Brittany Maynard

[Mrs Mungo]

It seems that Belgium has the most relaxed laws.  

http://rt.com/news/191280-assisted-suicide-belgium-couple/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/belgium-euthanasia/

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/27/opinion/opinion-anti-euthanasia-kevin-fitzpatrick/

 

I'm sorry, but I don't see where any of those links support the assertion that you initially made. Could you be more specific?

 

This was your claim:

 

In Europe, elderly people are being given this medicine even when not suffering from a terminal diagnosis.  That's disturbing that we can't even take care of our elderly and that they feel like they need to kill themselves when they become a burden and are no longer useful to society.

 

 

 

She wasn't brave. She wasn't cowardly. She just dealt with what she was given in her own way.

 

I'm sad for her family left behind. She was in a no-win situation.

 

As a Christian, I would not have chosen as she did, but I do not fault her choice.

I think she was brave to open herself up and talk about it publicly.

 

I've know more than one Christian who has killed themselves. Being a Christian doesn't eliminate the possibility of suicide or euthanasia for everyone.

 

Speaking to the topic at large, not to any one person:

 

The one thing I struggle with is that I feel that seeing someone wither away helps family members to let go. It makes you believe that there's nothing more to be done. That you have to give up hope of them getting better in this life. It makes you believe that medicine has done what it could, and that there is not going to be a cure to come along and save your loved one. I think I would mentally have a harder time coming to grips with losing someone who was still relatively healthy. I'm not saying that it's a good reason for those suffering to be forced to stick it out until the devastating, bitter end. I'm just thinking out loud about why I struggle with the issue. It seems like it should be an easy call to not force people to suffer so much, but it feels much more difficult than that when I try to think it through.

[marbel]

 

<snip>

 

The one thing I struggle with is that I feel that seeing someone wither away helps family members to let go. It makes you believe that there's nothing more to be done. That you have to give up hope of them getting better in this life. It makes you believe that medicine has done what it could, and that there is not going to be a cure to come along and save your loved one. I think I would mentally have a harder time coming to grips with losing someone who was still relatively healthy. I'm not saying that it's a good reason for those suffering to be forced to stick it out until the devastating, bitter end. I'm just thinking out loud about why I struggle with the issue. It seems like it should be an easy call to not force people to suffer so much, but it feels much more difficult than that when I try to think it through.

 

I think I know what you mean.   If a person appears healthy, it may seem as if there is still hope.  Perhaps some of the criticism comes from this.  People who followed the story casually, via headlines, saw pictures of her traveling, apparently enjoying life.  People could easily look at her and say "why is she doing this?  Here she is at the Grand Canyon, she's doing well enough to travel, so why do this now?" 

 

I am not saying that she should have waited longer.  I am not saying she should have done things to make it easier for the public who do not know the whole story.  I'm just riffing off Mrs. Mungo and musing about peoples' reactions (whether they are right or wrong, informed or uninformed).  That may be a problem with making something like this so public - the public still doesn't always get the full picture.

[Mrs Mungo]

I think I know what you mean.   If a person appears healthy, it may seem as if there is still hope.  Perhaps some of the criticism comes from this.  People who followed the story casually, via headlines, saw pictures of her traveling, apparently enjoying life.  People could easily look at her and say "why is she doing this?  Here she is at the Grand Canyon, she's doing well enough to travel, so why do this now?" 

 

I am not saying that she should have waited longer.  I am not saying she should have done things to make it easier for the public who do not know the whole story.  I'm just riffing off Mrs. Mungo and musing about peoples' reactions (whether they are right or wrong, informed or uninformed).  That may be a problem with making something like this so public - the public still doesn't always get the full picture.

Right, I agree. I was thinking more of family and loved ones being able to let go, but it does of course apply even more to the general public.

[Liz CA]

I have spent the last months with a dear aunt and those were the most precious moments. She shared so many memories and reflected on her life. She was much older and there was not that desperate feeling of life being cut short (in our human view, at least). She also was not suffering in the sense of the word until the last week of her life.

As someone who does not want to feel pain any more than the next person, I do understand Maynard's reasoning. As a believer I do not decide when my life ends. However, those who do not have those considerations want to cut short the time of suffering and pain - understandably so - but it is so often in those moments that we grow most profoundly.

