The Ultimate Form Of Self-Control
Booth Gardner, an ex-governor with Parkinson's stumps for the legalization of physician-assisted suicide in Washington state. (I'm guessing it isn't the atheists who are against it. Just guessing.) From a Claudia Rowe story in the Seattle P-I:
While many politicians are reluctant even to associate their names with the issue, it is even more striking for Gardner, who during his governorship constantly frustrated fellow Democrats with his reluctance to lobby for any particular measure.Last weekend, however, he stood before a convention of social workers, beating the drum.
"I feel that God gave me a mission in life, and he also gave me the ability to think -- that includes thinking about when I want to leave early," he told the 150 caregivers. "Under no circumstances should my fate be put in the hands of a pinhead politician who can't pass ninth-grade biology."
His quips won the expected chuckles, and afterward several attendees gave him a standing ovation. One asked where she could sign up to help. It was not surprising, as the National Association of Social Workers was among the first groups in Washington to endorse aid-in-dying 16 years ago, during its last go-round as a voters initiative.
But three social workers, all of them African American, left the room visibly upset.
"I'm not comfortable with the policy they're trying to get on the ballot," said one, Noreen Freeman. "I don't think it's our job to take our own life, and as long as you don't have consistency of medical care, you put certain groups at risk."
Data from Oregon show that among those residents who have used the Death With Dignity Act, none was black.
This is only a taste of the opposition likely to align against Gardner if his campaign moves forward.
A law making it legal for physicians to help patients die would "push caring aside in favor of killing," wrote state Sen. Margarita Prentice, a registered nurse who opposed the measure here in 1991. "We should never ask our doctors to kill."
She feels the same today, and points out that anyone is free to stop eating or discontinue life-extending medication any time they like.
"That's not dignity," Gardner snaps at such arguments.
It's great he's doing this, but why is it people have to get afflicted with something to grow principles? Or have a daughter or son announce they're gay to drop their anti-gay stance? Well, better forced than never.
I always find it amazing that people willing to put down a pet with a terminal illness wont do the same for a family member.
And exactly what kind of disconnect is going on in these morons heads?
Stupid shits belive in a paradise on the 'other side' of death, so why are they trying so damn hard to avoid it?
lujlp at January 10, 2008 8:07 AM
Well, I am one of those morons, and while I may not be the sharpest tool in the shed, I hope I can explain my position to you, lujlp.
I am not so much concerned with the possibility of putting down another person as I am having someone putting me down. I am a bit leery of someone taking that action "for my own good", because "I would have wanted it that way".
I figure if I want to go out due to some painful terminal illness, or just because I finally comprehend the full extent of my stupidity and can no longer live with myself, I will figure some way to off myself without help, and will not be too concerned if my actions are legal or not.
The law of unintended consequences indicates that a high barrier to assisted suicide is a good thing.
Sweet Lou at January 10, 2008 8:29 AM
I have a Living Will, and in it there is a part, borrowed (okay, hijacked) from a newspaper that was seen on an Army base, that reads:
I, _________________________ (fill in the blank), being of sound mind and body, DO NOT wish to be kept alive indefinitely by artificial means.
Under no circumstances should my fate be put in the hands of peckerhead politicians who couldn't pass ninth-grade biology if their lives depended on it.
If a reasonable amount of time passes (2 weeks to a month, anyway) and I fail to sit up and ask for a scotch, it should be presumed that I won't do so ever again. When such a determination is reached, I hereby instruct my spouse, children and attending physicians to pull the plug, reel in the tubes and call it a day.
Under no circumstances shall the members of the Legislature enact a special law to keep me on life-support machinery. It is my wish that these assholes mind their own damn business, and pay attention instead to the health, education and future of the millions of Americans who AREN'T in a permanent coma and who nonetheless may be in need of nourishment.
Under no circumstances shall any politicians butt into this case. I don't care how many fundamentalist votes they're trying to scrounge for their run for the presidency, it is my wish that they play politics with someone else's life and leave me alone to die in peace. I couldn't care less if a hundred religious zealots send e-mails to legislators in which they pretend to care about me. I don't know these people, and I certainly haven't authorized them to preach and/or crusade on my behalf. They should mind their own damn business, too.
If any of my family goes against my wishes and turns my case into a political cause, I hereby promise to come back from the grave to haunt them and make his or her existence a living hell.
