Thread: Opinions on Euthanasia?

I agree, it should be a legal option. I forget what the document is called, but the one that a person puts his intention as far as whether or not to try to keep him alive... this document should be first in presedence, then the next of kins decision, then if there is no next of kin and no document, it should default to keeping him alive. I wish I could say that the hospital board of doctors would make the third choice, but unfortunately since insurance companies and bean counters took over everything, they'd probably pull the plug on someone who could be saved to save the cash. :-/

I stated in a thread that i believe it should be an option on the state ballots. I would not want the federal government involved, nor would i like to see them in a debate over the issue. This like gay marriage is a states rights issue.

Originally Posted by michaelr

I stated in a thread that i believe it should be an option on the state ballots. I would not want the federal government involved, nor would i like to see them in a debate over the issue. This like gay marriage is a states rights issue.

I'm not convinced about that. What advantage do we have as citizens, for states to decide this individually? I think something so important as end of life rights should be guaranteed for all citizens across the union.

Originally Posted by gabebrooks

I'm not convinced about that. What advantage do we have as citizens, for states to decide this individually? I think something so important as end of life rights should be guaranteed for all citizens across the union.

When it becomes a state issue a vote is necessary. Thats the way I would like to see it, and think this is the proper option. Think of it like Prop 19, or gay rights. It is when it becomes a federal issue that you lose your voice.

Its hard to get it right, because its so personal to every person, and to a lesser degree their families. I believe that whatever happens, should be across the states though. What Djin said would be a big reason for it.

Originally Posted by Djinn

Well it would allow for some seriously fucked-up situations, like the son of a terminal parent bringing the parent across state lines, against the wishes of the son's sibling.

Your scenario would not be rare at all. Huh....I guess the parent could relocate temporarily.

The problem is, the federal government has no mandate for this, and they should not have. It is like the death penalty, we do not want the federal government dictating who or who is not eligible, it is an issue for the state. Besides if the federal government would be allowed to dictate the terms of euthanasia, then we could evolve this into areas where we do not want to be. Trying to stay clear of death panels here, not saying they exist, but I want to keep it that way, and with the federal takeover of health care, that had better be a concern.