Ethanasia is leagal in many western country but most of the eastern countries like Nepal oppose to the idea of ending the life of an individual suffering from a terminal illness or an incurable condition, as by lethal injection or the suspension of extraordinary medical treatment.

Do you all think a person should be given a cold sleep, quiet and painnless death, if we know that he/she don't have any hope to recover or should we let our loved ones suffer and die eventually just because we want to see them live longer, eventhough he/she cannot do anything but to lie down in a bed and wink their eyes??

I kinda agree with dangerous tranquilit.

Well.. this argument warrants another wuest.. what is the purpose of your being sent to.. or (if u rather>>)... your being in this world?? Do you really have the rigt to end the life taht you did not originate?

Well Euthansia is physian killing an individual suffering from terminal illness. and the physician does not do so out of his own will. If the patient asks the physician to kill him then isn't there the intent to kill onself?I am not saying these terms are totally similar, there are differences but the intent is to take life, isn't it?
Euthanasia chai should be decided in terms of each case. the problem then arises is ... who is to decide if it is right or wrong??

Well .. personally i think.. it is indeed indirect suicide.
And, if you are asking someone to kill you .. you r taking the life that is NOT actually granted by YOU in the first place. WE are not born on our own will... thus, death should not be realy our choice either. Be glad taht at least we have been granted the free will living. we can at least make of our life what we want.
the thing is .. be it suicide or euthanasia...... u r in a voluntary man salughter.

Typo in my first paste.
wuest = quest

I am not sure where I stand on this issue.. each individual case should be looked at individually.. so i guess there is no right or wrong thing u can do.. Yes.. one should have the will to do whatever he/she wants with his/her life.. but then again in the name of mercy.. there are always going to be people like Dr. Jack Kevorkian who takes every opportunity he can get to end lives (when these lives could have been saved throu counselling etc.)

Felicity, agree with ya

I beg to differ with you, Felicity. You have to think Euthanasia as a medicine to believe that it is not a suicide. You kill yourself in suicide but you release yourself from enormous physical and mental trauma in Euthanasia.

Imagine what would you do if you see a person screaming in agonizing pain? First off, you will try to cure the person, right? You will try your very best to save that person using newest of the new technologies, surgeons, medicines, you name it whatever you can. Everyone will do that. Of course we are considering here an ideal scenario where financial constraints and all other practical hurdles do not apply.

Ok, now consider the case when you know that no technology, surgeon or medicine can save the person and he will have to bear the pain all by himself until he dies. Then you will know you have no other option. Life is not all about principles my dear Felicity. Sometimes you have to look upon things in pragmatic ways. I have seen goats being slaughtered back in Nepal, probably you have too. Can you imagine leaving a goat to die all by itself after its neck is cut by more than half? Do you dare to listen to the scream of the dying goat until it dies? Forget about humans. No one can overvome the trauma of death especially when you know you are dying.

Now comes the question that DT and few other people raised. How do we look upon the priorities to know which case needs euthanasia and which does not. Thats a good question actually.To answer that, I will say if the patient is under coma (a severe form of unconsciouness) for substantially long period of time and technolgies do not see the patient getting any better in the future should be a PROSPECTIVE candidate for euthanasia. Of course it should require full consent of the patient's immediate family members. But if it involves constant physical pain and trauma, then the decision might not need the consent as well.

I agree with those saying this is a matter of choice when and where a choice can be made. In cases where the patient is not in a position to make a choice, I feel there needs to be some threshold defined by the law - ie consent of living parents, children, and spouse etc.

I would caution people against allowing the Chiavo case to influence too much their opinions about euthanasia. As per what I have read, most euthanasia cases in the US involve the consensus of loved ones and the Chiavo case was more the exception to the rule.

This is a tough subject that exposes some sensitive spots in people's value and belief systems and I respect the views of those who think differently. I don't think there are too many easy answers to all the questions this issue brings up.

To life (while it lasts)

:)

A very controversial issue , it is too. Euthanasia, if one dint know what it meant, one would think it was actaully a name of some ancient greek goddess. Euthanasia has till date remained inarguably one of the most discussed issues .Human rights activists and religious groups remain steadfast in their beliefs .Who is actually to say what is wrong and what is not? Does one not have the right to end his life when he chooses to? And then again, if euthanasia is to be ever be legaliised worldwide... there could be numerous complexities.Possibly, a terminal patient might feel the pressure to"lighten " his family and friends the "load ".I for one, would like to live and let live.

Haddock, heres to you ..to life while it lasts.. and to make it all worthwhile.

Gone with the wind..

