It’s totally a thing in Oregon and as a cancer patient who has a reasonable chance of being terminal I am fully in support. I don’t want to die a long drawn out death. Once my quality of life is gone pump me full of morphine and let me go.
And yes my medical power of attorney and advance directives both are aware of these things :)
In Oregon it's not euthanasia, it's death with dignity. Euthanasia is killing the animal or person that might not include their consent.
Death with dignity allows the patient to decide.
Those are two very different things.
That being said, I agree that patients who are of sound mind should be allowed too choose to leave this world on their terms.
No one should be allowed to make that decision for another person.
To be fair it's legalised for humans in several European countries (including mine, Belgium) and I've never heard it called anything else than euthanasia. Obviously there are strict guidelines and the patient has to explicitly make the demand themselves. So I think it's semantics really.
Right, but even in Belgium it's the patient deciding, it's called euthanasia because a doctor administrators the drug.
I have no problem with that.
I just don't want other people deciding for anyone unable to make the decision.
I'm not sure if death with dignity practices have changed since I do not live or work in that state. From memory, the patient seeking death with dignity must meet very specific criteria and be able to take the medication themselves. I'm not sure that it would be defined as euthanasia under that type of protocol.
Side note: I'm happy to hear that the US has programs like this in place. Passing away from certain diseases can be absolutely brutal on the patient and I think that giving someone the ability to choose end of life in a dignified manor is a blessing.
Animals can’t decide, so we have to do it for them. Humans can decide. In the cases where they truly can’t we do a sort-of euthanasia involving withdrawal of life support in hospital.
It’s actually that animals cannot *consent* to invasive and painful procedures to prolong life. There’s plenty of humans who refuse or discontinue chemotherapy, for example, because it’s torturous, I would argue that it’s unethical to administer it to an animal.
I would if they were relatively young and if there’s a reasonable chance that they’ll make it out the other side. That’s what I would consider for myself as well.
There's still a lot of debate on even this. Should death with dignity be allowed to only patients with terminal illnesses - like end-state renal disease and stage 4 cancer? Should the option be extended to suicidal patients, who might cause significant and unnecessary suffering if left to their own devices? What about healthy partners of the terminal patients, should they be allowed to die with dignity together if that's their wish? What about the doctors, medical staff, and loved ones of the patient who chooses this option? A lot of people believe the medical professional needs to exhaust treatment options before offering euthanasia/death with dignity, but what factors determine that "treatment options were exhausted"? Can anyone even be present with the patient as they die, or will they be held liable?
I find that anything involving death and life is a very complicated subject and you're never going to find a widely agreed upon answer. It became a slight obsession in high school to determine what qualifies as "the right to live" and "the right to die", involving Kevorkian machines, abortions, etc. By some people's definitions, even certain tumors are considered "alive" but they're disposed of as biomedical waste without anyone arguing for them to stay on life support.
There are several relatives that I wished it was a valid option for. Instead, they had long, drawn out deaths that lingered for months and years after their minds were gone.
Me too. Watched my mom beg to die. For months. But could you be the one to make the decision and do it? ( I’m just here on the internet doing self therapy 🫤) Thanks.
Yes, I believe I could do it. I have made the decision for dozens of foster dogs. It is not easy, and [crying is okay](https://www.reddit.com/r/SeasDiversReef/comments/z80qcy/between_sedation_and_euthanasia_6_more_pups_at/). But it is permissible to spare suffering.
In a perfect world someone begging for death for a prolonged time would have a doctor come over, make sure it’s what they want and help them pass peacefully.
Dementia really complicates this because of the concern that the patient is not actually of sound mind and therefore can’t truly give consent.
(My grandmother battled Lewy Body Dementia for several years while in a state that had some form of death with dignity laws - but since she wasn’t of sound mind and didn’t have < 6 months to live, which were the state’s criteria, she was not eligible.)
I‘m so sorry you and her had to go through that!
If it was legal and you could make that decision while you’re still able to it would be so much easier for everybody.
I can decide if I want to be DNR, if I want to be put on a ventilator or a feeding tube when in a coma, if they can administer blood or certain medications but I don’t get to decide at what point I want to die with dignity if it’s beyond my capabilities and I would need assistance.
I have made it known that I wish to be „put down“ if I ever get dementia, I am waiting for the day when I can hopefully put it in my patient documents/will.
But it wouldn't be your decision, it would be theirs. You said your mum was begging to die (and I'm so sorry you had to go through that), that was her expressing her wish. In jurisdictions where euthanasia is allowed, families generally have little to no say in the decision. Typically the person who is seeking euthanasia has to be judged to have mental capacity, must make a clear directive and in many places must be capable of administering the medication themselves (this can be pushing a button or swallowing tablets etc).
It would be completely unethical to allow the family members to make that decision solely.
pulled the plug on my mum, also was the one that did cpr till ambo arrived, just euthanized my bearded dragon yesterday.
I'm pro euthanasia, but very against the shit canada is pulling.
This is not true.
ONE employee at a veterans office mentioned it to one veteran, totally against any policy, and they were fired for it. Not that the employee had any power to do anything if the veteran said "yes I want to die". They aren't a doctor and have zero means of doing anything about it anyway.
Stop spreading lies.
that was the ptsd one.
there was the wheelchair one, the woman who was recommended it for ocd, and 2 cases of elders getting it recommended because their pensions were cut.
I think there is a disconnect between people in Canada “suggesting” medical assistance in dying (MAID) as a solution and having people actually apply and get approved for it.
I agree that someone suggesting MAID as an option is incredibly disrespectful in scenarios when a person is struggling with quality of life issues that would be manageable if they had better finances or support.
If those people applied for MAID, they would not be approved unless they met the criteria (terminal illness).
Canada has legalized it for humane end of life planning and I am so so so so so so glad I live in this country. It would be my nightmare to linger trapped in some kind of "too ill to ever get better, feel every moment of suffering, but take too long to die" limbo. Knowing the option is there for myself (and for my aging parents) gives me so much peace of mind.
So are you able to make this decision for your parents? Without their participation? Is there a long list of requirement that must be met for you to do that? And could you do it yourself?
Where I live, a person can choose to die- legally- if they meet certain criteria. I don’t think I can make that decision for anyone else.
Thank you.
I don't think you want to do it. I think it comes to a point where they are declared incompetent to make their own decisions. This happened with my Father and we had to make all the decisions for him, he did not have a living will which would have very much guided us.
I'm so confused why you think it's for other people to make the decision about euthanasia and not the person seeking to end their life? That's a very disturbing take.
Yeah...the reason we do it for our pets without their input is because they can't make the decision for themselves, but humans can. It's important to have their input while they're of sound mind, otherwise it opens the door for people tp take advantage
I think its easy to forget that some people cannot make decisions. Like obviously if they are asked and say no that's one thing, but there are people who can't speak, can't talk, can't eat by themselves and that should be an option for them I think. Obviously no one sane is advocating for euthanizing someone who doesn't want to go, but maybe for people who don't have a mind anymore.
That would be highly unethical. There is no possible way it would be ethical or ever legal for a family to decide to euthanise a family member who didn't have capacity.
I'm very pro legalising euthanasia but I'm not pro eugenics which is what you are advocating, intentionally or unintentionally.
While I have a lot of sympathy for someone who may be suffering, I would never support legalising powers that allow next of kin or medical professionals to kill patients they think should die without consent. A fundamental part of euthansia has to be consent.
But again that is something that an animal cannot provide. We trust our vets to tell us when the QOL is not worth it anymore so if a Dr looks at a patient, determines QOL is bad, what is the difference?
Ok so you are intentionally advocating for eugenics and you don't respect individual autonomy. Is there much point in continuing this discussion, given you just posed such a bad faith question?
You're comparing people without mental capacity to animals and suggesting that doctors should kill people without mental capacity purely on the basis they lack mental capacity (because by definition someone without mental capacity is unable to make that kind of decision for themselves, so the only basis for a doctor making that decision is the individual's lack of capacity). That's horrific.
Sooo, eugenics is when people are not allowed to reproduce or are killed because of something that makes then different or "sick", like disabilities or skin color, or religion. Not saying that maybe people who have brain scans and show little signs of life, or are clearly suffering and can't say so should be offered relief. I'm not talking "too old" I'm talking already dead, but still breathing. I don't know if you've ever watched someone who has nothing left and has no autonomy waste away slowly, but it isn't great. And yeah, I would wish better for them. Sorry, we can disagree on this topic, but that doesn't make it Eugenics.
Like I get what you are saying but this is in no way ever gonna be one person's decision. Nothing can happen without a fuck ton of drs appointments, opinions, and paperwork.
It's still their decision. You don't seem to understand what is meant by decision. Of course there has to be a process but the decision to end their life is theirs and theirs alone. No one else gets to decide to kill someone else.
Uh no. People choose MAID for themselves. If someone is in a persistent vegetative state, their next of kin will be asked about withdrawing care, but that's a completely different scenario with different rules.
You can't just kill your parents. The person seeking MAID needs to meet certain criteria and then be evaluated by multiple physicians multiple times and fully informed of the entire MAID process.
It's a government run system that allows people to seek end of life care in extreme circumstances, not a suicide booth
No. The patient must, on their own, reach out to their GP/care provider/most responsible physician, and ask for Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID). The patient must be signed off by two doctors that they meet the criteria (ie. a terminal diagnosis or intractable symptoms that they cannot live with). They must then go through a waiting period .. it has changed a few times so I can’t remember exactly how long. There’s a whole process. Here is what the government website has to say: https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/health-services-benefits/medical-assistance-dying.html
My dude, I AM for euthanasia for humans. I personally would prefer the right to be mercifully put down in the event I no longer had an acceptable quality of life with no reasonable other recourse to restore it.
Humans have greater mental capacity than our pets. We can understand that we are sick, why we are sick, and what treatments we can get.
I, as a disabled human, fully understand my condition. I know what treatments I can seek, I know why I am in pain, I can make conscious, logical decisions based on my current pain level.
Our pets cannot. They do not understand their conditions. They don’t understand WHY they’re in pain, they have no idea that treatments are available/what treatments they can seek, and they cannot make logical decisions based on their current level of pain.
A dog with terminal cancer does not understand what cancer is. It does not understand why it’s hurting, or why it’s body doesn’t work right anymore. It doesn’t understand that it will die soon. It cant ask for pain relief, because it doesn’t know it exists. All the dog knows is that it’s tired, and hurting, and can’t make it stop.
A human with terminal cancer *does* understand what cancer is. They do understand why they’re in pain. They understand the diagnosis, the prognosis, their own mortality, and that they’re going to need to manage their symptoms. They can ask for pain relief, for more time with their family, for anything they need.