[Ausmumof3]

I believe she had brain cancer which can significantly change a persons personality in the final stages. I wouldn't take the choice she did for religious reasons but totally understand it. Physical pain can be endured but the thought of becoming someone different to the people I lived would be very very hard. I think if she spared her family from that she made a brave choice.

[VeteranMom]

VeteranMom, on 04 Nov 2014 - 08:38 AM, said:

It seems that Belgium has the most relaxed laws.  
http://rt.com/news/1...belgium-couple/
http://www.huffingto...ium-euthanasia/
http://www.cnn.com/2...in-fitzpatrick/

 
I'm sorry, but I don't see where any of those links support the assertion that you initially made. Could you be more specific?

 

I shouldn't have said "we", since it's not in the U.S..  The older couple in Belgium decided to take the medication due to not wanting to be a burden to their families.   Neither had a terminal diagnosis.  That's the slippery slope to me- getting to the point where people don't want to be a burden when their health declines, so they decide to end their lives.  I am more accepting of the death with dignity laws for terminal patients, but some of what is going on in Belgium is not as clear cut.       

[Mrs Mungo]

That's still different than people having it forced upon them or feeling that it was forced upon them, don't you think? I think your other post implied more force or pressure. 

[VeteranMom]

That's still different than people having it forced upon them or feeling that it was forced upon them, don't you think? I think your other post implied more force or pressure. 

In this thread, others wanted me to support my statement that this is happening in Europe (not in all of Europe, but in Belgium) and I was able to provide that information from multiple sources.  I was only providing the information others asked for. People (in Belgium) are given the medication without the diagnosis of a terminal illness.      

[Mrs Mungo]

People were asking for support of your implication that older people were being pressured to commit suicide so as not to burden the younger members of the family because "we can't take care of our elderly." So far, you haven't provided any info that supports that implication.

 

Being without a formal terminal diagnosis of cancer or something doesn't mean there isn't dementia or other issues at play with those decisions being made. Losing her mental capacities is a large part of the reason the young woman referenced in the OP made the decision that she did. Older people can't have similar reasons?

[VeteranMom]

People were asking for support of your implication that older people were being pressured to commit suicide so as not to burden the younger members of the family because "we can't take care of our elderly." So far, you haven't provided any info that supports that implication.

 

Being without a formal terminal diagnosis of cancer or something doesn't mean there isn't dementia or other issues at play with those decisions being made. Losing her mental capacities is a large part of the reason the young woman referenced in the OP made the decision that she did. Older people can't have similar reasons?

Did you read the article about the elderly couple who didn't want to be a burden to their children?  That was one of the articles.  

ETA link:

http://rt.com/news/191280-assisted-suicide-belgium-couple/

[Momof3littles]

I have watched two loved ones die of cancer and frankly there are issues if its as bad as you are implying.  We have lots and lots of palliative care available to us.  We need to make use of it and make people aware of what we can do medically to ease the transition to death.  I don't know that I am comfortable with assisted suicide.  I certainly am comfortable with palliative care in place of drastic life saving measures.

 

I am comfortable with palliative care and hospice, and if necessary would want those options for my own care (if appropriate).  I've worked in healthcare, have taken courses in oncology (for phys. therapists) taught by a team of oncologist and his chaplain wife who spent most of her career working in hospice. 

 

My cousin had feces coming from her nose and mouth at the end.

 

Things like that can and do happen.  I am very aware of how well hospice and palliative care can manage many situations, but that's not always the case.

[Mrs Mungo]

Did you read the article about the elderly couple who didn't want to be a burden to their children?  That was one of the articles.  

ETA link:

http://rt.com/news/191280-assisted-suicide-belgium-couple/

 

An octogenarian Belgian couple has chosen to end their lives through assisted suicide rather than risk the chance of dying alone. Their children have reportedly backed their decision.

 

Francis, 89, and Anne, 86, neither of whom are terminally ill, have received the full support of their three adult children, who say they would be unable to care for either parent if they were to be widowed.

 

While neither one of them is terminally ill, both have suffered from various ailments, many age-related. Francis has received treatment for prostate cancer for the past two decades and is dependent on morphine. Ann, meanwhile, is partially blind and totally deaf.

Quality of life and fear of loneliness seem to be the greatest contributors to their decision. This doesn't look like a case of old people being pressured into euthanasia because "we can't take care of our elderly." That was your claim.