Who should decide on our right to die? If we have a right to live, then we certainly should have the right to die. People with terminal illnesses who do not wish to lie in bed with a Morphine pump giving shooting them every five minutes to kill the pain might just think that it is time to go. I know we all love our loved ones, but isn't it a personal choice? I'm not saying that we need to go out and kill all the people with terminal illnesses, but I am saying that they are the ones who should make the choice, not the government.



You are right it should be the patient’s choice. Unfortunately, in our society that in and of itself could lead to the corruption of its practice. What happens when the patient is incapable of speaking for himself or herself? I think in the case of a fully functional adult the choice should be admissible. I think maybe some counseling should go along with it to make sure the patient understands fully the consequences. Of course, this should only be used in the case of extreme terminal degenerative diseases.
Dear Veekie and SammieD,
I did a very large research project on this topic, with a focus on Dr. Jack Kevorkian. Hopefully, you are true nineties children, and that name sounds familiar. He was "doctor death," the Oregon doctor who offered PAS, who was eventually jailed for a minor legal taboo. My point is that I know this subject well, and you should watch my blog for a future post on this. Thanks a lot.
Michael Allen Yarbrough
EDIT: well, I thought I'd have something useful to add, but I've found another blog post that really just covers everything, though lots of the discussion is against one member who opposes it, and though Jack Kevorkian is not mentioned. Sorry for presuming I'd be able to contribute.
Did Jack do experiments on his subject, before he helped them with their suicide?
I think he did not, though I didn't read the comprehensive Jack biography or anything. Though I don't know everything he may have done, I do know that he was quite circumspect about how much he was pushing the laws. He made contracts, interviewed patients, made voice recordings, and generally ensured the absolute agreement of the sufferers. He had to do this, because he knew the legal consequences of overstepping the proper lines of the physician would be grave. Experimentation on patients would lie far past that line.
Michael Allen Yarbrough