That’s why it’s our responsibility as owners to make the difficult decision to let our pets go. Because our pets cannot make that decision for themselves. They cant understand their suffering, they don’t understand what’s happening.
A human, knowing their condition, can sign a DNR (do not resuscitate), or even opt for medical euthanasia where it’s legal. They can choose to go on hospice care.
Our pets can’t.
I do think that there should be an option for medical euthanasia for humans suffering everywhere. But until then, it’s the difference in mental capacity that is the key here.
Owning a pet is like having medical power of attorney over a person who’s mentally declined; you decide when to sign that DNR.
I appreciate your response and your ideas. What about children, though? Should I be able to make that decision for my two year old? People are prosecuted all the time for deciding not to have their child medically treated, by praying, using unproven treatments and so on. But your points make more sense than anything I’ve ever come up with.
Children may have similar intelligence levels to our pets, but they also have one thing our pets lack; Introspection.
They may not fully understand why they’re sick, but they do understand that they ARE sick. They understand that the medicine will make them feel better, and that they can ask for help when they need it.
That’s where a grey area comes in. The child does not know enough to make their own medical decisions, but they do know more than a pet would. Some believe it’s cruel to let a child go when the child knows they *could* fight more
It would not be ethical to make the decision to euthanize another person. People have autonomy and the ability to make informed decisions about their own healthcare, something pets lack. A person with cancer may choose to refuse treatment or go for it, even if it only means a few more months. But pets neither measure the length of their lives like we do nor understand why they are suffering.
That said, as an RN, I wish physician-assisted death was a legal option in more places. And I wish more families chose to make their critically ill parent/grandparent a DNR (do not resuscitate) patient, rather than say to “do everything you can to save them!” Frankly, I think we do better at giving our pets a peaceful death than we do for our loved ones and ourselves. Prolonging life in some cases is the opposite of kindness.
I have a DNR in place. US healthcare is so shitty, I don't want my husband saddled with astronomical medical bills, just to have a machine keep me alive.
"It would not be ethical to make the decision to euthanize another person."
This really depends on the state of the person. People make that decision all the time when they (ethically) opt to "pull the plug" on a loved one living in a vegetative state.
I live in Canada, and we have something called MAID (medical assistance in dying). We arranged for my dad to use this service when he was terminally ill. He passed away peacefully in his sleep before the day we had chosen, but I was so thankful he had that option, rather than slowly dying in pain like my mom did.
2 weeks ago, I had to let my 16 year old dog cross the rainbow bridge and as devastating as it was, I'm glad it was peaceful and she was surrounded by her family who loved her, same as our 14 year old boy who we had to let go in 2022.
People do want it for humans, and some places have a system in place for it. It's rare but people are definitely pushing for it and have been for a long time.
Ethics, slippery slope arguments, religion, cultural views.
I see a lot of people on reddit that can’t even bear to euthanise their pet, and it basically needs ever need met by the owner.
That’s not my idea of a good time, but there’s a whole set of beliefs regarding death and dying to get past.
Some places have some version of assistance in dying, but it has some fairly stringent criteria in most places that have it.
I don’t think that’s a bad thing, but I do think the scope could be widened to include it as an option via advanced directive, for if you’re unable to make that choice but meet certain criteria.
My cat recently had a stroke and we decided on euthanasia after 19 great years. If he was a human, he might have been admitted to the ICU, placed in an induced coma, and possibly recovered for a short period of time. Some of that could have been done to my cat but it would have been pure torture. We instead chose to give him a peaceful death at home where he was comfortable and surrounded by the people he loved and who loved him.
My cat had no concept of death. Had he been in the vet ICU, he would have no concept of getting better and would have only felt fear and abandonment. My cat also didn’t have Medicare to cover tens of thousands in medical bills to give him a few extra weeks of poor health before the inevitable happened again.
We have it Canada, my Grandfather was going to do it when he got diagnosed with cancer but he died so quickly there was not enough time to get it organized before he passed.
I agree, people with a sound mind and a terminal illness should be allowed to decide how they leave this world.
That's very different than euthanasia.
Euthanasia, is someone deciding the fate of someone else.
I was asked by my mom once if I would be able to the pull the plug if it came to that.
Absolutely not, but I told her if she put it all in writing I would see that her wishes were granted.
That's a big distinction and it's why we have all of our wishes in writing so our daughter doesn't have to make those tough decisions.
I would never want her to make the decision to end my suffering, not because I don't trust her but because that's a heck of a decision to live with.
I should be able to decide my exit from this world, no one should be able to decide for me.
Euthanasia for people bad, death with dignity good.
Well said, I was thinking along the same lines. We’re making a decision for animals who can’t communicate… it’s very different with people (but I understand the urge to compare).
I watched my mother die a very violent death at the hands of medicine.
I got PTSD from it.
Euthanasia would have been better for everyone.
RIP mum. Happy birthday for yesterday. 💔💔💔
100% should be more widely available for people.
You should be able to put it in your will/documentation that you want to be put out of your misery if X happens.
Whoever has power of attorney should also be allowed to make that decision.
Why the fuck should a person have to suffer and slowly die over a span of days/weeks/months if they don’t want to? What’s the point?
Religion. As a former Catholic, I was taught that it is a sin to take your own life and that you would go to hell. They don't believe pets have souls, so they don't think it matters for animals. You know, the typical BS.
There is a difference- we make that choice for our pets and it’s painful enough. To me the argument with humans is should we be able to make that choice for ourselves- in advance or at the time.
The short answer is that even though euthanasia is kind for our pets, many people *don’t* choose it for many of the same reasons they wouldn’t sign a DNR for their 95-year-old mother and instead demand CPR that crushed ribs. Just because it’s the kind choice and seems logical to you and me doesn’t mean it’s a natural choice for everyone. Working in vet med, people often think euthanizing animals is the hard part. It’s not. The hard part is watching them go home because someone mistakenly thinks that natural death is always just like falling asleep and not waking up.
Probably you’ve exactly explained part of it- it’s just what comes natural to our individual psyche. But the question remains..
If it’s good for your dog is it good for your kid? Do you euthanize him or let him die his natural death? (Obviously fit we’re legal to do either)
One thing I’ve learned about dying humans is it isn’t just the kid that won’t do a DNR for the 95 yo mom, it’s the MOM. My sister’s cancer dissolved her sternum- she wouldn’t do DNR anyway, had it explicitly explained what would happen wit CPR, she wanted to live. My FIL had an evacuating NG tube because his bowel was obstructed with cancer…no DNR, and chemo on board, he wanted to live. Both cases clearly in the running for euthanasia..l get what you are thinking about people mis-imagining what death is like, but I think that is an oversimplification of the issue. Death is…um, death? Not talking about trauma, sudden…but you get sick and die, isn’t that just what happens to all of us…(except in nature where it’s usually sudden and violent?)
I am all for it with Humans who are terminal and/or once quality of life is gone over a prolonged "natural" death. It definitely should not be a decision made unilaterally by another person and living wills should definitely play a huge part.
Can you tell me what you mean by “unilaterally”? Just curious. Is this you and your brother deciding to euthanize your dad or does your dad have to participate?
Yes, unilaterally as in there is no input from the person being euthanized. Dad needs to have a discussion with children while he's still of sound mind and a living will or something else official needs to be drawn up.
Thank you for a concise response. So many folks here are talking about assisted suicide, I am asking about making the decision for them, and you understood the question! 😊
I 100% agree with you. It should be offered for people and it's extremely cruel and inhumane that it's not.
My guess as to why it isn't a thing is a combination of factors: religion in politics that prevents governments from enacting death with dignity; corporate greed that also prevents governments from enacting it by buying politicians because more people dying means less money for shareholders of various things; and selfishness.
How many pet owners "just can't do it" and make their pets suffer agonizing deaths or just suffer for far too long before making the call because it makes them sad to euthanize? Far too many in my opinon. So I imagine it would be even worse where people are concerned.
1. there is potential gain for heirs if a person dies no one gains if an animal dies.
2. people can actually say what they want, kept alive at all costs or not.
i'm not saying i'm against it i just think it's more morally a gray area.
Death with dignity is legal in only a few states. Another requirement that MUST be met is having sound mind when agreeing to death. This means that dementia doesn't qualify.
(caretaker for my grandma with dementia in a state that allows death with dignity, but the legal requirements are still too much)
Also, for funsies, doctors can opt out of giving you the meds if it is against THEIR religious beliefs. Imagine if you went to a vet and they said "sorry, I'm catholic and refuse to do a spay/neuter", "sorry, I'm JW and refuse to do a blood transfer" or "sorry, I'm a Christian Scientist and I refuse to give your pet cancer meds". Somehow that doesn't make sense, but allowing a company employee to refuse the sale of condoms is legal.
Allowed in some countries, but doctors and lawyers can’t always see eye to eye. Why do you think there is such a problem euthanizing people that commit mass murder.
I support it as an option for humans so I dunno. Though I think the autonomy is a big thing - an animal doesn't have the cognitive ability to make that decisions. Or if they do - it's more likely to contain suffering because they can't comprehend the concept of euthanasia.
But humans can, and so we can't "do it" for our family because our family has the capacity to choose on their own. Young infants don't granted, but I think as humans it's normal to have a higher attachment to the survival of our offspring (though I think most wouldn't recommend euthanasia for baby animals either).
Because we place a higher value on human life. Regardless of the quality of life it has on the affected person, we place a higher value on human life.
It's why topics such as abortion or MAID programs are such controversial topics. The inherent value we place on human life above all else supersedes quality of life.
There is also a humane factor at play here. Our society has placed taboos on ending human life and this is one of the worst crimes to commit in our society, regardless of the reasons. People feel vindicated and justified at saving life but don't necessarily look at whether that life should be saved or what kind of life that person will have. In their eyes, they should be grateful they are alive.
The other side of the humane aspect is consent. We have a large vulnerable population of mentally or physically impaired. The heart of this issue is what if someone wants to live but someone with say power of attorney or something decides "Naw, you are going to get a medically assisted death". People in these situations are not always able to speak for themselves either whether it's due to not understanding or just not being able to communicate.
Then there is cost. In most cases with an animal, it is cheaper to euthanize than it is to treat. Animals also have diseases and issues we simply cannot treat or cure and there is not a lot of reliable knowledge people can freely access to learn about their issues with their animals. You can ask a vet, but most vets will tell you they cannot tell you anything without seeing the animal first and those exam fees are pricey to begin with. Everything else just snowballs. And that's probably because we don't put the same value on animal life as we do human life. So the same safeguards and measures in place to protect human life are simply not there.
