Go back
Slippery Slope of Euthanasia for Children

Slippery Slope of Euthanasia for Children

Debates

Vote Up
Vote Down

My 2 cents:

If someone is suffering terribly and constantly without any end in sight other than death, and that person wants to no longer live, then I think it is the ethical thing to do to euthanize that person. However, exacting standards should be met. This should involving several peoples signing off on it, including the patient (if possible), parents (if applicable), some sort of ethics board, and a psychiatrist or psychologist who would diagnose the suffering.

The typical scenario thought of is the elderly, bed-ridden person who has no joy left in life. We should allow that person to have his or her suffering ended. We already euthanize dogs and cats because no one wants to provide homes for them, and there is no uproar about that, even though it is a very sad state of affairs, but people who say nothing about that ardently oppose any sort of euthanasia for suffering humans.

I do not think that we should kill for eugenic or aesthetic reasons. I do not think that people should be killed for being mentally retarded.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Dissident Dan
My 2 cents:

If someone is suffering terribly and constantly without any end in sight other than death, and that person wants to no longer live, then I think it is the ethical thing to do to euthanize that person. However, exacting standards should be met. This should involving several peoples signing off on it, including the patient (if possible), ...[text shortened]... c or aesthetic reasons. I do not think that people should be killed for being mentally retarded.
Well you picked a bad one, but I hope your not incharge if I'm the one
suffering.

Vote Up
Vote Down

What life will get unwanted mentally retarded child?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by TovMauzer
What life will get unwanted mentally retarded child?
I don't understand your question, could your say it another way?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by wucky3
sorry if i haven't made it clear...have you read the link i gave?

if a screening for downs is positive the women is offered the choice of an abortion regardless of how many weeks...

most women in the uk are automatically tested now for ds...in some regions it is compulsory. Agree?...disagree?
I have read the full link.
I disagree with automatically testing for the reasons I have given.
Nice link.
Kelly

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by KellyJay
I don't understand your question, could your say it another way?
My question seems clear enough for me. I support euthanasia if it's done by pacient will, since his life belongs to him. Question about screening is much more difficult.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by TovMauzer
My question seems clear enough for me. I support euthanasia if it's done by pacient will, since his life belongs to him. Question about screening is much more difficult.
Why, you have already said that your okay with ending a life because
someone wants to end it? All your doing now is simply giving that
choice to someone other than the one being killed. What is the big deal?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by KellyJay
Why, you have already said that your okay with ending a life because
someone wants to end it? All your doing now is simply giving that
choice to someone other than the one being killed. What is the big deal?
There is the clear difference: people should have right to decide for themself what to do with their life. Suicide is the choice, not the sin.

I also agree with abortion rights on early stage, but Wucky3 raised different question and posted excellent link. I asked my question looking at the problem from other side. And I'm not sure if I agree or disagree with screening practice.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by TovMauzer
There is the clear difference: people should have right to decide for themself what to do with their life. Suicide is the choice, not the sin.

I also agree with abortion rights on early stage, but Wucky3 raised different question and posted excellent link. I asked my question looking at the problem from other side. And I'm not sure if I agree or disagree with screening practice.
I completely disagree with your foundational views on this matter
of abortion, but I'm glad you at least are giving the screening
practice more thought.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by wucky3
sorry if i haven't made it clear...have you read the link i gave?

if a screening for downs is positive the women is offered the choice of an abortion regardless of how many weeks...

most women in the uk are automatically tested now for ds...in some regions it is compulsory. Agree?...disagree?
It certainly not should be compulsary.

That would, again, mean that a woman doesn't have control over what she does with her own body and anything in it.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by shavixmir
It certainly not should be compulsary.

That would, again, mean that a woman doesn't have control over what she does with her own body and anything in it.
Unless rape is involved, she has control. No one has to die over
a choice until she becomes with child.