Flynne at January 10, 2008 9:03 AM
Sweet Lou you are an idiot.
We arent talking about killing people in comas, or the granny who cant pay her bill(becuase that one is already leagal)
We are talking about people who are aware of the surroundings, aware of their diagnosis and want the doctor to give them an extra shot of morphine.
If you dont want to fine, but why do you get to decide that Betty in bed number 3 cant do what she wants?
lujlp at January 10, 2008 9:53 AM
Amy writes:
"Booth Gardner, an ex-governor with Parkinson's stumps for the legalization of physician-assisted suicide in Washington state. (I'm guessing it isn't the atheists who are against it. Just guessing.)"
Your guess would be wrong.
The New York Times, in a Sunday Magazine story on December 2 of last year, covered Gardner's story and the issues around it in more detail than the story you post.
There are people opposed to Gardener's campaign for reasons that have nothing to do with religion at all. And their reasons, even if ultimately unconvincing to you, are at least worthy of some thought.
I'm not taking a position here myself, but jumping to conclusions is a bad idea.
L. McKednna at January 10, 2008 10:03 AM
Flynne, ya might wanna be a little specific about what constitutes "life-support machinery", "pulling the plug", and "coma", because the way you have it written, if you switch to gin for a couple of weeks, and it makes you snore, your wife is perfectly justified in smothering you with a pillow.
Call me paranoid, but I'll go with the hundred religious zealots pretending to care about me over the enlightened humanitarian who sincerely values my right to die in dignity and comfort.
Sweet Lou at January 10, 2008 10:06 AM
lujlp,
When you call me an idiot, you aren't telling me anything I don't already know.
Still, idiot that I am, I figure if Betty in Bed #3 is so aware and capable, then she ought to figure out a way to off herself.
See, the problem I see is the part where we figure out what Betty REALLY wants. Or, rather, what Sweet Lou REALLY wants. Because I am so stupid, they might be asking if I want that extra shot of morphine and I would be thinking they were talking about an extra helping of pudding for dessert, and you see, I really like pudding...
Sweet Lou at January 10, 2008 10:19 AM
Sweet Lou, I have a boyfriend not a wife (I'm female myself). I just think that after all the crap about the Terry Schiavo mess, my decision most definitely is this: if my quality of life is compromised to the point her's was, pull the damn plug, reel in the tubes, and let me go! I wouldn't be able to do it myself and so would want my daughters and BF to understand that yes, it is what I would want. Why should I be an emotional and financial drain on them any longer than necessary? If a month goes by and I'm not askin' for a damn thing to wet my whistle, let me freakin' go, already. YMMV o_O
Flynne at January 10, 2008 10:37 AM
You do not have the right to force another person to kill you, or help you kill yourself.
Who the fuck do you think you are, passing a law that will require a man to administer a lethal dose of medication to you? What gives you the right to put that burden on his conscience?
And don't even get me started on the lawsuits waiting to happen - ethical concerns aside. Doctor kills someone, family member argues that they were coerced into giving consent. Wham! Doctor now facing a murder 1 charge and potential death sentence.
Sorry. Do. Not. Want.
brian at January 10, 2008 10:41 AM
I'm with lujlp on this one. I have never been able to figure out why we'll put a dog or a cat out of their misery without a second's thought but so cruelly prolong a human being's misery.
Sweet Lou, it's more complicated than that and we're not talking about pulling the plug that easily and you damn well know it. You also know that the medically untrained offing themself is easier said than done and a failed attempt in most states lands you in the psycho ward. Not to mention the comotose, etc, can't resort to that. And that depriving yourself of medicine/food/water is much more agonizing that extra morphine.
Flynn, I love that! I may use that though, being a tea-totaller, I might have to change scotch to chocolate (in any form). If I've managed to go that long without chocolate, I am technically dead. I can't go two days without. Even when losing weight, I have a bit each day.
Donna at January 10, 2008 10:43 AM
Flynne, sorry for the gender confusion.
Me, I'm getting on in years. lujlp has already accurately assessed my intellectual skills, and my personal charms rival my mental ones. My dear wife has already put up with me for an eternity. As I become ever more impotent and decrepit and an emotional drain who could blame her for thinking it is time to let ME freakin' go, already? Which would probably be a good thing for the world in general, but for yours truly, maybe not so much.