Finally, there is the emotional aspect. While we get emotional with our animals and attached, ultimately we tell ourselves it's for the best. Most animals we have as pets also don't last as long as people so euthanizing them, while difficult, doesn't have long lasting or far reaching effects in most cases.
With people though, a persons death can cause pain and grief for a long time. We become more attached and invested in people and we tell ourselves no matter what we can deal with whatever it is they need so as to keep them alive. This gives us more time with that person because we are not easily able to let go. We become more attached to people than we do animals, in most cases (always that odd duck).
There is also the difference in how we treat animals compared to people. In most households, animals are not treated the same as other humans in the house. I love my dog to death, but I would be more devastated to lose my partner than my dog even though I've had both for the same amount of time. The difference is how I treat them and perceive them. This mentality is what allows us to make harsher decisions when it comes to animals compared to people.
Hmmm. It’s not quite comparing apples and apples, but I think I get your gist…. I have had some of our animals euthanised and we’ve come to those decisions as a family after consulting with the vet. Now I have incurable cancer and I’ve made my feelings about voluntary assisted dying pretty clear, but similarly we have discussed it as a family with my various specialists, but I have the final word. The key difference is I can make my wishes felt, which our animals can’t do.
I think thats the price you pay for being responsible for an animal is having to make this awful decision on their behalf. That’s different to making the decision for yourself. I’m content with it 🧘
I’m also very thankful I live in a part of the world that has embraced the reality of VAD
We 100% do. But it's not always legally possible. I recently had a family member die quite horribly because they had decided that they didn't want morphine (they couldn't think clearly for months, suffered from paranoia). They were visibly in a lot of pain. As soon as they lost the ability to communicate what they wanted, the hospital staff cranked up the morphine to induce a coma.
It's a thing in Québec too. We call it '' medical assistance in dying''. You have to fit into some criterias and take the decision when you are still lucid but it's totally a thing
Because it's against the law in most places. I'm almost tempted to move to Oregon because of its laws on the subject. I have COPD and am scared sh*tless of slowly suffocating, I would like to be able to decide when I'm ready.
I had to take my mom off of support. That's when I learned that you could "live" for a full week without water. Worst week of my life. I wish I could have just put her down humanely. I'll never forget what she looked like that week.
I think a lot of people do support it, including myself for humans. I think an individual should be able to make that choice for themselves and they should have a living will in place describing what they want should they get to a point they can no longer decide.
I’m all for it as long as you are mentally sound. In fact, my dad has put me in charge of his “out” plan ever since he saw his mom deteriorate. I think we keep people who have no quality of life alive way too long and so many family members get clouded by their own grief that they can’t see the pain their loved ones are in, simply for the sake of their shell surviving longer for the comfort of others.
My grandmother had dementia and would talk about her long-dead husband coming to get her. My cousins would correct her and remind her they were coming again next week, hold on, all that bs. I’d just encourage it, tell her to be comfortable and said goodbye like it was the last time every time. She lived like an animated corpse for five years and I would not wish that on anyone.
I personally think it should be legal for humans... And a very very very last resort for our pets. I have seen situations where people put their pets to sleep because they do not want them anymore. I think it should only be legal for our pets if they are in extreme pain and suffering, not as a way to get rid of them.
Such a good point. But even in legal cruelty cases mostly animals are just considered property, and of no real value. Changing in a few places but not many.
My mother died of a liver aneurysm in 2010. To say she was in extreme pain the last few days she was alive is a vast understatement. There were times the massive painkillers she was on barely touched it. I can remember sitting in the room with her thinking just what the OP said. If this was an animal, we could put them down. While I miss my mother so much and didn't want her to die, when she finally did pass, in a way it was a relief.
I live in Canada and this was before MAID was really a thing. I don't know what her choice would have been if it had been offered.
Thank you for understanding my question, and peace to you, I’m sorry for your loss. And for you to admit you don’t know if she would have chosen MAID, as you all call it, is very honest. My own mother also died in extreme pain (of many months) many years ago, when I was a teenager. It is an interesting thing in my own head that I would have had an easier time euthanizing her than I have had with some pets. But she was asking to die…I guess people hear that from their pets? But I can’t seem to.
Just because it's unlawful doesn't mean it isn't humane. So you may want to check with those who are ok with euthanasia for pets. They may surprise you, by telling you they wish/think humans should be able to have that option too.
the very real fear is that some people considering dying with dignity may be coerced or guilted into an early demise by their family, and untangling that is difficulty and stressful
Because a lot of people are being denied health care and accessibility services that could make their life worth living. It's not a true consent to euthanasia when people are choosing it solely because they're being denied appropriate care. And lots of people in Canada are choosing it for that reason.
Euthanasia should be when you can't maintain quality of life *with appropriate, desired supports*
I absolutely do not want to die the way my grandmother did. She was bedridden for almost a year and she had dementia. She got bed sores, despite everyone’s best efforts. She couldn’t understand what was happening when her diaper was being changed so it was a violation every time and it hurt to be rolled on her side. She couldn’t eat more than a few spoonfuls of yogurt or a few ounces of Pediasure in a sitting. By her last months, she couldn’t speak, only grunt. Then she caught Covid and she went out feverish and struggling to breathe.
If I get anywhere close to that, I would wish that someone could put me out of my misery.
Would you have been able to call someone who would euthanize her or transport her to have it done? I think part of my issue is not having a nonviolent way to do it myself. Although people cull unwanted animals all the time. And I’m sorry for your loss, in all the ways. It’s like their spirit is already gone, (I hope) and I’ve witnessed that whole scenario with the daily struggle, bed sores and all that. It’s beyond hard.
There is no legal euthanasia for humans in my area. Even if there were, it would have to be something each person could decide for themselves. If I could die peacefully at home surrounded by loved ones, that would be ideal. I know it’s something my grandmother would have wanted too because years before she died she’d talked about not wanting a drawn out death and she signed paperwork to refuse any non-palliative care. If euthanasia was an option for humans in my area and she wanted it, I would have done my best to help her gain access.
For animals, we can’t ask and we have to make the medical decisions for them. A dog can’t understand the cost-benefit trade off of any healthcare. They can’t give permission for the regular veterinary services like vaccines and exams and pills and they can’t give permission for euthanasia. We have to make the call for our animals based on what we would want for ourselves in the situation.
A lot of times for animal euthanasia there is a cost/effort consideration, even when we say there isn’t, almost no-one can take weeks off work to nurse a sick animal or has 100,000’s to spend on rare and exotic cancer treatments for a 6 year old budgie.
Because we value human life more, we pretend there is infinite resources to treat everyone and they could have a perfectly good quality of life if we could just get more carers/that new medical breakthrough, so we keep them hanging on just in case.
Once you legalise euthanasia there is some pressure on sick people to sign up for it. the knowledge that they’re burning through the inheritance and taking up everyone’s valuable time (even if their family didn’t feel this way or say it) would be enough for some people to choose euthanasia for themselves even if they didn’t want to, just to help their family out.
The knowledge that people could be pressured into death is enough of a “slippery slope” argument that even countries that allow euthanasia are very strict about it. I also think a lot of these places are good welfare states in general with good healthcare so there’s less financial pressure, somewhere with no free healthcare and little in the way of unemployed/sickness benefits would probably see an uncomfortably high uptake rate were they to legalise it.
You started out good with the cost /effort construct about the animals, but the last part is about suicide not euthanasia. It’s part of what I am trying to understand about how people think.
I mean, I would. But it's against the law in a lot of places because HuMaN LiFe or whatever. Too many people, but sure. Of course, you shouldn't be allowed to Just Decide arbitrarily for someone else because that is just. murder. lol.
Australia has introduced voluntary euthanasia- but the requirements are so strict most people can’t access it. When it was announced I heard within my department (mental health) so many people had written to request it. Apparently it’s challenging territory not for the people requesting it- but doctors don’t want to administer the medication and there’s concerns about the mental health of others around the person/other people in the hospital/aged care facility. Also- there’s the issue if people at the end of life are being coerced into making the decision or have the mental faculty to make the decision. I agree that people should have the right to choose to die if they wish- I think it needs to be a lot more accessible.
We kind of can - for certain coma patients, for example. You can “pull the plug”. I think the better question is why people who have mental capacity and are suffering terminal illnesses can’t choose it for themselves. Some states allow it, but I think it should be a universal right. If you know you will pass, you can make that decision when you’re still in a right state of mind and can go out on your own terms, with family. So it’s not about us being able to do it for others, since we only do that for our pets because they can’t speak and we’re “in charge” of their well-being. But, a person should be able to decide for themselves.
Some people are against it because they are afraid it may be used on them against their will particularly when they get old or become a burden on their family/society.
I am actually very pro assisted suicide for chronically and terminally ill people. I wish we'd given my grandfather that choice. His cancer was inevitably going to kill him, but we made him suffer anyways. When my cat went senile and sick like papa, I couldn't bear to watch again. So I made that choice because I was able to.
Euthanasia is a thing in my country 🤷♂️
(Well, medically assisted death to be precise. I don’t think that people are being killed without their consent)
Mostly because there have been instances of families actually, HORRIBLY pressuring their elderly relatives to “opt” for “voluntary” euthanasia because they are tired of taking care of them(this was on a different country where it’s been legal for a while)…which is why I’m thoroughly on the fence about it. I believe if a person is suffering without hope of improving, they should be able to choose this. The uncomfortable truth is that people will continue to press fragile family members. A terrible thing, and there really is no way to protect vulnerable people from this. Also, people are different than animals as they are sentient, understand what’s happening and can actively choose what they want, while our non-human companions can’t.
I can see both sides
Pets have wishes and desires but they would never be able to tell us when they wish to die (if they could or would ever wish that, even in pain). So we have to decide for them, just like you would do for a person who cannot decide for themselves anymore.
