote, but close enough in meaning to give it quotation marks.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/3/2014 @ 5:31 amCNN reported that Maynard had died. No, she killed herself.
Denver Todd (fe903f) — 11/3/2014 @ 5:33 amTo Tanny- My father is quite limited due to a number of strokes over his lifetime, and my mother has her own physical issues as well. One of the “angels” in their lives is a fellow with Parkinson’s, who manages to be a great blessing to many in spite of the lack of cooperation of his neuromuscular system. By God’s grace he somehow gets his muscles to ignore the various tremors and spasms to cooperate in driving a car and being a “fix-it man”.
Out of curiosity, can I ask what field of study you focus in.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/3/2014 @ 5:43 amTo the commenters arguing that making euthanasia legal wlll inevitably result in coercion, will you then agree that sometimes government regulation can actually increase freedom?
Johnny scrum-half (4e8509) — 11/3/2014 @ 6:29 amare we developing a Universal Theory?
happyfeet (618bc5) — 11/3/2014 @ 6:40 amMy universal theory is I want to get a manicure today
happyfeet (618bc5) — 11/3/2014 @ 6:40 amI gave myself one yesterday? What are you doing for dinner tonight?
nk (dbc370) — 11/3/2014 @ 6:50 amI’m a computer programmer. I’ve used 29 different computer languages in my career, 2 which I invented. I hold prior art on patents that Motorola, Microsoft, and Apple own. I graduated a year early from high school (they would not let me graduate 2 years early). Looking back, I wasn’t mature enough when I did graduate. I went to the Academy of Automoble Design for a year. I became a Christian December 18, 1974. Went to Bible college for a year and a half. Loved biblical Greek (it was like math to me). Let myself be talked out of finishing Bible college because of a toxic belief of what the Bible says about obeying parents (my abusive ex-wife’s). I deal with insecurity every day.
My hobby is my vintage sports car which I drive every day. It’s me rebelling against all the automation I’ve caused.
Tanny O'Haley (066e8f) — 11/3/2014 @ 7:16 amHi Mr nk I’m pretty slammed til next week but for sure let’s put something on schedule…maybe next Wednesday? I’ll let u know what time I get home from work once I get the routine down
happyfeet (618bc5) — 11/3/2014 @ 7:24 amI always end up bleeding when I try to do nail stuff
happyfeet (618bc5) — 11/3/2014 @ 7:25 amWhenever you can, like I said we’re practically neighbors.
nk (dbc370) — 11/3/2014 @ 7:32 amRest in peace, Brittany. So young, so beautiful and so happy–it just seems so unfair and capricious. Like life is, as we all know too well, the longer we travel through it.
I will comment on the politics of her act only because she intended us to talk about it. Her publicizing seems awkward, or insufficiently solemn, to me. I read it as a sort of desperate existential anxiety that she chose to make this a mostly political or medical problem. I don’t know how she felt about a higher power or authority, but this medicalizing, as MD puts it, or politicizing, like a Kaci Hickox might, seems like a huge denial of the full dimension of the spirit. I hope and pray she achieved as much peace and resolution as humanly possible and that her loved ones do too.
Patricia (5fc097) — 11/3/2014 @ 7:32 amTanny O’Haley,
God bless you for your faith, strength and courage.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 11/3/2014 @ 7:36 amDRJ,
Thank you so very much. I don’t feel strong or courageous. I feel weak and fearful. It’s good to know that courage is not the absence of fear, but a willingness to move forward, despite fear. I’m humbled by your encouragement. I’ve survived physical abuse, racism, fear, and cancer. I know God has something for me, and you too.
Be blessed and have hope.
Tanny O'Haley (066e8f) — 11/3/2014 @ 8:07 amMy uncle left us in a similar manner ten years ago. He had cancer, fought it into remission, was declared cancer-free at the five year point, then it came back with a vengeance. When he was at the point where the needed pain medications didn’t allow him to think, he did himself in. The sole difference was that he was a doctor, so prescribed his own lethal dose.
Another tacit method of doctor-assisted suicide in terminal cancer cases is using steroids. The doctor would prescribe high levels of prednisone, giving the patient strength and making them feel better. When that was no longer working and the patient went to the hospital/hospice, they would end the prescription. The patient would quickly go downhill, dying within the week.
tweell (3d09de) — 11/3/2014 @ 8:55 amTanny, thanks for the info.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/3/2014 @ 11:55 amOne of the Psalms is a prayer that one would have enough money/wealth so that they would not be tempted to steal, and not too much that they forget their need of God.
I think security is a little like that, enough to have the freedom to move ahead, but not so much as to think “I can handle this one on my own, God”.
But it sounds like maybe a little more for you would be a good thing, and I have and will pray for you along those lines.
tweell-
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/3/2014 @ 11:59 amSome may think it is making a fine point without distinction, but I would consider looking at the steroid issue a little differently. “Stress dose” steroids is a treatment, in fact with a brain tumor it would be very appropriate treatment. When a treatment is no longer working there may be no reason to continue it.
The intent is to promote life and vigor as is reasonably possible. When that is no longer reasonably possible there should be no problem with letting nature take its course.