Because if memory serves me right, we never DID get Terry Shiavo's point of view on this issue. Leaving a grey area you could steer a supertanker through.
Sweet Lou at January 10, 2008 10:56 AM
brian
I don't worry so much about the burden I will place on another. My experience is that there is usually some humanitarian all too eager to help me into a comfortable grave.
Donna, you are right about it being more complicated, and that is what worries me. I might also note that most dogs and cats that are put down are not done in order to put them out of pain.
Drew Carey had a pretty funny routine that makes my point better than I have, but I can't find it on youtube.
Sweet Lou at January 10, 2008 11:09 AM
Brian, this isn't about forcing doctors to assist in suicides, it's about allowing those who are willing to help to do so without prosecution. Will there need to be safeguards in place? Sure. But, because some people might say, abuse gun ownership, do you deny gun ownership to all? Same goes for the right to take your own life if you so desire. It's yours to do with as you wish more than anything else in the world, short of physically harming other people.
Amy Alkon at January 10, 2008 11:10 AM
Gien terrys brain was pudding you'd never have gotten her opinion.
And suppose you had a terminal AIDS paitent with arthritis, they cant pul the trigger, they cant push the needles plunger down so their forced to starve to death or drown as some infection causes their lungs to fill with fluid?
All so you can feel morally superior? If god did exist there would be a specal place in hell for people like you who force others to wallow in pain
Luck for you there aint and your actions will have no personal consequences, unless you ever decide you want to die painlessly without blowing half your head off
lujlp at January 10, 2008 11:36 AM
Amy, it is exactly about forcing a physician to put down a fellow primate. Think about poor little 'ol me living all alone out here in the boonies, surrounded by hostiles. If I were in a terminal condition in the opinion of one facility, they would rejoice at your legislative efforts. Just get the ball rolling Amy & they will find a loop hole later to get that miserable heretic out of their lives. Finally, we will be able to rid the great state of Kansas of non-believers.
When I was growing up I was taught that cursing would result in a one way ticket to Hell. After your legislative efforts they might start teaching that if you don't go to church every Sunday, you'll get sick. I know people who attend church out of fear.
No group of people should ever have the authority to kill an individual, not for any reason! The death penalty is wrong, assisted suicide is wrong, killing a child is wrong after it has reached a particular benchmark of development (ie a blastocyst is not a human being yet)
Also, I wish you hadn't a brought guns into this Amy. Out here in the boon docks some neighbors you borrow sugar from, some others you shoot at. If the later gets me first, I don't want to end up in a hospital bed being attended by one of his brethren... especially with an assisted suicide law on the books.
William at January 10, 2008 11:36 AM
I think this is a pretty easy issue to fix, at least in my mind. You, as an adult, should have contemplated your own end and should have a will or living will. Adult people should have one. Have we learned nothing from the Schiavo mess? Just do it. That way, no one's mistaking a request for pudding for death. And I'm sorry, maybe it's morbid, but that idea made me snort milk out my nose. Gluttony=death... kinda funny.
One should also discuss this, at length, with spouses, parents, children etc. In writing is best.
Just as now certain doctors do not provide abortions, doctors could opt out of assisting suicide. Wa-la. There goes that argument.
Only people that have never been hungry could offer up death by starvation. The length of time required to die by starvation can be 3 weeks. I get hugely bitchy if my meal is delayed by an hour. You want to end your life by slow starvation, fine. Go ahead. No one is saying that assisted suicide means bumping off people who might want to die, possibly, whose words we must interpret as they're ill in the hospital. It would require some pretty iron-clad, premeditated legal work.
If you've ever had a loved one suffer slowly towards death, you might be able to understand the idea a bit better.I've discussed this every which way with my mom. Bring on the morphine, mums, and I will go gladly.
christina at January 10, 2008 11:51 AM
Someone in critical medical condition is not necessarily of sound mind. Part of their medical condition might include giving up, a good physician will counter this impulse. If someone is suffering slowly towards death then they need to be moved somewhere else because the facility they are in is loosing them. Death is something that should be fought tenaciously, anything else does not belong in any facility dedicated to healing people.
William at January 10, 2008 12:03 PM
Death is something that should be fought tenaciously,
Why? Give me reasons. Here's mine: If I'm in a vegetative state, and my daughters can't afford to keep me on life support, emotinally and/or financially, LET ME GO. There is no point in keeping my physical body alive when my cognitve being is no longer there. I do not wish that my body be kept alive by artificial means. End of story.