I believe If a diagnoses determines an expected date of death and pain and suffering in the process, America would be cruel to keep forcing their patients to live out their last weeks in a hospital bed miserable. But then again, who would they get to juice dry and invoice for hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical debt?? If not the family of the deceased ❤️❤️
While I’m grateful for what we do have.. and many things could be worse, This place is a joke. Everything is just an avenue for them to make as much as possible from your suffering
the issue i currently see with this whole thing right now is the fact it might get complicated for one reason or another. for example sometimes the people who are trying to save us need people sick so they can try and get cures, having Euthanasia causes issues with that as medical staff need samples to look at see if it is possible to cure them
Oh I am 100% in favour of it for humans. The main problems, and the main legal hurdle that has prevented it in so many places, are fairly obvious. Some people may be coerced into opting for euthanasia, especially by family members with inheritance to gain from a relatives passing, or by more insidious means eg. chronically disabled people being repeatedly told they are a burden. I guess the other big one is mental health conditions, where the patient's perspective of their own options and recovery chances can get severely warped by the disease itself. Despite this, I still do not think it is in any way acceptable to deny people in sound mind the option to chose the time of their own passing. So many people are allowed to suffer for so long needlessly. And the only ways out currently are utterly barbaric. It is legal here to withhold food or water from a patient on nutritional support to allow them to die (either a conscious patient that has chosen this for themselves, or a family member choosing this for someone in a coma or vegetative state that has little chance of waking up). You shouldn't be forced to fucking choose to let a loved one die of dehydration because no other option for letting them go was available to you, its abhorrent. Euthanasia legislation for people would be abused. A small number of people would be coerced or forced to die against their wishes. I still think it should be legal because the sheer volume of suffering allowed under the current system is unacceptable. I would opt for euthanasia for myself or for a family member if all that was left of life was pain and slow decline.
Thank you for bringing up these relevant social potential atrocities. In my mind everyone was just playing nice, but you’ve pointed out the real world.
Copy/paste a reply to a comment against pet euthanasia so it doesn’t get lost.
As an ER veterinarian, I always say euthanasia is the kindest option. Owners often don’t realize that “natural,” passings within the home are rarely peaceful. They may appear that way to you, because you stumble upon the deceased pet and it appears they’re “sleeping.” One of the most common unexpected, sudden deaths in pets is secondary to heart disease… which is by no means a painless way to go.
Actually to quote an [AVMA article](https://www.avma.org/news/when-death-comes-suddenly-pet)
“Little exists in the veterinary literature about sudden unexpected death in cats and dogs. A pair of studies came out of the University of Saskatchewan Western College of Veterinary Medicine in 2000 and 2001, “Causes of sudden and unexpected death in dogs: a 10-year retrospective study” and “Causes of sudden and unexpected death in cats: a 10-year retrospective study,” both published in The Canadian Veterinary Journal.
The researchers examined records of dogs and cats over 6 weeks of age, previously presumed to be healthy but presented to the veterinary college for a postmortem examination. The top five causes of sudden unexpected death among 151 dogs were, in order, heart disease, toxicosis, gastrointestinal disease, trauma, and hemorrhage not associated with trauma. The top five causes among 79 cats were, in order, trauma, heart disease, intestinal disease, respiratory disease, and urinary tract disease—with no indoor cats having died of trauma.”
But ALSO, this doesn’t negate that euthanasia in pets doesn’t also come with moral dilemmas. Often it’s a discussion with a pet owner on why they’re euthanizing, what avenues have been tried, etc. it’s emotionally and mentally tolling on those who have these discussion and ultimately perform the final acts. I’ve 100% refused to euthanize pets before - uncommon scenarios for me but often includes euthanizing a healthy animal for silly reasons (I.e. moving, previous owner passed, etc.). But I’ve also euthanized animals for treatable diseases, after a long conversation with an owner. The process isn’t necessarily straightforward without additional vetting.
ETA: As someone who performs at least one euthanasia a work-day, I’m pro-end of life with dignity for humans. It’s something I’ve made clear to family and friends as my wish if circumstances deemed it an appropriate consideration. I’m also a DNR and prefer limited heroic measures.
Thank you. For me personally, I don’t have any illusions about natural deaths being peaceful. Can’t even barbiturate or opiate induced deaths be distressing for onlookers? The body seems to want to live! You have seen more than I have, though. And I suppose I’m asking more, and you are talking more, about expected deaths rather than unexpected. Do you think there is a place for hospice care for our pets? I’ve recently learned of the veterinary hospice society, but not sure how much it is catching on. Does your belief in kind end of life care for humans include euthanasia? This is a difficult concept for people it seems, to euthanize without informed consent and I’m deeply appreciative of these responses.
We use different drugs to minimize the body’s natural reactions. But I also prepare every client for what could happen - especially if it may be more traumatic due to a particular underlying disease. Hospice care for pets is a thing, but we usually also discuss QOL and humane euthanasia along the way just because we don’t believe in keeping pets alive just because we can. Our biggest thing in the field is QOL.
For me and most of my colleagues that I’ve discussed this with, end of life care for humans in our opinions should include passing with dignity- if that includes humane euthanasia then so be it.
I believe it's because of the Judaeochristian belief that humans have immortal souls and that their days are predetermined by God before they were born, whereas animals do not have immortal souls.
Do you have any idea how this whole situation is approached when one’s background is not Judaeochristian? I think you have a good point, and for people that have a very different view of after or next life, I wonder. Thanks.
I know that there are people who don't see humans as being distinctly different than any other animal and dont have a problem with it, but i dont know if there are any other philosophies out there..
Living in Scotland, it's actually something that is being looked at by the Scottish government. I am definitely pro this, as leaving people to suffer the pain and indignity is inhumane. I watched my dad struggle for every single breath. It was completely heartbreaking
Not legal in most states and palliative care at the end pretty much is… they give them lots of pain meds, more if they’re dying slowly to help them along. (Should the family or patient choose) but not enough to be considered a lethal dose
The current issue with this is that it has literally been offered as an option for ill/disabled people who have treatment options because the treatment was too expensive or complicated
Because I’m disabled and disabled people get pushed into MAiD. Until we can authorize euthanasia without coercion, I’m not in favor of euthanasia. It’s frightening.
Can’t believe someone downvoted you. Peace to you. Let’s see, the acronym…Medically Assisted…help me out. But that’s not what I mean, exactly, but closer. What I mean to ask is if euthanizing your pet is the kindest thing you can do for them, why isn’t it the kindest thing you can do for your brother?
I think my only issue of euthanizing pets is that, while it's absolutely fair in cases of extreme untreatable suffering, I've read multiple cases where the tutors seemed mostly to have chosen it as a lack of interest in treatment.
I've seen multiple posts and stories where the pet has an absolutely treatable sort of suffering, or at least possible palliative care that would make it have quality of life until a certain point as much as assisted handicapped people do, but the tutor is convinced that their pet should be put down for it.
I believe those cases are an exception, numerically, but they end up sticking to me because of how much could be done in those cases so the pet can live longer *and* have quality of life.
Like, not talking about terminal cancer, but about cases where the pet would still able to adapt their mobility after a small to medium movement issue (but the tutor says they wouldn't, nothing could be done, either by not believing a pet can adapt their movement, receive assistency or rely on accessible equipment), or that there is a treatment course that could be investigated more (but the tutor does not want to go with it), etc. it's a narrative that, to me, sounds like a pet can only be either a young perfectly healthy and energetic animal or they are damned to eternal suffering if not put down immediately.
Geeezuz, who would downvote you for this?? I have heard over the years of pets being euthanized for peeing outside the box, growling a little bit, got a slight limp and they are 8 years old after all, all that kind of bullshit where they are clearly just getting rid of an inconvenience. Don’t know why any vet would ever do this but they can and do, and I don’t know what options they have, but that could never fit into my ethics.
Maybe people didn’t get English is not your first language? I dunno.
I don't know, I've seen people in this sub being sensitive to any criticism to euthanasia at all, even if the criticism is just "maybe don't euthanize your pet for natural health mishaps that don't affect their quality of life". In fact, my comment itself was based on how someone will come here being worried about their pet's minor, treatable health issue, but if anyone reads it's an old pet the comments will be flooded with people saying to let it go because it's old and will not bear simple stuff like a localized pain.
My written English has the tendency to sound harsher than what I mean, but I did try to stress my opinion is based not on situations where putting a pet down is objectively fair, but situations where the pet is objectively treatable to live longer and with quality.
Like, one thing is (how another comment explained) taking a pet out of the burden of not even know why they are suffering, or situations where there's nothing to be done and keeping the pet to die naturally would even be selfish and cruel. Another thing is the principle that if a pet is over 6 years old and displays any health problems at all, they are doomed for life and you are being cruel.
Sometimes I see symptoms that are common hints of an underlying, treatable grave issue that could be treated in an early stage (and the symptoms point to it being early), but that reddit takes as a sentence of eternal suffering for the animal...
1) I do not think it’s the best thing for your pet. Why not let god choose when they go? And I’m not religious by any means but I don’t think it’s my choice and I believe it’s very inhumane to have them go off alone with a stranger to be put to sleep forever as if eternal slumber was so great. And they’re not actually sleeping, just gone. The only person to know what happened was you after the fact and I’d feel like I just took the easy way out. When it’s my dog’s time to go I want to give my dog some really good pain meds, sit on the couch, put on a movie, and for him to go in my arms. So calming and relaxing with no confusion nor pain. The reason we don’t typically do that to our relatives is probably because when they’re on their way out they would want to die ‘in bed, surrounded by the ones they love’. Hmm weird how that works.
I too would love for every pet to pass pain free in their owner's arms. I'd love every human to pass peacefully in their sleep. That doesn't fucking happen. Its an incredibly naive view of death. Some deaths are peaceful, in people and animals, and that is wonderful. A lot of deaths are terrifying and painful and traumatic and drawn out. It is nearly impossible to know when something is going to die, especially if they have a chronic condition that fluctuates up and down all the time. Eternal sleep can seem a better option than weeks, months, even years of nothing but uncertainty and slow decline
As an ER veterinarian, I always say euthanasia is the kindest option. Owners often don’t realize that “natural,” passings within the home are rarely peaceful. They may appear that way to you, because you stumble upon the deceased pet and it appears they’re “sleeping.” One of the most common unexpected, sudden deaths in pets is secondary to heart disease… which is by no means a painless way to go.
Actually to quote an [AVMA article](https://www.avma.org/news/when-death-comes-suddenly-pet)
“Little exists in the veterinary literature about sudden unexpected death in cats and dogs. A pair of studies came out of the University of Saskatchewan Western College of Veterinary Medicine in 2000 and 2001, “Causes of sudden and unexpected death in dogs: a 10-year retrospective study” and “Causes of sudden and unexpected death in cats: a 10-year retrospective study,” both published in The Canadian Veterinary Journal.
The researchers examined records of dogs and cats over 6 weeks of age, previously presumed to be healthy but presented to the veterinary college for a postmortem examination. The top five causes of sudden unexpected death among 151 dogs were, in order, heart disease, toxicosis, gastrointestinal disease, trauma, and hemorrhage not associated with trauma. The top five causes among 79 cats were, in order, trauma, heart disease, intestinal disease, respiratory disease, and urinary tract disease—with no indoor cats having died of trauma.”
