So,
Last night I had to take my cat to the vets.
It's not very well at all. I didn't even know that cats could get AIDS.
But anyway, they had to put it down, which is fair enough, can't have him living in pain.

Which raises the question, if it's "humane" to put down an animal that's in pain, and isn't going to get better, why can't we pull the plug on coma patients and "ease the suffering" of people with terminal cancer?

Surely it'd be more humane?
( Cawl, Thu 4 Jun 2009, 10:12, 24 replies, latest was 16 years ago)

Because there's too many ethical loopholes
that and the fact that we don't live in a humane society. We value animal's lives over human lives. This is why we give morphine instead of Euthatol to cancer sufferers.
( fuck shit up the best you never had, Thu 4 Jun 2009, 10:15, Reply)

Seems a bit messed up, doesn't it?

( Cawl, Thu 4 Jun 2009, 10:16, Reply)

Incredibly so
My uncle Klaus died last year from long term bowel cancer. By the time he died it had been in his bones for nearly six months and he was in agony every, single, day. He asked to be given an overdose of morpheine but no one would. So instead he spent his last months as a shell of his former self, unresponsive and not quite all there.

Stupid ethical laws. he could have been saved so much pain and indignity.
(Poppet some assembly required., Thu 4 Jun 2009, 10:20, Reply)

Yep
when my dad was in the hospital, he was lucid and painfree up until the last two days. He refused morphine, but the cancer had already metastasised to his brain, so we couldn't tell if he was in pain or not. The docs refused to give him pain relief on top of what he already had because he was refusing it, despite being delirious.
( fuck shit up the best you never had, Thu 4 Jun 2009, 10:20, Reply)

^these things suck
if I get into that condition I charge all of you, as I will my friends, to make sure I am so drugged up I can't feel a damn thing.
( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Thu 4 Jun 2009, 10:26, Reply)

Yeah,
I'd want putting down if I got any of those diseases where your mind goes and you forget your loved ones.
You're not you anymore once that happens.
( Cawl, Thu 4 Jun 2009, 10:33, Reply)

Tell ya what...
let's put you both down now, and save there being any confusion later.
( thealternativefact, Thu 4 Jun 2009, 10:46, Reply)

No!
I'm happy, and I'm enjoying life :(
( Cawl, Thu 4 Jun 2009, 10:52, Reply)

QUICK! HE'S NOT MAKING SENSE!

( thealternativefact, Thu 4 Jun 2009, 10:54, Reply)

FINISH HIM

( fuck shit up the best you never had, Thu 4 Jun 2009, 11:00, Reply)

FATALITY

(Ghost Atreides enjoying incontestable health benefits on, Thu 4 Jun 2009, 11:08, Reply)

Me and my mates signed a pact agreeing to something similar
If any of us develop a disease where the mind goes, we've agreed to find a way to have them put down before they get too bad.

Of course, if we all catch this disease at the same time and lose our minds, then we're all fucked.
(Ghost Atreides enjoying incontestable health benefits on, Thu 4 Jun 2009, 10:55, Reply)

I think we should
put you down
( TGB checking Off Topic is still shit at, Thu 4 Jun 2009, 10:19, Reply)

If people could inherit money from their cats
it would probably be a lot harder to legally euthanise them.
( djtrialprice, Thu 4 Jun 2009, 10:33, Reply)

Oh, good point
That's probably as good an answer as any!
( K2k6 has a proper job these days, Thu 4 Jun 2009, 10:43, Reply)

But they can
People leave money to their pets all the time and it's only passed onto the human family once the pet has died.
( fuck shit up the best you never had, Thu 4 Jun 2009, 10:44, Reply)

wow
People actually do that? Mental.

"This kitten has a cough. Please put it down."

"I could give it some anti-biotics or a course of..."

"KILL IT! You've got to kill it now!"
( djtrialprice, Thu 4 Jun 2009, 11:39, Reply)

It is stupid
The choice should be given. Some people don't want to die - that's fine. But to force people to live in agony is plain cruel, on both them and their families.

My grandfather is slowly dieing of cancer, although he doesn't show it. One of the hardest thing he's had to do was ask us, when the time comes for him to be moved to hospital, is to help him with certain drugs so he can go in peace and with his family around. This has, unfortunatly caused a big rift between my dad and one of my uncles because they don't want him to go like that. We had a good long talk about it - he's 87, happy with his life and doesn't want to cause my grandmother any more pain then she has to go through. It's really a choice that should be given to people who wants it.
(Potty Jag har smör i min rumpspringa, Thu 4 Jun 2009, 10:42, Reply)

I don't understand people who want to keep someone alive
against their wishes. I am sorry for the pain you and your family are going through. I do hope someone is able to listen to your grandfather's wishes.
(MichaelS wasn't picked again, Thu 4 Jun 2009, 12:53, Reply)

Religion
doesn't help. The sanctity of human life and all that stuff.
( K2k6 has a proper job these days, Thu 4 Jun 2009, 10:43, Reply)

This pissed me off the other day
With a thinly-veiled pro/anti-euthanasia debate on the Today Programme. The chap who was opposed to it had lost his mother not so long ago, and she had been in a position where they were considering euthanasia. Obviously I have every sympathy for the man; it's a horrible decision to have to face, and not one to be taken lightly.

But then he cited the argument that they always use - the "what if?" argument. Apparently on the last day his mother had briefly regained consciousness. I don't know whether she was sufficiently sentient to communicate, but she briefly flickered into life before she relapsed and eventually passed away.

All rather touching. And, he argued, he was opposed to euthanasia because, if they had switched off the life support, they would have missed out on that last opportunity.

As I say, my sympathies go out to the feller, but I hate that argument. There's something so horribly manipulative about it. It plays on that uncertainty, that lingering "you never know...", which, unfortunately, doesn't happen in the majority of cases.

It reminds me of the anecdote where one doctor asks another whether he would have terminated the unborn child of a syphilitic mother, which would be born with various other ailments. If the other doctor says "yes," he is told
"Then you would have killed Beethoven."

Witty, perhaps, but not statistically accurate. He would have killed one unborn child who would probably have been born with various ailments and hereditary syphilis. Historically, the chances of such a child going on to become a hugely influential figure in late-classical/early-romantic music are very small indeed*.

I don't think it's right to play this "what if?" card in these cases. If your relative is predicted to spend another month, in agony and partially sedated, then any number of things could happen before that month is up. They might die sooner. They might hang on longer than that. Yes, they might regain consciousness. But there's no certainty of any of these things happening. You're playing on the fear bought on by people's uncertainty, and that will never help them come to a reasoned decision regarding whether or not to pull the plug.

*_{I'm not saying that we should therefore terminate such pregnancies, I'm just trying to say I don't think that's a watertight argument against abortion}
(LongJohnBaldry, Thu 4 Jun 2009, 10:46, Reply)

The person who gave the what if argument because
his mother MAY have been conscious for about 2 seconds was an incredibly selfish fuck. He was doing it for himself, not for his mother.

If someone chooses to live in incredible pain thats fine, but a person should be able to chose to end things painlessly if that is what he or she wants. Whose fucking business is it but the person who is sick?

Also, in case we end up in a situation where we can't make a decision, we have living wills that clearly state we should not be kept alive through artificial means when there is no hope of recovery.
(MichaelS wasn't picked again, Thu 4 Jun 2009, 12:49, Reply)

78
Exceptionally unlikely (p
(Eds Meds Mathskillz=1,Socialskillz=0, Thu 4 Jun 2009, 10:56, Reply)

Ooops?
; )
(porkylips looks better as the sun goes down., Thu 4 Jun 2009, 11:03, Reply)