New 'Mercy Killing' Rules Netherlands?

[peapod]

This may sound strange, but there is something spiritual in suffering to me. I think it connects you to your humaness, without it something might be lacking.

Its difficult to explain, as comos mentioned, we both knew a dying boy who had cancer, although most people don't have to see this first hand, thank goodness, along with the sadness is also great inspiration. To watch a young child deal with cancer and still try and live out his childhood is a privilage to observe. It shows you what is important in life with all the clutter removed.

One of the things about suffering that is so amazing to me is when someone transcends it. They are on a different plane than the rest of us. So I do believe that suffering does have a place and a purpose.

"Born in Tuscumbia, Alabama, in 1880, Helen Keller at the age of 19
months contracted a fever that left her blind and deaf. When she was
almost seven years old, her parents engaged Anne Mansfield Sullivan to
be her tutor. With dedication, patience, courage and love, Miss
Sullivan was able to bring out and help develop the child's enormous
intelligence. Helen Keller quickly learned to read and write. By the
age of 10 she began to speak. At the age of 20 she entered Radcliffe
College, with Miss Sullivan at her side to spell textbooks - letter by
letter -- into her hand. Four years later Radcliffe awarded Helen
Keller a B.A. degree magna cum laude

'I seldom think about my limitations, and they
never make me sad,' she once remarked

'I have been asked to say a little about myself, what I have achieved,
and what obstacles I have had to overcome' Hawking said. 'I think my
greatest achievement is being alive today.'

 

[Rick van Opbergen]

Oh I know Helen Keller, I once saw a documentary about her and posted her story on another forum. The verb "to give up" was not in her dictionary!

 

[Giraldi_Theirrey]

RE: New 'Mercy Killing' R

Awww.... you guys have mercy killing??? Here in Canada, they excercise NO MERCY KILLING!!! Canadian style. Suspects are tortured killed without trial. that is why canada has such a low crime rate adding to the fact that nobody dares to criticise canada anymore.

 

[Rick van Opbergen]

Ehm OK ... are you high? Just wondering.

 

[Cosmo]

Interesting perspective, Peapod. I hadn't viewed it that way, but you are certainly correct. It was a privilege to be part of that child's struggle. Your characterization of it as "it shows you what is important in life with all the clutter removed" is exactly on target. What was important was survival and relationships. It was pared down to bare bones. But I did agree with the mother's final decision not to give him treatment the last time. That, in itself, was a form of euthanasia and an act of kind unselfishness. Like the Rev wrote, making the child suffer would have been the ultimate act of selfishness.

Suffering can be a valid spiritual practice. I used to scoff at Native practices, wondering why someone would put their bodies through such agony in the name of spirituality. That is, until I experienced some of it for myself and discovered that once we reach the end of our physical abilities and the depletion of self will, the only source one has left to turn to for strength is faith. Perhaps before death we are put through such suffering for a similar reason. But that applies to people who can make the choice.

This topic is about those unable to make these rational decisions. Without the framework of educated choice, suffering seems pointless. To prolong it for the sake of the ones who claim to love the sufferer is the ultimate in selfishness. When the lack of quality of life exceeds life, it's time to cash in the chips. In my opinion.

I hold a guardian who is strong and brave enough to make that kind of choice in high esteem. It is not easy.

It's impossible to regulate this kind of issue. It doesn't lend itself to black and white laws or to politics. Euthanasia is very much a grey area and, as such, open to all kinds of abuse. It would take the wisdom of Solomon to set the rules because every situation is unique. Our society is just not equipped to create laws for this kind of thing. When it comes to law, our thinking is too linear to allow for something as nebulous as euthanasia.

This one mystifies me. I'm not a fan of legislation and am a big supporter of personal freedom, but with the vulnerability to abuse, euthanasia cannot be left up to just anyone. Lotta words to say, "I just don't know"

 

[Rick van Opbergen]

It's impossible to regulate this kind of issue. It doesn't lend itself to black and white laws or to politics. Euthanasia is very much a grey area and, as such, open to all kinds of abuse.

I couldn't agree with you more.

 

[waleed]

Thanks for your post Cosmo, that was a really good post in my opinion. Euthanasia is always a difficult subject to talk about. It's still controversial here in the Netherlands, although certain forms have been legalized. I think there are a lot of examples in which euthanasia has proved to be "the right thing", by the wish of the patients and the family. There have also been examples in which the patient wanted to die but the family opposed that - a difficult situation. The main question therefore seems to be: are the advantages greater than the disadvantages?

 

[waleed]

Thanks for your post Cosmo, that was a really good post in my opinion. Euthanasia is always a difficult subject to talk about. It's still controversial here in the Netherlands, although certain forms have been legalized. I think there are a lot of examples in which euthanasia has proved to be "the right thing", by the wish of the patients and the family. There have also been examples in which the patient wanted to die but the family opposed that - a difficult situation. The main question therefore seems to be: are the advantages greater than the disadvantages?

 

[waleed]

Thanks for your post Cosmo, that was a really good post in my opinion. Euthanasia is always a difficult subject to talk about. It's still controversial here in the Netherlands, although certain forms have been legalized. I think there are a lot of examples in which euthanasia has proved to be "the right thing", by the wish of the patients and the family. There have also been examples in which the patient wanted to die but the family opposed that - a difficult situation. The main question therefore seems to be: are the advantages greater than the disadvantages?

 

[waleed]

people who love with other, then don't kill them

 

[waleed]

people who love with other, then don't kill them

 

[waleed]

people who love with other, then don't kill them