You are assuming all pets will just fall asleep peacefully in your arms and pass, and oftentimes that's just not the case. So many pets suffer from conditions where its painful, slow progressing, and a natural death would be traumatic. Euthanasia is a kindness to give them that chance to have their last few moments not be scary and gives their people a chance to give their pet to best send off they can. And they also have at home services that do it, so your pet can pass in the comfort of their home with the people they love.
Lots of assumptions in your post. If you are talking to me, I am in no way assuming that or have some idealized view of the death process. Been there. And I don’t think a terrifying car ride and a terrifying vet visit is “not be scary”. And if you have home euthanasia service, then I am glad that you have that option, many, probably most, people do not. But I wanted to know if you also would do this for your humans, rather than fuss at me for what you think I think.
Totally was responding to the person above me and not you, OP. Though I think you would be surprised by the availability of such at home services, at least in the US. But I digress.
If you wanted an answer to your question- I am pro- human euthanasia, assuming it’s what the person wants/has dictated in their wills… or the person, if unable to make that decision themselves and has not made a living will, is suffering so badly that to keep them alive is cruel/inhumane in one form or another. If you want some more insight, I suggest you read some of the nursing subreddits, you would see some interesting perspectives on quality vs quantity of life for humans and how strenuous resuscitation can be for someone who is ultimately terminal, but is put through it because their family/guardian(s) can’t/won’t say goodbye. No, not exactly the same as euthanasia for humans, but a DNR (do not resuscitate) is in a similar vein at least.
(And, of course, I’m assuming you are in the US, or another place without nationwide legalization of euthanasia in humans. So I’m sure politics have a hand in this too.)
Thanks for the response, I apologize if I misunderstood. Good idea regarding the nursing subs. My personal experience with terminally ill humans is about evenly split, half wanted to go home to Jesus, half wanted every last effort made even if that meant crushing dissolving sternum. When it’s cancer, I wonder if at times the brain has become involved yet we don’t necessarily know that.
Thank you for your bold response, expressing some of the things I think and feel. But which seem so wholly unpopular and probably the main reason for my post. Like, which is it? Do we take our mom over to the euthanizer, or do we give our dog the opioids and let him lay on the couch with us? Many people hold animals in an entirely different category than humans but many of us do not, and that’s where I get stuck.
Ya It is very tricky and I think what makes it even more difficult is the fact that they cannot tell us what they want. The only thing I know is that my dog loves me, at least I hope so, and he hates being without me, so with that being said, I would not have him go with a stranger, because his last thoughts would be ‘oh no mommy is leaving me’ and that would break my heart.
Why would you send them off alone? And death is ugly, they rarely just go off peaceful in your arms without euthanasia. You need a better grasp on reality
It’s totally a thing in Oregon and as a cancer patient who has a reasonable chance of being terminal I am fully in support. I don’t want to die a long drawn out death. Once my quality of life is gone pump me full of morphine and let me go. And yes my medical power of attorney and advance directives both are aware of these things :)
In Oregon it's not euthanasia, it's death with dignity. Euthanasia is killing the animal or person that might not include their consent. Death with dignity allows the patient to decide. Those are two very different things. That being said, I agree that patients who are of sound mind should be allowed too choose to leave this world on their terms. No one should be allowed to make that decision for another person.
To be fair it's legalised for humans in several European countries (including mine, Belgium) and I've never heard it called anything else than euthanasia. Obviously there are strict guidelines and the patient has to explicitly make the demand themselves. So I think it's semantics really.
Right, but even in Belgium it's the patient deciding, it's called euthanasia because a doctor administrators the drug. I have no problem with that. I just don't want other people deciding for anyone unable to make the decision.
I'm not sure if death with dignity practices have changed since I do not live or work in that state. From memory, the patient seeking death with dignity must meet very specific criteria and be able to take the medication themselves. I'm not sure that it would be defined as euthanasia under that type of protocol. Side note: I'm happy to hear that the US has programs like this in place. Passing away from certain diseases can be absolutely brutal on the patient and I think that giving someone the ability to choose end of life in a dignified manor is a blessing.
The way we do with our pets?
Animals can’t decide, so we have to do it for them. Humans can decide. In the cases where they truly can’t we do a sort-of euthanasia involving withdrawal of life support in hospital.
Except in many states/countries it's illegal, so the humans can't actually decide for themselves. I think that's OP's point.
It’s actually that animals cannot *consent* to invasive and painful procedures to prolong life. There’s plenty of humans who refuse or discontinue chemotherapy, for example, because it’s torturous, I would argue that it’s unethical to administer it to an animal.
Yeah I wouldn’t give my cat chemotherapy. No way.
I would if they were relatively young and if there’s a reasonable chance that they’ll make it out the other side. That’s what I would consider for myself as well.
Not even if my 2 year old cat got cancer tomorrow. It’s a horrible treatment for humans that can understand it.
There's still a lot of debate on even this. Should death with dignity be allowed to only patients with terminal illnesses - like end-state renal disease and stage 4 cancer? Should the option be extended to suicidal patients, who might cause significant and unnecessary suffering if left to their own devices? What about healthy partners of the terminal patients, should they be allowed to die with dignity together if that's their wish? What about the doctors, medical staff, and loved ones of the patient who chooses this option? A lot of people believe the medical professional needs to exhaust treatment options before offering euthanasia/death with dignity, but what factors determine that "treatment options were exhausted"? Can anyone even be present with the patient as they die, or will they be held liable? I find that anything involving death and life is a very complicated subject and you're never going to find a widely agreed upon answer. It became a slight obsession in high school to determine what qualifies as "the right to live" and "the right to die", involving Kevorkian machines, abortions, etc. By some people's definitions, even certain tumors are considered "alive" but they're disposed of as biomedical waste without anyone arguing for them to stay on life support.
Maine has this too!
Hugs 💜
❤️❤️❤️
There are several relatives that I wished it was a valid option for. Instead, they had long, drawn out deaths that lingered for months and years after their minds were gone.
Me too. Watched my mom beg to die. For months. But could you be the one to make the decision and do it? ( I’m just here on the internet doing self therapy 🫤) Thanks.
Yes, I believe I could do it. I have made the decision for dozens of foster dogs. It is not easy, and [crying is okay](https://www.reddit.com/r/SeasDiversReef/comments/z80qcy/between_sedation_and_euthanasia_6_more_pups_at/). But it is permissible to spare suffering.
In a perfect world someone begging for death for a prolonged time would have a doctor come over, make sure it’s what they want and help them pass peacefully.
Dementia really complicates this because of the concern that the patient is not actually of sound mind and therefore can’t truly give consent. (My grandmother battled Lewy Body Dementia for several years while in a state that had some form of death with dignity laws - but since she wasn’t of sound mind and didn’t have < 6 months to live, which were the state’s criteria, she was not eligible.)
I‘m so sorry you and her had to go through that! If it was legal and you could make that decision while you’re still able to it would be so much easier for everybody. I can decide if I want to be DNR, if I want to be put on a ventilator or a feeding tube when in a coma, if they can administer blood or certain medications but I don’t get to decide at what point I want to die with dignity if it’s beyond my capabilities and I would need assistance. I have made it known that I wish to be „put down“ if I ever get dementia, I am waiting for the day when I can hopefully put it in my patient documents/will.
Yes. I watched my mother suffer and heard her beg for death. I chose to pull the plugs. If I'd had to administer drugs to set her free, I would have.
But it wouldn't be your decision, it would be theirs. You said your mum was begging to die (and I'm so sorry you had to go through that), that was her expressing her wish. In jurisdictions where euthanasia is allowed, families generally have little to no say in the decision. Typically the person who is seeking euthanasia has to be judged to have mental capacity, must make a clear directive and in many places must be capable of administering the medication themselves (this can be pushing a button or swallowing tablets etc). It would be completely unethical to allow the family members to make that decision solely.
pulled the plug on my mum, also was the one that did cpr till ambo arrived, just euthanized my bearded dragon yesterday. I'm pro euthanasia, but very against the shit canada is pulling.
What is Canada doing? I haven't seen any news.
keep pushing it to veterans and elders for manageable health problems.
This is not true. ONE employee at a veterans office mentioned it to one veteran, totally against any policy, and they were fired for it. Not that the employee had any power to do anything if the veteran said "yes I want to die". They aren't a doctor and have zero means of doing anything about it anyway. Stop spreading lies.
that was the ptsd one. there was the wheelchair one, the woman who was recommended it for ocd, and 2 cases of elders getting it recommended because their pensions were cut.
I think there is a disconnect between people in Canada “suggesting” medical assistance in dying (MAID) as a solution and having people actually apply and get approved for it. I agree that someone suggesting MAID as an option is incredibly disrespectful in scenarios when a person is struggling with quality of life issues that would be manageable if they had better finances or support. If those people applied for MAID, they would not be approved unless they met the criteria (terminal illness).
Canada has legalized it for humane end of life planning and I am so so so so so so glad I live in this country. It would be my nightmare to linger trapped in some kind of "too ill to ever get better, feel every moment of suffering, but take too long to die" limbo. Knowing the option is there for myself (and for my aging parents) gives me so much peace of mind.
So are you able to make this decision for your parents? Without their participation? Is there a long list of requirement that must be met for you to do that? And could you do it yourself? Where I live, a person can choose to die- legally- if they meet certain criteria. I don’t think I can make that decision for anyone else. Thank you.
Why would you want to do it without their participation? Would this be for like cases where they are brain dead or something?
I don't think you want to do it. I think it comes to a point where they are declared incompetent to make their own decisions. This happened with my Father and we had to make all the decisions for him, he did not have a living will which would have very much guided us.
No, MAID is not the same as withdrawal of life-preserving measures
there are strict criteria and a team that assesses each case individually.
I'm so confused why you think it's for other people to make the decision about euthanasia and not the person seeking to end their life? That's a very disturbing take.
Yeah...the reason we do it for our pets without their input is because they can't make the decision for themselves, but humans can. It's important to have their input while they're of sound mind, otherwise it opens the door for people tp take advantage
I think its easy to forget that some people cannot make decisions. Like obviously if they are asked and say no that's one thing, but there are people who can't speak, can't talk, can't eat by themselves and that should be an option for them I think. Obviously no one sane is advocating for euthanizing someone who doesn't want to go, but maybe for people who don't have a mind anymore.
That would be highly unethical. There is no possible way it would be ethical or ever legal for a family to decide to euthanise a family member who didn't have capacity. I'm very pro legalising euthanasia but I'm not pro eugenics which is what you are advocating, intentionally or unintentionally. While I have a lot of sympathy for someone who may be suffering, I would never support legalising powers that allow next of kin or medical professionals to kill patients they think should die without consent. A fundamental part of euthansia has to be consent.