Flynne at January 10, 2008 12:27 PM
I agree with you, william, ecept for the idea that death should be fought tenaciously. If I don't want the 5th round of chemo, if I choose not to go with the 5% chance the surgery will work, that should be up to me, not you or anyone else.
In real life this would probably require a good number of shrinks to certify that I'm not crazy, but so be it. I'd be willing to be analyzed to the moon if it meant I could go peacefully of my own choice. Not everyone is so terrified to die that they want to hang on to the bitter end.
christina at January 10, 2008 12:31 PM
If your "cognitively being is no longer there" then you don't know that you are suffering. The only issue remaining is expense... instruct your relatives in your will that they are not to pay. Fight for affordable health care that doesn't run out, but please do not fight for your own death or the death of another.
William at January 10, 2008 12:40 PM
William, you didn't answer my question: Why should death be tenaciously fought? That makes no sense. We're all going to die. Why fight it? Are you that afraid of dying? I'm not. I may be afraid of the way I might die, but I've lived a good life so far, and have very few regrets. As far as I'm concerned, when your number is up, it's up. You don't get a much of a say in the matter, unless you can get a word in edgewise that you want to go with dignity.
Flynne at January 10, 2008 12:44 PM
Why do you need a reason? Your pessimism is not going to help your longevity.
William at January 10, 2008 12:54 PM
I don't need a reason, I'm just curious about YOUR reason. And I'm far from pessimistic, so I'm sorry if I gave you that impression. I'm really at a good place in my life right now. I have no plans to die anytime soon, but if I walk out the door tonight on my way home and get hit by a bus, so be it. YMMV
Flynne at January 10, 2008 1:10 PM
YOU are avoiding giving a reason for your statement that death must be tenaciously fought. Having second thoughts, perhaps? Your avoidance smacks of hypocrisy.
Flynne at January 10, 2008 1:12 PM
Your straw man attack will not change the fact that if you are ill your physician will fight for your life, not for your death. Changing that scenario would be morbid at best.
William at January 10, 2008 2:25 PM
So William....as long as its not a doctor in a hospital, you're OK with it? Move to another "facility" (say a hospice) and the medical practioner in attendance can follow through on whatever written instructions you've left and discussed with your family regarding your care and/or termination?
If you're cognitively not there so don't know you're suffering, you also don't know you're still alive, so what difference does it make? If it eases the burden on those who are still around, isn't that what you'd want to do?
moreta at January 10, 2008 2:55 PM
Amy -
There's one problem with your position. It won't be voluntary.
In New York, Bloomberg wanted to (don't know if it ever went through) make abortion a part of standard OB/GYN training in the city's hospitals. Like I said, don't know if it went through.
But the first time someone sued because their doctor wouldn't kill them, there'd be some schmuck ramming through legislation forcing a doctor to violate his own principles and kill his patients.
I wonder how many doctors are actually willing to kill their patients. I mean, personally put the needle in the arm and give the injection that puts the lights out for good.
I'm not in favor of this for one other reason - it gives some future bean counter the idea that people ought to be counseled toward euthanasia when their treatments become too expensive. And then when their pension payments become too much of a burden.
Better to never open the can of worms. I may not live to see it happen, but I don't want to be remembered by history as having been a member of the civilization that put that first brick down.
brian at January 10, 2008 4:33 PM
@brian - if that were true thaen pharmicicsts across the country would be forcedto give out birth control pills, but they arent
Ironicaly there was a case here in Phx a few yrs ago where a pharmicist refused to fill a prescription for pre natal vitiamins cause it came from planned parenthood.
@william
Your as ass, answer the question already why are you so afrid of death? While your at it perhaps you can answer why so many people who belive they are going to heaven are afraid of death.
By the way if your willing to pay hunndereds of thousands of dollars to keep a corpse alive feel free, but why should I have to? Why shold my familly have to? And why should I have to suffer horribly if I want to stop medical treatment that wont save my life?
lujlp at January 11, 2008 6:03 AM
Your straw man attack will not change the fact that if you are ill your physician will fight for your life, not for your death. Changing that scenario would be morbid at best.