No opinions, just a story from my side on this topic:

- http://guild.sajha.com/guild/read.cfm?guildid=69

even after finishing a paper in euthanasia, i'm still not convinced if it is legal at all...
just too many angles to look at this issue.
during the research about this topic, i met a lady nurse who agreed to let her mother go instead of treating her...
her mother had cancer and was 79 years old, treatment going on for 5 years....
at a point, she decided that treatment was worthless and didn't make her mother able to do even basic things like eating, speaking etc...
sounds horrible, mother killer...
but what can we say... its better than throwing old parents through the cliff...as seen on one nepal tv serial...(actually they did not throw the old parents as their son told to keep the Doko so that he can throw them when they get old... haha)

lol...i know i know... its a serious issue.. ought to keep a stiff upper lip and all.But i had happened to see the same tele movie as mentioned above by Neupane. Save the doko for the next generation.
Euthanasia will never be truly justified.

gone.,,

Okay...
Hunk in grave:.. I am well aware that euthanasia is something u provide to end a pain of dear one or self. But, my dear, are not we all enveloped in worldy pain in one way or the other ... which is actually more unbearable..than the physical pains inflicted upon you. But putting that question aside, there still is so many facets to this issue.... like Neupane says. And ofcourse legality? really a freedom of chice??? Lets say, for Terry's case.. how could one be really sure what SHE had wanted in the depth of her being??
....SORRY i am a vegetarian..and for the exact reason. But that does not mean I abhor the ppl who eat meat. goat is meant to be eaten... it is provoided to you (by GOD or whoever you would rather.... that SUPREME power).....for your conveneinece, this is why we are on the highest tier of biological pyramid.

Anyways, Hunk in the grave, when you know that no technology, surgeon or medicine can save the person and he will have to bear the pain all by himself until he dies..... then u gotta believe there is SOME POWER SUPERIOR TO YOU. U could be deplete of options but that power would not be. THusm, see.. I am being actually more pragmatic here. Euthanasia is NOT pragmatism, it is running away from pain, and more of being enslaved to your sentiments, then being practical. where does legal issues tand hre then/

Scarlett... u r right.. euthanasia can never truly be justified!

Thank you everyone for putting your 2 mins of effort to discuss on this matter. I've been thinking about this for years cause i've seen lotta people around me who are practically being a burden on their family. Just cause of one person the whole family gets disrupted. Is that worth it? the one that is in bed will definately gonna die sooner or later, there is not even a single hope that they will start to walk or to talk or to show any emotion again and their family spending fortune just to keep them alive.

About 5-6 years, someone I know gets into coma. This guy was pretty well off so the family started taking him whereever they could for the treatment. Time passes by, hes been dragged in the stretcher from one country to another. Now slowly the cash is gettin outta bank and since he was the bread winner, they didn't have no other income but to use the family savings. The medical support is thousands of rupees a day just for the hope that he will wake up even when the doctors have given up!! His wife sells most of the property, started living in rent and still going through his treatment just cause in Nepal, you can't pull the wire if the guy is still breathing. Their son almost goes nuts. Rest of her family started to avoid her thinking that she will go to them for help. She is practically in street these days. What doctor told her was he will eventually die when one of his organs fails and she will have to keep on treating him till that day. she is doing the best she could. She doesn't even have no flesh in her body no more.

I think this is little unfair to her. Just cause of that one person which no one has hope he will walk again, her entire life got messed up!!

Felicity, do you think that is fair???

Nepalipoonte:

of course when we see it from our view.. it definitely seems unfair. but if u see it from her view.... u may be surprised that she would rather die than to see her beloved die. saas rahunjel aash. And...... if i were to think of that for my man (GOD FORBID)... i would do anything in my power to just to be able to see him for another iota of a second!!!

And...of course again..... like i say.. i believe in power beyond us.... .

Well Nepalipoonte, you put up a good hypothecical example and i'm replying to this hypothetical case only. you cannnot generalize from one incident. in this particular case it should be the will of the wife. However, it seems like you are measuring life in terms of money!
As far as Euthanasia being never justified. i do not agree with that. It can be justified in some cases. Hunk, gave a good way to determine "Prospective Candidate" for Euthansia. i have another question though how long is "long period of time" a month, year, 5 years 10 years? Even this may seem a short period for some....

Dangerous Tranquilit I wasn't measuring life with money. I was giving you a situation. and the things that I've written, that ain't hypothetical. The wife was willing to pull the wires cause she is sick and tired. Shes couldn't do it cause its against the nepali law to take a life of somebody who is still breathing no matter condition s/he may be!! Thats the word she got from docs....

my view on euthanasia
http://guild.sajha.com/guild/read.cfm?guildid=76

Megalomaniac

Megalomaniac, nice nice, had I knew you had written something on this topic, I'd have contacted you directly:).

Nice write up. Again the main problem is how much is "enough evidence"? i definitely agree with the part "should be accompanied with other strict laws ."
NP, sorry about the misunderstanding.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=361980 what do you say abt this article, NP?