this post was submitted on 16 Apr 2024
595 points (99.2% liked)

News

23014 readers
19 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

On a brisk day at a restaurant outside Chicago, Deb Robertson sat with her teenage grandson to talk about her death.

She’ll probably miss his high school graduation. She declined the extended warranty on her car. Sometimes she wonders who will be at her funeral.

Those things don’t frighten her much. The 65-year-old didn’t cry when she learned two months ago that the cancerous tumors in her liver were spreading, portending a tormented death.

But later, she received a call. A bill moving through the Illinois Legislature to allow certain terminally ill patients to end their own lives with a doctor’s help had made progress.

Then she cried.

“Medical-aid in dying is not me choosing to die,” she says she told her 17-year-old grandson. “I am going to die. But it is my way of having a little bit more control over what it looks like in the end.

That same conversation is happening beside hospital beds and around dinner tables across the country, as Americans who are nearing life’s end negotiate the terms with themselves, their families and, now, state lawmakers.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 79 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

The flip side of our ability to prolong life more and more successfully is that we equip ourselves to extend suffering more and more unbearably.

Puritanical attitudes around the right to die will impact a vast majority of people in terrible ways that will largely get ignored as on the other end of it the victims have no voice and often the family is mourning and wants to move on or just doesn't even fully realize how terrible that end was.

But the doctors and medical staff...

The people I know well in those roles get upset when healthy patients take a turn for the worse and die when they had so much life before that. But by far the most upset I see them is when a family member of a patient decides because of beliefs to choose life prolonging options that are the equivalent of extended torture.

As our medical capabilities improve we really need to continually rethink just what it means to "do no harm."

[–] [email protected] 38 points 6 months ago

My grandpa passed a year ago now, COPD. Likely honestly a heart attack after all the steroid meds for his lungs created heart problems including a heart aneurysm. When he was diagnosed way back in 2006 they told us he had 5 years if he was lucky, I didn't think he'd see me graduate HS. Well he had a lot more than 5 years in him but after about 2014 it was all shit. He started telling my grandma that he was ready to die, wanted to die, in 2018, he begged for it on hard nights. He tried to kill himself in 2021 and 2022. Both attempts left him strapped to a hospital bed "for his safety" as he struggled to breathe, he hadn't been able to reliably breathe laying on his back for several years by then but they didn't care as long as he lived.

I never felt anything but sympathy for him after those attempts. As someone with chronic lifelong asthma, I know how my end will go. I know what it's like to suffocate and struggle to breathe and in case anyone wonders, it fucking sucks. It's terrifying, it's slow, and you know it's coming. Panic is inevitable. He felt like that for nearly 10 fucking years. He told me once after it had gotten bad that he'd always felt so bad for me as a kid to have asthma but now he finally understood, he said I was so brave to have dealt with it for so long but in that moment I didn't feel brave I felt lucky. When I use my inhaler I can breathe again, for him it just made him struggle less. For a long time I wished he would die, my absolute favorite person on the planet, and I wanted them dead. It destroyed me mentally for years. When he finally did die it was horribly sad and also such a massive relief for everyone to know that at least he wasn't suffering anymore.

I say all this, partially to get it off my chest but mostly to say, if we are going to prolong life we need to also give people the option to check out. Life isn't life without quality of health, it's just suffering. Prolonging suffering makes use torturers, it's not a saving grace. If we have the capacity to do this for our pets then people deserve the same mercy.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Ideas and times progress, maybe it’s time to change that oath to something along the lines of “do the least harm”.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Best thing to ask your doctor is what they would do in the same situation. They usually give you the bestg medical advice answer but their personal answer can be very different with what they have seen. Although some won't answer that question which is in itself a kind of answer.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 months ago (3 children)

My mom was an RN and spent time doing basically everything. She said her time in oncology, geriatrics, and hospice made her never want to treat cancer or undergo prolonging, because the chance of it extending the quality life was slim and quantity isn’t worth it when it’s miserable.

She died of cervical cancer when I was 23 (it was stage 3 by the time she went in for dx, so she knew something was wrong and chose not to do anything about it) and the only treatment she got was oxycodone and having me get weed for her for the intense nausea that comes from smoking cigarettes on oxycodone. She was in hospice though.

I, similarly, probably won’t undergo treatment if I am similarly afflicted, unless our treatments evolve from a toxic cocktail to something with more chance of working and fewer horrible side effects.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 56 points 6 months ago (38 children)

We need a federal constitutional amendment of bodily autonomy. Abortions, tattoos, personal drug use, gender reassignment, plastic surgery, suicide, neuralink, etc. All the same issue: My body, fuck off. You can make it more complicated than that but it’s not.