Morbid, how? If I'm terminally ill, and I want to die, and the doctor is going against my wishes, I'll sue the bastard, or have my family do it, for trying to keep me alive and making my life more miserable and unbearable than it needs to be. It's MY life, not his, moron. He is an advisor, not a saviour. If he has given me all the pertinent information that I need with regards to my health and I've made my choice, it is not up to him to play god with my life. It's not HIS option, it's mine.
Flynne at January 11, 2008 6:57 AM
"I might also note that most dogs and cats that are put down are not done in order to put them out of pain." Good, God! Where do you live that they're just killing the kitties and puppies for the hell of it? If you're talking about the (in)humane society, don't get me started. They've a better chance being strays and knowing that the feral cat population in NYC is something like half a million strong and several generations old doesn't disuade me of that. But vets don't just willy nilly kill cats without reason. They do it when they're suffering.
I had a cat 18 and a half years old before she had to be put down. By then, she was back at the vet every week in pain on the last visit when she howled as soon as the vet touched her I knew I'd be asked after the exam. I was lucky to have her that long. Never expected to. I was not going to make her suffer because I wanted to deny she was on her last legs. She would not have lasted more than a few more months tops and wasn't expected to last that long. Her x-rays showed a shadow that could have been cancer or an enlarged heart. An exploratory operation to find out would have killed her. I think it disgusting that I could show her that kind of mercy but had that been my Grandma or something, they'd have made her live in agony for however long she had to go on.
It is time we stopped showing animals more compassion than we show human beings.
Donna at January 11, 2008 7:11 AM
Ok all those oppose to euthanasias try this one, this is my greatest fear and why I'm all for humanly putting down vegetables as long as they ask to be put down before they are in such a state.
You are in a persitant vegative state. Your EEG read turnip you made it clear that you do not want to be a turnip. Now imagine that you are still actually you. Your conscious and aware of how you feel. You feel nothing the part of the brain that lets you interact with the world is damaged. However your cognitive abilities are fine. You are now a permanent prisoner in your own body, no sound, no taste, no touch, no smell, and total darkness. Anyone who helps end your suffering (I can not imagine anything worse for me ever) goes to jail for manslaughter at least. Now after about 6-months to a year of this even if the doctors bring me back I'll be a raving lunatic. So why should I have to suffer so you feel better about yourself?
vlad at January 11, 2008 1:28 PM
Oy, how did I miss all this fun?
Sweet Lou -
No one is arguing that people should be making this decision on their hospital bed. This is something that should be decided well in advance, through a living will. Nor should it be the attending doctor who actually does the deed. There is a group of physicians who are actively lobbying for proactive euthanasia, who make it clear that this is something that should be clarified in a living will, with the help of a physician. This way the bases can be covered about exactly the circumstances that would make the living will active, in accordance to your wishes. The condition would be initially made by the attending, then verified by a second opinion, finally, the doctor who would actually carry out the euthanasia would also verify that the conditions have been met.
Brian -
But the first time someone sued because their doctor wouldn't kill them, there'd be some schmuck ramming through legislation forcing a doctor to violate his own principles and kill his patients.
Thus why a living will is so important. Also why it is important to have doctors who are not the attending and willing to carry out the wishes of the patient involved.
This is even true if the attending is also willing to carry out living wills. It is important that the physician who actually does the deed, is not the patients own doctor.
I wonder how many doctors are actually willing to kill their patients. I mean, personally put the needle in the arm and give the injection that puts the lights out for good.
You might be surprised. There are a lot of physicians who think that the status quo, in which people are required to drown in their own fluids, starve to death, die of dehydration or any of a number of horrific ways they die through lack of intervention, is absolutely barbaric.
I'm not in favor of this for one other reason - it gives some future bean counter the idea that people ought to be counseled toward euthanasia when their treatments become too expensive. And then when their pension payments become too much of a burden.
Then you keep that from happening. Doing A, does not necessitate B. What abuses might be enacted, if we are not vigilant and involved, doesn't come close to justifying restricting my right to die with dignity if I so desire.
William -
Your straw man attack will not change the fact that if you are ill your physician will fight for your life, not for your death. Changing that scenario would be morbid at best.
Are you really this ignorant? It's already happened. No physician has a right to disrespect my wishes, by providing medical interventions contrary to my express, legal wishes. If they did, they could and with my family, would be sued if they did. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing such vile persons stripped of their medical license and thrown in jail.
DuWayne at January 12, 2008 6:05 PM
Leave a comment