145
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Mar 2024
145 points (97.4% liked)
[Outdated, please look at pinned post] Casual Conversation
6649 readers
1 users here now
Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.
RULES
- Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling
- Encourage conversation in your post
- Avoid controversial topics such as politics or societal debates
- Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate
- No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc.
- Respect privacy: Don’t ask for or share any personal information
Related discussion-focused communities
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I was in favor of this until I started reading Marta Russell. She lays out the history of using the concept of assisted dying to do things like get rid of people with disabilities, increase profits for hospitals, decrease funding for home nurses, convince people who are no longer productive that they shouldn't live anymore, etc etc. It seems like a good idea on paper, because bodily autonomy and stuff, but capitalist ghouls coerce people into it.
Anything can be corrupted by capitalist ghouls. I wouldn’t let that fear stop me from doing the right thing. People shouldn’t be forced to suffer, and should be allowed to choose when to die.
Can you really not see that capitalist "ghouls" (they're just people) have already corrupted society enough, that they are the very reason people are suffering in the first place, and that making those who are suffering kill themselves off the "reasonable" solution, instead of ending the suffering enforced on them by capitalists, is very actively playing along with said capitalists, rather than the ones whose suffering you claim to be concerned with?
Cause nobody ever died of slowly and painfully of cancer except that capitalist forced it on them? Come on. Capitalism sucks a lot, but it's not the source of ALL problems.
May I ask were you live? I live in Sweden and would personally trust our medical system not to abuse such tools but depending on were you are I do understand that you might be worried.
Anyways I don't really see it as a problem with assisted death but with the system using it
Guess everyone should suffer because there is the possibility of abuse that we already know about and could take steps to avoid.
In Oregon, you have to be able to administer it to yourself. It’s not something someone else does to you.
Some people get it as an insurance policy of sorts. So it’s an option during end of life care, but not necessarily one they take.
I am curious about what happens with the med if left unused. Like, do people tuck it away like spare antibiotic eye drops?
It's done with a medico in attendance, who then takes the apparatus and spare media on leaving.