this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2024
334 points (97.2% liked)
Futurology
1854 readers
6 users here now
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
As sad as this topic is, this is a much better way to go than a prolonged miserable painful death where you suffer the last months of a terminal disease.
Terminal or not this is a human way of accepting death.
Imagine your an old 70+/ 80+ couple that are ready to go but together. You can hold your spouses hand, spend time with family, and say your final goodbyes while you are still mentally functioning. Not a burden on anyone or heart broken after losing your partner.
To me, this is a great alternative to dying alone in a cold "retirement home." I know it is not for everyone but, my partner and I have talked about as an option.
I would rather do this than suffer through dementia, if it comes to that.
Ship me off to Hogeweyk
Its such a difficult topic to write about. You shouldnt glorify it but you also have to respect peoples wish to die. Putting that sort of sincerity into text is hard imo, but the article did a good job at it. Weird that they arrested the photographer tho :/
I cant imagine a much more peaceful way to go under her conditions.
I found it became a lot easier after my dad took almost three days to 'die' after he could no longer really live with his lung, throat and shoulder cancer. I get that dieing sucks ass, but if the alternative is dieing really really slowly, assisted death is really beautiful. Too bad our doctor had moral objections, which is fair for them, but it wasn't to us. We did not have this nitrogen capsule, we just had to wait it out and let our loved one gurgle themselves to death.
My grandmother chose to spend the last of her time “at home, with dignity.”
We (mom and siblings) lived with her, and got to experience the whole thing. I will spare you the details, but it was not dignified.
I will never put another person through that in my life. Not even hospital staff. If I ever receive a terminal diagnosis, I’m immediately going to begin planning my exit - likely in a similar fashion as above.
I am very thankful for the hospice nurses assigned to my Grandma, who was doomed to a similar fate to your Father, had they not mercifully increased her dosage of pain meds until she passed.
It's really sad that there aren't better end of life options, and we need to rely on the Mercy of whatever medical staff are assigned to care for us at the end of our lives. At least here in the US.
My condolences to you and may your father rest peacefully.
That doesn't seem an accurate description of the situation. Yes, doctors and nurses sometimes 'help people along' in their final hours or even days, that is not the same thing as the euthanasia being described here.
You're so very wrong about that. The chemicals used right now for lethal injection fail often, cause undue pain and distress, and often will paralyze you instead of killing you quickly while you slowly suffocate, unable to call for help. Nitrogen has no downsides. This isn't a "techbro" solution. It's a humane one. A guillotine was kinder to the one dying than the current method.
The current method prioritizes minimizing violence and maximizing comfort for spectators over being humane to the one dying. The only reason there is a paralytic in the chemical slurry is because the sleep and lethal chemicals sometimes fail spectacularly and the patient spasms painfully as they die. Their solution wasn't to change the method to be more humane, it was to paralyze them so they don't spasm. They're still in pain. They're still dying slowly. They're still scared. But we don't have to see it, so it's okay.
Nitrogen euthanasia is safe and humane, killing entirely painlessly. For some reason the fact that it's a gas, even an inert one, makes people crazy.
You're allowed to kill yourself in Switzerland, but this capsule uses nitrogen which violates chemical laws.
There are drugs that you're allowed to use.
The laws are clearly outdated. Drugs for lethal injection frequently fail and cause much more pain and distress. Nitrogen has *no downsides." It's like the fact that it's a gas makes people crazy.
I'm being downvoted and argued with for explaining the situation I have no control over
lemmy, the place where opinion is more important than facts
I'm not arguing with your statements, I'm arguing against the content therein. Also, it's not a productive comment to tell people discussing the ethical benefits of a reform to human euthanasia by saying the obvious, which is that it isn't yet legal.
And for the record, I didn't downvote you. That information is public. The flag of Israel probably isn't helping in that regard on Lemmy.
but this is not eutanasia since there's no terminal disease, this is just murder.
I think most people can understand her desire to no longer be in constant pain.
It's also a way for an ableist and ageist society to drive vulnerable people to take matters in to our own hands, instead of "forcing" it to act more directly (as opposed to "only" slightly less directly systemically financially and socially oppressing and excluding us), in a kind of "guilt free" eugenics.
Should people have the right to die, and are there some situations where self euthanasia would be the best way to go? Sure. But lets not pretend that sick, disabled, and or old people have nothing to give and are suffering simply for existing as such, and not because society does very little to accommodate, integrate or even accept us. Capitalism frames us as lazy burdens on the system, and if/once we can't contribute to the machine, we (and you, if you become ill, have an accident, or just age) get violently tossed to the margins, our lives made impossible to survive without pain and trauma external to our condition/s.
From what I can find, this capsule costs $20 to use, while existing as an old and or disabled person can cost hundreds to tens of thousands more a year. Making society accessible and inclusive would require a lot of work from people who don't want or care to do it, providing us with this "out" gives them their own.
Be very wary of promoting this as a good solution to people's suffering without taking in to account just how much of that suffering is created by society and its refusal to be inclusive.
You're right that there's too much unnecessary suffering imposed by our societal system. Still, consider that everyone's life eventually ends, and for many when that time comes it would be a blessing to choose it on their own terms.
I very literally did consider it.
I hear you expressing a lot of pain and frustration with the way society treats people who are elderly or disabled. And you're right, the first answer shouldn't be "kill yourself". While your comment briefly mentioned the right to die, you called this method as ableist, which I think is probably an extension of that frustration rather than factual. Reading the article it seemed to me this organization is very much interested in people's well being and reducing their suffering in a holistic way.
Yet you still came out eith the heartless WRONG answer. Curious.
I know you mean well, but you don't provide solutions of any kind. Simply saying the equivalent of "we should be better to fellow humans" isn't going to change the world. It's a platitude.
How do you propose we help the people currently suffering? We just let them suffer until society figures out how to help them? Unite arms and block suicide machines because "they are an easy way out and we should be helping them instead"? Sure, you're absolutely right, we should be helping them all now, but that's not how change works. It's not immediate. While we figure this stuff out, a bunch of people are going to suffer and die painfully.
Also, even if the cynical ending is "the government promotes suicide to get rid of the weak", I'd argue it's better than suffering until death.
Anti Commercial-AI license