This point confused me:
She seems to have a very narrow conception of suicide. I guess it only counts as suicide if the person is depressed, or wants to die in some sense. But the term “suicide” refers to the action, not to the motives behind it. And when people object to suicide, they are objecting to the act irrespective of the motives. If the act is wrong, then the motives behind it do not redeem it, the motives are irrelevant. Perhaps that’s wrong, perhaps some of the motives do redeem the act, but that understanding is why people consider euthanasia a form of suicide. Killing yourself because you have a terminal illness that you don’t want to have to go through is still killing yourself. I don’t mean to belittle what she went through or what she would have gone through had she chosen to live through it. I’m just saying it still qualifies as suicide.
Jim S. (cc05c9) — 11/3/2014 @ 12:01 pmJohnny scrum-half (4e8509) — 11/3/2014 @ 6:29 am
I can’t remember the last time someone advocating for no government at this site.
Some government is absolutely necessary, for if one has no property rights and no freedom from violence then there would not be much freedom at all.
To make a trivial analogy, mashed potatoes without salt is a little boring, but too much salt will also spoil them.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/3/2014 @ 12:03 pmShe and the sick Hemlock Society brought everyone into her “personal situation.” I’ve said my piece on Hot Air and won’t go into it again.
njrob (dc97a6) — 11/3/2014 @ 12:05 pmThat’s because no regular commentator has ever stated that seriously. Johnnny has its caricature of conservatives and the narrative™ must match that narrative™. It always a binary with these @$$h@t$.
hadoop (f7d5ba) — 11/3/2014 @ 12:08 pmJim S. (cc05c9) — 11/3/2014 @ 12:01 pm
I think at times a person is interested in an even-handed dialogue trying to reach an understanding of something, at other times we are trying to win an argument over some point. I do not know how much of that statement was a reflection of her best understanding of competing concepts, or a fully-conscious attempt to sway opinion through her use of words.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/3/2014 @ 12:09 pmDRJ (a83b8b) — 11/2/2014 @ 9:46 pm
Two trends collide:
http://www.aleteia.org/en/world/article/belgium-restores-the-death-penaltyon-demand-5876121732120576
Belguim has now agreed that a convicted murderer can also commit suicide.
Apparently with the same drugs that are too cruel to use for the death penalty.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 11/3/2014 @ 12:14 pmMD and Tanny– appreciate your comments and your confidence and faith in Father God. Thanks much!
Karen Ferris (ffdc7a) — 11/3/2014 @ 12:49 pmMD in Philly @12:03 – Thanks for your reply. My point isn’t (contrary to hadoop’s comment) to erect a straw-man that conservatives or libertarians advocate “no government.” Rather, I’m trying to get some acknowledgment that the issues are more complex than many (on both sides, but in my experience more commonly on the conservative/libertarian side) want to admit.
So, if you agree that some level of government regulation is essential, why is it that people who think that some larger level of regulation often are caricatured as “socialist” and the like? The point is that these are disagreements between people who can reasonably disagree, and the rhetorical bomb-throwing is unhelpful at best, and often in bad faith, in my opinion.
Jonny Scrum-half (843655) — 11/3/2014 @ 12:51 pmMy point isn’t (contrary to hadoop’s comment) to erect a straw-man that conservatives or libertarians advocate “no government.”
Well, it certainly appeared that way to me, too, and I replied only because it seemed easy enough to dismiss.
President Obama has called for the redistribution of wealth and has continued to foment class-warfare, and the Dems have gone along with it. Socialism by any other name is still socialism.
I am still waiting for the website that President Obama promised that would show where all of the stimulus money went. When he can keep that one relatively simple promise, then I’ll be willing to discuss another thing or two.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/3/2014 @ 2:29 pmI’m still waiting for the website that shows us the text of bills he promised.
Tanny O'Haley (feadb2) — 11/3/2014 @ 2:47 pmSince it was precisely all the new regulation surrounding the legalization of euthanasia, and entire new bureaucracies to ostensibly monitor adherence to all the new regulations, that led to the coercion then how do you arrive at the conclusion that government regulation increases freedom?
The nice, simple old law against murder prevented people from being coerced into ending their lives. As well as preventing doctors from being coerced into ending people’s lives, because upon legalizing the “right to die” Dutch doctors who refused to participate in what they saw as murder were accused of violating their patients’ rights.
I do; I’m a big supporter of having laws against murder. And enforcing them.
In the case of euthanasia, because it subordinated the very life of certain individuals to the “greater good.” A sterile cost benefit analysis determines the amount of care the bureaucracy is willing to ration to some people.
Dutch general practitioners have reported that when they tried to get elderly patients admitted to the hospital they were advised to recommend euthanasia instead. Hospital beds don’t grow on trees. Why waste them on the elderly? It’s not cost effective.
*My bad. Assisted suicide is legal now in the Netherlands, along with euthanasia. Between approx. 1974 and 2001 only euthanasia was tacitly permitted, even though it remained against the letter of the law.
Steve57 (c1c90e) — 11/3/2014 @ 5:58 pmSteve, didn’t you hear? The new style term from the government mouthpiece news outlets is “Aid in Dying” https://www.bing.com/search?setmkt=en-US&q=aid-in-dying
The old “assisted suicide” being too accurate, connotes judgement, guilt, culpability, and violated oaths (for doctors), in what is supposed to be a blissful extinguishing of grandma, removing the burden to her children, caused by her living so long.
I think the Progs use to be accusing Paul Ryan of something very similar a couple of elections back.
Here it is – Grandma off the cliff.
Someone should appropriate that admittedly BS commercial, and rework it (sadly not very much at all) to use against the push for state sanctioned murder that is coming, due to Maynard sick and disgusting need for the spotlight before she cut her own throat.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 11/3/2014 @ 8:15 pm