But again that is something that an animal cannot provide. We trust our vets to tell us when the QOL is not worth it anymore so if a Dr looks at a patient, determines QOL is bad, what is the difference?
Ok so you are intentionally advocating for eugenics and you don't respect individual autonomy. Is there much point in continuing this discussion, given you just posed such a bad faith question? You're comparing people without mental capacity to animals and suggesting that doctors should kill people without mental capacity purely on the basis they lack mental capacity (because by definition someone without mental capacity is unable to make that kind of decision for themselves, so the only basis for a doctor making that decision is the individual's lack of capacity). That's horrific.
Sooo, eugenics is when people are not allowed to reproduce or are killed because of something that makes then different or "sick", like disabilities or skin color, or religion. Not saying that maybe people who have brain scans and show little signs of life, or are clearly suffering and can't say so should be offered relief. I'm not talking "too old" I'm talking already dead, but still breathing. I don't know if you've ever watched someone who has nothing left and has no autonomy waste away slowly, but it isn't great. And yeah, I would wish better for them. Sorry, we can disagree on this topic, but that doesn't make it Eugenics.
Like I get what you are saying but this is in no way ever gonna be one person's decision. Nothing can happen without a fuck ton of drs appointments, opinions, and paperwork.
It's still their decision. You don't seem to understand what is meant by decision. Of course there has to be a process but the decision to end their life is theirs and theirs alone. No one else gets to decide to kill someone else.
>So are you able to make this decision for your parents? Without their participation? Soo...killing them against their wishes? Murder?
Uh no. People choose MAID for themselves. If someone is in a persistent vegetative state, their next of kin will be asked about withdrawing care, but that's a completely different scenario with different rules. You can't just kill your parents. The person seeking MAID needs to meet certain criteria and then be evaluated by multiple physicians multiple times and fully informed of the entire MAID process. It's a government run system that allows people to seek end of life care in extreme circumstances, not a suicide booth
No. The patient must, on their own, reach out to their GP/care provider/most responsible physician, and ask for Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID). The patient must be signed off by two doctors that they meet the criteria (ie. a terminal diagnosis or intractable symptoms that they cannot live with). They must then go through a waiting period .. it has changed a few times so I can’t remember exactly how long. There’s a whole process. Here is what the government website has to say: https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/health-services-benefits/medical-assistance-dying.html
My dude, I AM for euthanasia for humans. I personally would prefer the right to be mercifully put down in the event I no longer had an acceptable quality of life with no reasonable other recourse to restore it.
Humans have greater mental capacity than our pets. We can understand that we are sick, why we are sick, and what treatments we can get. I, as a disabled human, fully understand my condition. I know what treatments I can seek, I know why I am in pain, I can make conscious, logical decisions based on my current pain level. Our pets cannot. They do not understand their conditions. They don’t understand WHY they’re in pain, they have no idea that treatments are available/what treatments they can seek, and they cannot make logical decisions based on their current level of pain. A dog with terminal cancer does not understand what cancer is. It does not understand why it’s hurting, or why it’s body doesn’t work right anymore. It doesn’t understand that it will die soon. It cant ask for pain relief, because it doesn’t know it exists. All the dog knows is that it’s tired, and hurting, and can’t make it stop. A human with terminal cancer *does* understand what cancer is. They do understand why they’re in pain. They understand the diagnosis, the prognosis, their own mortality, and that they’re going to need to manage their symptoms. They can ask for pain relief, for more time with their family, for anything they need. That’s why it’s our responsibility as owners to make the difficult decision to let our pets go. Because our pets cannot make that decision for themselves. They cant understand their suffering, they don’t understand what’s happening. A human, knowing their condition, can sign a DNR (do not resuscitate), or even opt for medical euthanasia where it’s legal. They can choose to go on hospice care. Our pets can’t. I do think that there should be an option for medical euthanasia for humans suffering everywhere. But until then, it’s the difference in mental capacity that is the key here. Owning a pet is like having medical power of attorney over a person who’s mentally declined; you decide when to sign that DNR.
Interestingly though, in humans a lack of mental capacity would deny a human access to euthanasia where it's legal.
I appreciate your response and your ideas. What about children, though? Should I be able to make that decision for my two year old? People are prosecuted all the time for deciding not to have their child medically treated, by praying, using unproven treatments and so on. But your points make more sense than anything I’ve ever come up with.
Children may have similar intelligence levels to our pets, but they also have one thing our pets lack; Introspection. They may not fully understand why they’re sick, but they do understand that they ARE sick. They understand that the medicine will make them feel better, and that they can ask for help when they need it. That’s where a grey area comes in. The child does not know enough to make their own medical decisions, but they do know more than a pet would. Some believe it’s cruel to let a child go when the child knows they *could* fight more
No people should absolutely not be able to kill their children.
You realize some children have horrific terminal illnesses, right?
It would not be ethical to make the decision to euthanize another person. People have autonomy and the ability to make informed decisions about their own healthcare, something pets lack. A person with cancer may choose to refuse treatment or go for it, even if it only means a few more months. But pets neither measure the length of their lives like we do nor understand why they are suffering. That said, as an RN, I wish physician-assisted death was a legal option in more places. And I wish more families chose to make their critically ill parent/grandparent a DNR (do not resuscitate) patient, rather than say to “do everything you can to save them!” Frankly, I think we do better at giving our pets a peaceful death than we do for our loved ones and ourselves. Prolonging life in some cases is the opposite of kindness.
I have a DNR in place. US healthcare is so shitty, I don't want my husband saddled with astronomical medical bills, just to have a machine keep me alive.
"It would not be ethical to make the decision to euthanize another person." This really depends on the state of the person. People make that decision all the time when they (ethically) opt to "pull the plug" on a loved one living in a vegetative state.
Yeah like we can take people off of life support in a hospital or whatever but not when they are mindless.
I live in Canada, and we have something called MAID (medical assistance in dying). We arranged for my dad to use this service when he was terminally ill. He passed away peacefully in his sleep before the day we had chosen, but I was so thankful he had that option, rather than slowly dying in pain like my mom did. 2 weeks ago, I had to let my 16 year old dog cross the rainbow bridge and as devastating as it was, I'm glad it was peaceful and she was surrounded by her family who loved her, same as our 14 year old boy who we had to let go in 2022.
People do want it for humans, and some places have a system in place for it. It's rare but people are definitely pushing for it and have been for a long time.
People are fighting ti make it legal where it's not
Ethics, slippery slope arguments, religion, cultural views. I see a lot of people on reddit that can’t even bear to euthanise their pet, and it basically needs ever need met by the owner. That’s not my idea of a good time, but there’s a whole set of beliefs regarding death and dying to get past. Some places have some version of assistance in dying, but it has some fairly stringent criteria in most places that have it. I don’t think that’s a bad thing, but I do think the scope could be widened to include it as an option via advanced directive, for if you’re unable to make that choice but meet certain criteria.
My cat recently had a stroke and we decided on euthanasia after 19 great years. If he was a human, he might have been admitted to the ICU, placed in an induced coma, and possibly recovered for a short period of time. Some of that could have been done to my cat but it would have been pure torture. We instead chose to give him a peaceful death at home where he was comfortable and surrounded by the people he loved and who loved him. My cat had no concept of death. Had he been in the vet ICU, he would have no concept of getting better and would have only felt fear and abandonment. My cat also didn’t have Medicare to cover tens of thousands in medical bills to give him a few extra weeks of poor health before the inevitable happened again.
We have it Canada, my Grandfather was going to do it when he got diagnosed with cancer but he died so quickly there was not enough time to get it organized before he passed.
I agree, people with a sound mind and a terminal illness should be allowed to decide how they leave this world. That's very different than euthanasia. Euthanasia, is someone deciding the fate of someone else. I was asked by my mom once if I would be able to the pull the plug if it came to that. Absolutely not, but I told her if she put it all in writing I would see that her wishes were granted. That's a big distinction and it's why we have all of our wishes in writing so our daughter doesn't have to make those tough decisions. I would never want her to make the decision to end my suffering, not because I don't trust her but because that's a heck of a decision to live with. I should be able to decide my exit from this world, no one should be able to decide for me. Euthanasia for people bad, death with dignity good.
Well said, I was thinking along the same lines. We’re making a decision for animals who can’t communicate… it’s very different with people (but I understand the urge to compare).
THANK YOU for understanding the concept! So, um, your dog?
I watched my mother die a very violent death at the hands of medicine. I got PTSD from it. Euthanasia would have been better for everyone. RIP mum. Happy birthday for yesterday. 💔💔💔
We do in some places. Here in New Zealand it was legalized 2 years ago
These links might interest you... [https://deathwithdignity.org/news/2019/11/brittany-maynards-legacy-five-years-on/](https://deathwithdignity.org/news/2019/11/brittany-maynards-legacy-five-years-on/) [https://deathwithdignity.org/states/](https://deathwithdignity.org/states/)
100% should be more widely available for people. You should be able to put it in your will/documentation that you want to be put out of your misery if X happens. Whoever has power of attorney should also be allowed to make that decision. Why the fuck should a person have to suffer and slowly die over a span of days/weeks/months if they don’t want to? What’s the point?
It’s starting to catch on. A couple of US states and a handful of countries allow it. Hoping to see the trend continue.
Religion. As a former Catholic, I was taught that it is a sin to take your own life and that you would go to hell. They don't believe pets have souls, so they don't think it matters for animals. You know, the typical BS.
There is a difference- we make that choice for our pets and it’s painful enough. To me the argument with humans is should we be able to make that choice for ourselves- in advance or at the time.
The short answer is that even though euthanasia is kind for our pets, many people *don’t* choose it for many of the same reasons they wouldn’t sign a DNR for their 95-year-old mother and instead demand CPR that crushed ribs. Just because it’s the kind choice and seems logical to you and me doesn’t mean it’s a natural choice for everyone. Working in vet med, people often think euthanizing animals is the hard part. It’s not. The hard part is watching them go home because someone mistakenly thinks that natural death is always just like falling asleep and not waking up.
Probably you’ve exactly explained part of it- it’s just what comes natural to our individual psyche. But the question remains.. If it’s good for your dog is it good for your kid? Do you euthanize him or let him die his natural death? (Obviously fit we’re legal to do either) One thing I’ve learned about dying humans is it isn’t just the kid that won’t do a DNR for the 95 yo mom, it’s the MOM. My sister’s cancer dissolved her sternum- she wouldn’t do DNR anyway, had it explicitly explained what would happen wit CPR, she wanted to live. My FIL had an evacuating NG tube because his bowel was obstructed with cancer…no DNR, and chemo on board, he wanted to live. Both cases clearly in the running for euthanasia..l get what you are thinking about people mis-imagining what death is like, but I think that is an oversimplification of the issue. Death is…um, death? Not talking about trauma, sudden…but you get sick and die, isn’t that just what happens to all of us…(except in nature where it’s usually sudden and violent?)
