DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**praboobolbode** · 08-02-2009, 01:41 AM

I vote "Yes".

Obviously the system is open to some potential for abuse. (Fraudulent doctors' claims to euthanize people against their will, etc.) But then again organ donations are open to the same danger, but we allow that to happen because of the benefits outweighing the harm.

I think this is similar. You'd need checks and balances in the system to make sure the person's wish to die is: A) genuine and rational, and B) justified - i.e. the disability is likely to be lifelong and to create a substantial impairment of their ability to appreciate the rest of their life. But assuming that the court could objectively decide this, I think it's merciful to allow a person to choose to die assisted. Not everybody has the strength to pull the trigger themselves, metaphorically speaking.

But there needs to be careful oversight and regulation of this, otherwise we'd be better off without it.

08-02-2009, 01:41 AM	#3
praboobolbode Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 437 Senior Member	I vote "Yes". Obviously the system is open to some potential for abuse. (Fraudulent doctors' claims to euthanize people against their will, etc.) But then again organ donations are open to the same danger, but we allow that to happen because of the benefits outweighing the harm. I think this is similar. You'd need checks and balances in the system to make sure the person's wish to die is: A) genuine and rational, and B) justified - i.e. the disability is likely to be lifelong and to create a substantial impairment of their ability to appreciate the rest of their life. But assuming that the court could objectively decide this, I think it's merciful to allow a person to choose to die assisted. Not everybody has the strength to pull the trigger themselves, metaphorically speaking. But there needs to be careful oversight and regulation of this, otherwise we'd be better off without it.
	Quote