It doesn’t matter whether you agree with face tattoos or not. Nobody is making you get one. It’s not your concern. An artist can choose not to give face tattoos, as a doctor can choose whether they want to give a vasectomy to a young child-free man. But the government should have no say about what a person is allowed to do or have done to their own body. The government can regulate to make it safer, but not disallow.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago

Absolutely.

load more comments (37 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 6 months ago (3 children)

It must be tough to get to the end of your life and see nothing but people looking to profit off your passing.

Put me in a coffee can and blow it up or something.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 months ago (3 children)

I always said: "just put me out with the trash".

The cost of anything death related is so immensly high, even the cheap options are too much imo.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Budget Cremation: they toss the body in a dumpster and set it on fire.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Hey, it's how 99.9% of the rest of life went! Lol

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago

Humans are supposedly 60% water but for me, at least half of that has been replaced with coffee by now.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago (5 children)

The woman in the article is 65 Years Old. She is old enough to remember some of the third places that were free to exist in.

Which probably makes it worse...

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

For the last 10 years I have been saying this should be legal. As long as you are determined to be of sound mind and not influenced by anyone, then let them make the decision. You will have many arguments against it (religion, could be cured unexpectedly) but it's the patient's decision.

The only argument would be if doctors and nurses should assist. This is a huge argument against state sponsored executions. Maybe a device that can safely and painlessly assist the patient could be a resolution.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago (3 children)

So what you are saying is that we need some of those suicide booths that they had in Futarama.

You bring up a good point that it would be hard to find many doctors or medical professionals willing to focus their careers on euthanasia, as it goes against their oaths.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I'm in agreement. My concern is that this gives people in control the ability to feign choice. "They wanted this route" when in reality, it was murder.

Just need some decent protections in place for things like these.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago

I agree, it needs to be a very strict and regulated process. No power of attorney or anything like that. The person needs to undergo a psychiatric evaluation by two or three psychiatrist that specializes in suicidal thoughts or self harm. It needs to be a somewhat long process. But, I don't want it to be a multi year process either.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

In Canada, 2 doctors have to agree that the patient is of sound mind, wants Medical Assistance in Dying, and their condition meets the minimum legal threshold. I think that system has been working fairly well.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 6 months ago (6 children)

Death with dignity should be allowed and viewed with reverence.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I work as an EEG tech. I see some really awful cases where there's no hope for a meaningful recovery. Lawmakers should be required to do a month of hospice/palliative care rounds before signing any legislation on right to die. There is so much misinformation and misunderstanding surrounding what that care entails. The patients I see often don't have the ability to make that choice and are left up on life preserving care for days to months at a time without any chance at meaningful recovery.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 6 months ago

Forcing lawmakers to research a topic before deciding on it? This is America dammit! We don't even make them READ the bills before deciding on them!

[–] [email protected] 16 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It should also be noted that these decisions primarily affect people who are too poor to afford to travel with their loved ones to places that currently allow assisted suicide. If you're wealthy you are able to die how you want.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 6 months ago (1 children)

All the jabronis in this thread with "being able to decide when you die is BAD actually" have clearly never had a loved one painfully and slowly waste away in a shitty hospital bed praying for death every day.

People should have the right to decide when they decide to end the game of life. They should be able to make this decision with a qualified medical professional, preferably one who specializes in end of life care.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I remember when this was a ballot initiative in CO.

I voted for it, but it was shocking to see just how much negativity there was surrounding it.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 months ago (1 children)

But what about the pharmaceutical company shareholders? Don't they get any say in how long we need their products? Yes one person might be in terrible pain for years, but at least twelve people will make a lot of money.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Making suicide profitable surely won't have any kind of twisted dystopian effects on companies...

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 months ago (4 children)

I shouldn’t need a reason.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 months ago (1 children)

This is not so much about giving you a reason than giving a doctor the legal option to assist you.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I'd support it for any nation with free healthcare. But people are now going to be choosing between being with their families and not bankrupting them. I would not doubt it would be used to justify insurance companies not covering terminally ill patients because they only cover death for the terminaly ill.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago

Yeah, as great of an idea it is, it’s terrifying to envision this through the lense of American capitalists.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago

I think Kovorkian has the right idea, honestly.

load more comments
view more: next ›