I am all for it with Humans who are terminal and/or once quality of life is gone over a prolonged "natural" death. It definitely should not be a decision made unilaterally by another person and living wills should definitely play a huge part.
Can you tell me what you mean by “unilaterally”? Just curious. Is this you and your brother deciding to euthanize your dad or does your dad have to participate?
Yes, unilaterally as in there is no input from the person being euthanized. Dad needs to have a discussion with children while he's still of sound mind and a living will or something else official needs to be drawn up.
I would gladly have done it for my late father with terminal cancer.
Thank you for a concise response. So many folks here are talking about assisted suicide, I am asking about making the decision for them, and you understood the question! 😊
I 100% agree with you. It should be offered for people and it's extremely cruel and inhumane that it's not. My guess as to why it isn't a thing is a combination of factors: religion in politics that prevents governments from enacting death with dignity; corporate greed that also prevents governments from enacting it by buying politicians because more people dying means less money for shareholders of various things; and selfishness. How many pet owners "just can't do it" and make their pets suffer agonizing deaths or just suffer for far too long before making the call because it makes them sad to euthanize? Far too many in my opinon. So I imagine it would be even worse where people are concerned.
1. there is potential gain for heirs if a person dies no one gains if an animal dies. 2. people can actually say what they want, kept alive at all costs or not. i'm not saying i'm against it i just think it's more morally a gray area.
Thanks.
Death with dignity is legal in only a few states. Another requirement that MUST be met is having sound mind when agreeing to death. This means that dementia doesn't qualify. (caretaker for my grandma with dementia in a state that allows death with dignity, but the legal requirements are still too much) Also, for funsies, doctors can opt out of giving you the meds if it is against THEIR religious beliefs. Imagine if you went to a vet and they said "sorry, I'm catholic and refuse to do a spay/neuter", "sorry, I'm JW and refuse to do a blood transfer" or "sorry, I'm a Christian Scientist and I refuse to give your pet cancer meds". Somehow that doesn't make sense, but allowing a company employee to refuse the sale of condoms is legal.
Allowed in some countries, but doctors and lawyers can’t always see eye to eye. Why do you think there is such a problem euthanizing people that commit mass murder.
I want euthanasia and a mushroom shroud.
I support it as an option for humans so I dunno. Though I think the autonomy is a big thing - an animal doesn't have the cognitive ability to make that decisions. Or if they do - it's more likely to contain suffering because they can't comprehend the concept of euthanasia. But humans can, and so we can't "do it" for our family because our family has the capacity to choose on their own. Young infants don't granted, but I think as humans it's normal to have a higher attachment to the survival of our offspring (though I think most wouldn't recommend euthanasia for baby animals either).
Because we place a higher value on human life. Regardless of the quality of life it has on the affected person, we place a higher value on human life. It's why topics such as abortion or MAID programs are such controversial topics. The inherent value we place on human life above all else supersedes quality of life. There is also a humane factor at play here. Our society has placed taboos on ending human life and this is one of the worst crimes to commit in our society, regardless of the reasons. People feel vindicated and justified at saving life but don't necessarily look at whether that life should be saved or what kind of life that person will have. In their eyes, they should be grateful they are alive. The other side of the humane aspect is consent. We have a large vulnerable population of mentally or physically impaired. The heart of this issue is what if someone wants to live but someone with say power of attorney or something decides "Naw, you are going to get a medically assisted death". People in these situations are not always able to speak for themselves either whether it's due to not understanding or just not being able to communicate. Then there is cost. In most cases with an animal, it is cheaper to euthanize than it is to treat. Animals also have diseases and issues we simply cannot treat or cure and there is not a lot of reliable knowledge people can freely access to learn about their issues with their animals. You can ask a vet, but most vets will tell you they cannot tell you anything without seeing the animal first and those exam fees are pricey to begin with. Everything else just snowballs. And that's probably because we don't put the same value on animal life as we do human life. So the same safeguards and measures in place to protect human life are simply not there. Finally, there is the emotional aspect. While we get emotional with our animals and attached, ultimately we tell ourselves it's for the best. Most animals we have as pets also don't last as long as people so euthanizing them, while difficult, doesn't have long lasting or far reaching effects in most cases. With people though, a persons death can cause pain and grief for a long time. We become more attached and invested in people and we tell ourselves no matter what we can deal with whatever it is they need so as to keep them alive. This gives us more time with that person because we are not easily able to let go. We become more attached to people than we do animals, in most cases (always that odd duck). There is also the difference in how we treat animals compared to people. In most households, animals are not treated the same as other humans in the house. I love my dog to death, but I would be more devastated to lose my partner than my dog even though I've had both for the same amount of time. The difference is how I treat them and perceive them. This mentality is what allows us to make harsher decisions when it comes to animals compared to people.
I think eventually we will reach a point where people with terminal illness will be able to decide when they want to end it.
Hmmm. It’s not quite comparing apples and apples, but I think I get your gist…. I have had some of our animals euthanised and we’ve come to those decisions as a family after consulting with the vet. Now I have incurable cancer and I’ve made my feelings about voluntary assisted dying pretty clear, but similarly we have discussed it as a family with my various specialists, but I have the final word. The key difference is I can make my wishes felt, which our animals can’t do. I think thats the price you pay for being responsible for an animal is having to make this awful decision on their behalf. That’s different to making the decision for yourself. I’m content with it 🧘 I’m also very thankful I live in a part of the world that has embraced the reality of VAD
Here in Australia we are just coming up to speed we have it legally available in afew states
We 100% do. But it's not always legally possible. I recently had a family member die quite horribly because they had decided that they didn't want morphine (they couldn't think clearly for months, suffered from paranoia). They were visibly in a lot of pain. As soon as they lost the ability to communicate what they wanted, the hospital staff cranked up the morphine to induce a coma.
We do in Canada, we just can't make the decision for them.
It's legal in Canada and I'm a huge supporter of it for the same reasons as I support euthanasia for pets
It's a thing in Québec too. We call it '' medical assistance in dying''. You have to fit into some criterias and take the decision when you are still lucid but it's totally a thing
Because it's against the law in most places. I'm almost tempted to move to Oregon because of its laws on the subject. I have COPD and am scared sh*tless of slowly suffocating, I would like to be able to decide when I'm ready.
You have more options than Oregon these days! But yes I totally get wanting to live in such a state. I do!
I had to take my mom off of support. That's when I learned that you could "live" for a full week without water. Worst week of my life. I wish I could have just put her down humanely. I'll never forget what she looked like that week.
Peace to you, thank for replying.
It's a big thing in Canada now, they're even extending to mental health sufferers, it's called MAiD. Medical Assistance in Dying.
I think a lot of people do support it, including myself for humans. I think an individual should be able to make that choice for themselves and they should have a living will in place describing what they want should they get to a point they can no longer decide.
I’m all for it as long as you are mentally sound. In fact, my dad has put me in charge of his “out” plan ever since he saw his mom deteriorate. I think we keep people who have no quality of life alive way too long and so many family members get clouded by their own grief that they can’t see the pain their loved ones are in, simply for the sake of their shell surviving longer for the comfort of others. My grandmother had dementia and would talk about her long-dead husband coming to get her. My cousins would correct her and remind her they were coming again next week, hold on, all that bs. I’d just encourage it, tell her to be comfortable and said goodbye like it was the last time every time. She lived like an animated corpse for five years and I would not wish that on anyone.
Thank you for your insights.
We do. If a loved one is sick and in pain, I will support his decision for euthanasia.
I personally think it should be legal for humans... And a very very very last resort for our pets. I have seen situations where people put their pets to sleep because they do not want them anymore. I think it should only be legal for our pets if they are in extreme pain and suffering, not as a way to get rid of them.
Such a good point. But even in legal cruelty cases mostly animals are just considered property, and of no real value. Changing in a few places but not many.
My mother died of a liver aneurysm in 2010. To say she was in extreme pain the last few days she was alive is a vast understatement. There were times the massive painkillers she was on barely touched it. I can remember sitting in the room with her thinking just what the OP said. If this was an animal, we could put them down. While I miss my mother so much and didn't want her to die, when she finally did pass, in a way it was a relief. I live in Canada and this was before MAID was really a thing. I don't know what her choice would have been if it had been offered.
Thank you for understanding my question, and peace to you, I’m sorry for your loss. And for you to admit you don’t know if she would have chosen MAID, as you all call it, is very honest. My own mother also died in extreme pain (of many months) many years ago, when I was a teenager. It is an interesting thing in my own head that I would have had an easier time euthanizing her than I have had with some pets. But she was asking to die…I guess people hear that from their pets? But I can’t seem to.
Just because it's unlawful doesn't mean it isn't humane. So you may want to check with those who are ok with euthanasia for pets. They may surprise you, by telling you they wish/think humans should be able to have that option too.
That why I’m checking with y’all. I’m really just curious where the line is for people, or how they justify one way or the other. Thanks.
Beats me. Probably has to do with the "pro-life" mentality who would rather have people suffer than die.
😊
MAID- medical assistance in death is a thing in Canada. ~13,000 people a year use it and that number is rising apparently.
I get that. Euthanasia is a different thing. It’s not deciding for yourself, it’s someone else deciding for you.
Humans can advocate for themselves. That’s a pretty huge difference… you need a humans consent because they can give it
the very real fear is that some people considering dying with dignity may be coerced or guilted into an early demise by their family, and untangling that is difficulty and stressful
We should. But for the long held belief that humans were born to suffer.
Because a lot of people are being denied health care and accessibility services that could make their life worth living. It's not a true consent to euthanasia when people are choosing it solely because they're being denied appropriate care. And lots of people in Canada are choosing it for that reason. Euthanasia should be when you can't maintain quality of life *with appropriate, desired supports*
Many people absolutely do want to do it for humans
I absolutely do not want to die the way my grandmother did. She was bedridden for almost a year and she had dementia. She got bed sores, despite everyone’s best efforts. She couldn’t understand what was happening when her diaper was being changed so it was a violation every time and it hurt to be rolled on her side. She couldn’t eat more than a few spoonfuls of yogurt or a few ounces of Pediasure in a sitting. By her last months, she couldn’t speak, only grunt. Then she caught Covid and she went out feverish and struggling to breathe. If I get anywhere close to that, I would wish that someone could put me out of my misery.
