Anonymous wrote:Go to a gun show and by a 38 revolver and ammo, you won't need any assistance

Had one family member do that. Traumatized one of the daughters so much that she spiraled out. Guess what she did about five years later. yup.

Blowing your brains out is not a death with dignity.

Go to a gun show and by a 38 revolver and ammo, you won't need any assistance

Pls excuse my typos, esp mispelling Lou Gehrig's disease. I was watching the debate, drinking and reading DCUMs, all after my bedtime.

Anonymous wrote:How about this scenario - patent has living will requesting assisted suicide., when i cease have any possibly of a meaningful existence. Patient admitted to Hospice with ~6 mos. to live, but is totally unable to communicate a cogent thought? Can caregiver proceed to carry out patients wishes?

Yes, if that's what they want. Personally I'd put a pain clause in there. That's what I want to avoid.

How about this scenario - patent has living will requesting assisted suicide., when i cease have any possibly of a meaningful existence. Patient admitted to Hospice with ~6 mos. to live, but is totally unable to communicate a cogent thought? Can caregiver proceed to carry out patients wishes?

Anonymous wrote:I'm for it. Nobody should be forced to stay alive. That's the ultimate denial of liberty.

+1. 40 something, pretty liberal Dem. I think Oregon got it right.

I heard this on NPR a few days ago. Interesting stats coming out of Oregon where they have had assisted suicide for years.
http://onpoint.wbur.org/2012/10/18/death-on-demand

Some points brought up that have stayed wtih me:

1. everyone must qualify for hospice care to get the prescription (meaning they have less than 6 months to live)
2. a lot of people fill the prescription but never use it. It gives them a sense of power and control, courage to face each day that may bring more suffering than the day before.
3. about 80% of those who use it have cancer. And about 20% have Lou Gerig's disease, which is a high percentage of those who have Lou Gerig'sd disease. This is a testimony of how awful that diease is.
4. the fear that the poor would commit suicide because they don't have funds to fight their illnesses have proven to be not true.
5. the elderly haven't stormed Oregan's borders in order to get the prescription. It's truly been just terminally ill residents of Oregon.

My DH and I have both lost parents to cancer. Both parents truly suffered in the final weeks, though hospice care was there to help. It was a relief when death came because it was grueling. I think if the suffering of those last days had gone on weeks, we would have been open to discussing options. I'm so glad we didn't have to think about that.

Anonymous wrote:I'm for it. Nobody should be forced to stay alive. That's the ultimate denial of liberty.

+1

After taking care of my mom during a very long slow decline and watching her with zero quality of life for several years - no way I would NOT support this.

Anonymous wrote:I'm for it. Nobody should be forced to stay alive. That's the ultimate denial of liberty.

+1

I support assisted suicide. It makes zero sense to me to force someone who doesn't want to suffer and can plainly see they're going to suffer to stay alive.

I have known several people though who I think would've chosen the pain to live as long as they were "meant" to even if AS were available.

Can it be address in a health care directive? Leaving specific instructions in the event of such diagnosis?

I had a friend with ALS. She lived in MA curiously enough. The doctor gave her meds that would end her life if she chose that route. I'm sure that type of practice goes on more than we realize.

Anonymous wrote:I'm for it. Nobody should be forced to stay alive. That's the ultimate denial of liberty.

Op here. That is my thinking as well. The only thing I don't really like about it is it does not cover those who are suffering from degenerative diseases. At the point that they may be given a 6 month left to live diagnosis, they may not be able to communicate anymore. This was the case with my aunt who suffered from ALS and lived for 8 months with her only form of communication being the blinking of her eyes. Cognitively, she was all there (aside from the heavy amount of medications she was on), and was literally a prisoner in her own body. She had expressed not ever wanting to live like that but at the time, there was nothing we could do but hope that she would pass away quickly once that stage came on. So that is one thing I don't like about it.

Obamcare

I'm for it. Nobody should be forced to stay alive. That's the ultimate denial of liberty.

I'm just curious to see where people stand on this issue. It is on our ballot this November (I live in MA) and have found a lot of people I talk to are really split down the middle. There also doesn't seem to be any clear divide between Rep and Dem and their stance on it. Here is an article on the issue (although I find it to be somewhat biased). Basically, someone would need a medical diagnosis saying they had 6 months or less to live, and then would receive injections to end their live (kind of like being euthanized) . I am for it, although am a bit worried about possible abuse that will occur if it is passed, as well as making sure that families would be able to benefit from life insurance etc even though it is a form of suicide.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2012/10/20/mass-voters-consider-physician-assisted-suicide/9zttqLoe8G5I8nmOlMd49M/story.html