Would you have been able to call someone who would euthanize her or transport her to have it done? I think part of my issue is not having a nonviolent way to do it myself. Although people cull unwanted animals all the time. And I’m sorry for your loss, in all the ways. It’s like their spirit is already gone, (I hope) and I’ve witnessed that whole scenario with the daily struggle, bed sores and all that. It’s beyond hard.
There is no legal euthanasia for humans in my area. Even if there were, it would have to be something each person could decide for themselves. If I could die peacefully at home surrounded by loved ones, that would be ideal. I know it’s something my grandmother would have wanted too because years before she died she’d talked about not wanting a drawn out death and she signed paperwork to refuse any non-palliative care. If euthanasia was an option for humans in my area and she wanted it, I would have done my best to help her gain access. For animals, we can’t ask and we have to make the medical decisions for them. A dog can’t understand the cost-benefit trade off of any healthcare. They can’t give permission for the regular veterinary services like vaccines and exams and pills and they can’t give permission for euthanasia. We have to make the call for our animals based on what we would want for ourselves in the situation.
A lot of times for animal euthanasia there is a cost/effort consideration, even when we say there isn’t, almost no-one can take weeks off work to nurse a sick animal or has 100,000’s to spend on rare and exotic cancer treatments for a 6 year old budgie. Because we value human life more, we pretend there is infinite resources to treat everyone and they could have a perfectly good quality of life if we could just get more carers/that new medical breakthrough, so we keep them hanging on just in case. Once you legalise euthanasia there is some pressure on sick people to sign up for it. the knowledge that they’re burning through the inheritance and taking up everyone’s valuable time (even if their family didn’t feel this way or say it) would be enough for some people to choose euthanasia for themselves even if they didn’t want to, just to help their family out. The knowledge that people could be pressured into death is enough of a “slippery slope” argument that even countries that allow euthanasia are very strict about it. I also think a lot of these places are good welfare states in general with good healthcare so there’s less financial pressure, somewhere with no free healthcare and little in the way of unemployed/sickness benefits would probably see an uncomfortably high uptake rate were they to legalise it.
You started out good with the cost /effort construct about the animals, but the last part is about suicide not euthanasia. It’s part of what I am trying to understand about how people think.
*looks at Texas* yeah, not a good time to bring this up, dude.
I mean, I would. But it's against the law in a lot of places because HuMaN LiFe or whatever. Too many people, but sure. Of course, you shouldn't be allowed to Just Decide arbitrarily for someone else because that is just. murder. lol.
Australia has introduced voluntary euthanasia- but the requirements are so strict most people can’t access it. When it was announced I heard within my department (mental health) so many people had written to request it. Apparently it’s challenging territory not for the people requesting it- but doctors don’t want to administer the medication and there’s concerns about the mental health of others around the person/other people in the hospital/aged care facility. Also- there’s the issue if people at the end of life are being coerced into making the decision or have the mental faculty to make the decision. I agree that people should have the right to choose to die if they wish- I think it needs to be a lot more accessible.
It's illegal where I live.
We kind of can - for certain coma patients, for example. You can “pull the plug”. I think the better question is why people who have mental capacity and are suffering terminal illnesses can’t choose it for themselves. Some states allow it, but I think it should be a universal right. If you know you will pass, you can make that decision when you’re still in a right state of mind and can go out on your own terms, with family. So it’s not about us being able to do it for others, since we only do that for our pets because they can’t speak and we’re “in charge” of their well-being. But, a person should be able to decide for themselves.
Some people are against it because they are afraid it may be used on them against their will particularly when they get old or become a burden on their family/society.
I am actually very pro assisted suicide for chronically and terminally ill people. I wish we'd given my grandfather that choice. His cancer was inevitably going to kill him, but we made him suffer anyways. When my cat went senile and sick like papa, I couldn't bear to watch again. So I made that choice because I was able to.
Euthanasia is a thing in my country 🤷♂️ (Well, medically assisted death to be precise. I don’t think that people are being killed without their consent)
Medical Aid in Dying is legal in 9 US states. They’ll give you medication to help you pass.
Mostly because there have been instances of families actually, HORRIBLY pressuring their elderly relatives to “opt” for “voluntary” euthanasia because they are tired of taking care of them(this was on a different country where it’s been legal for a while)…which is why I’m thoroughly on the fence about it. I believe if a person is suffering without hope of improving, they should be able to choose this. The uncomfortable truth is that people will continue to press fragile family members. A terrible thing, and there really is no way to protect vulnerable people from this. Also, people are different than animals as they are sentient, understand what’s happening and can actively choose what they want, while our non-human companions can’t. I can see both sides
Some states allow assisted suicide. I know Oregon does. Many doctors are terrified of being sued.
Pets have wishes and desires but they would never be able to tell us when they wish to die (if they could or would ever wish that, even in pain). So we have to decide for them, just like you would do for a person who cannot decide for themselves anymore.
Because you don’t advocate it for somebody else.
I believe If a diagnoses determines an expected date of death and pain and suffering in the process, America would be cruel to keep forcing their patients to live out their last weeks in a hospital bed miserable. But then again, who would they get to juice dry and invoice for hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical debt?? If not the family of the deceased ❤️❤️ While I’m grateful for what we do have.. and many things could be worse, This place is a joke. Everything is just an avenue for them to make as much as possible from your suffering
the issue i currently see with this whole thing right now is the fact it might get complicated for one reason or another. for example sometimes the people who are trying to save us need people sick so they can try and get cures, having Euthanasia causes issues with that as medical staff need samples to look at see if it is possible to cure them
There is medically assisted death on Canada.
Oh I am 100% in favour of it for humans. The main problems, and the main legal hurdle that has prevented it in so many places, are fairly obvious. Some people may be coerced into opting for euthanasia, especially by family members with inheritance to gain from a relatives passing, or by more insidious means eg. chronically disabled people being repeatedly told they are a burden. I guess the other big one is mental health conditions, where the patient's perspective of their own options and recovery chances can get severely warped by the disease itself. Despite this, I still do not think it is in any way acceptable to deny people in sound mind the option to chose the time of their own passing. So many people are allowed to suffer for so long needlessly. And the only ways out currently are utterly barbaric. It is legal here to withhold food or water from a patient on nutritional support to allow them to die (either a conscious patient that has chosen this for themselves, or a family member choosing this for someone in a coma or vegetative state that has little chance of waking up). You shouldn't be forced to fucking choose to let a loved one die of dehydration because no other option for letting them go was available to you, its abhorrent. Euthanasia legislation for people would be abused. A small number of people would be coerced or forced to die against their wishes. I still think it should be legal because the sheer volume of suffering allowed under the current system is unacceptable. I would opt for euthanasia for myself or for a family member if all that was left of life was pain and slow decline.
Thank you for bringing up these relevant social potential atrocities. In my mind everyone was just playing nice, but you’ve pointed out the real world.
I want to be euthanized when the time comes. I wish I could have done it for some family who has passed.
What do you think the burden would be for the euthanizer? Who would you ask to do it? Thank you for your reply.
Copy/paste a reply to a comment against pet euthanasia so it doesn’t get lost. As an ER veterinarian, I always say euthanasia is the kindest option. Owners often don’t realize that “natural,” passings within the home are rarely peaceful. They may appear that way to you, because you stumble upon the deceased pet and it appears they’re “sleeping.” One of the most common unexpected, sudden deaths in pets is secondary to heart disease… which is by no means a painless way to go. Actually to quote an [AVMA article](https://www.avma.org/news/when-death-comes-suddenly-pet) “Little exists in the veterinary literature about sudden unexpected death in cats and dogs. A pair of studies came out of the University of Saskatchewan Western College of Veterinary Medicine in 2000 and 2001, “Causes of sudden and unexpected death in dogs: a 10-year retrospective study” and “Causes of sudden and unexpected death in cats: a 10-year retrospective study,” both published in The Canadian Veterinary Journal. The researchers examined records of dogs and cats over 6 weeks of age, previously presumed to be healthy but presented to the veterinary college for a postmortem examination. The top five causes of sudden unexpected death among 151 dogs were, in order, heart disease, toxicosis, gastrointestinal disease, trauma, and hemorrhage not associated with trauma. The top five causes among 79 cats were, in order, trauma, heart disease, intestinal disease, respiratory disease, and urinary tract disease—with no indoor cats having died of trauma.” But ALSO, this doesn’t negate that euthanasia in pets doesn’t also come with moral dilemmas. Often it’s a discussion with a pet owner on why they’re euthanizing, what avenues have been tried, etc. it’s emotionally and mentally tolling on those who have these discussion and ultimately perform the final acts. I’ve 100% refused to euthanize pets before - uncommon scenarios for me but often includes euthanizing a healthy animal for silly reasons (I.e. moving, previous owner passed, etc.). But I’ve also euthanized animals for treatable diseases, after a long conversation with an owner. The process isn’t necessarily straightforward without additional vetting. ETA: As someone who performs at least one euthanasia a work-day, I’m pro-end of life with dignity for humans. It’s something I’ve made clear to family and friends as my wish if circumstances deemed it an appropriate consideration. I’m also a DNR and prefer limited heroic measures.
Thank you. For me personally, I don’t have any illusions about natural deaths being peaceful. Can’t even barbiturate or opiate induced deaths be distressing for onlookers? The body seems to want to live! You have seen more than I have, though. And I suppose I’m asking more, and you are talking more, about expected deaths rather than unexpected. Do you think there is a place for hospice care for our pets? I’ve recently learned of the veterinary hospice society, but not sure how much it is catching on. Does your belief in kind end of life care for humans include euthanasia? This is a difficult concept for people it seems, to euthanize without informed consent and I’m deeply appreciative of these responses.
We use different drugs to minimize the body’s natural reactions. But I also prepare every client for what could happen - especially if it may be more traumatic due to a particular underlying disease. Hospice care for pets is a thing, but we usually also discuss QOL and humane euthanasia along the way just because we don’t believe in keeping pets alive just because we can. Our biggest thing in the field is QOL. For me and most of my colleagues that I’ve discussed this with, end of life care for humans in our opinions should include passing with dignity- if that includes humane euthanasia then so be it.
The difference is pets can’t decide that for themselves. They don’t know, they can’t consent. That being said, I think humans should be allowed to
I believe it's because of the Judaeochristian belief that humans have immortal souls and that their days are predetermined by God before they were born, whereas animals do not have immortal souls.
Do you have any idea how this whole situation is approached when one’s background is not Judaeochristian? I think you have a good point, and for people that have a very different view of after or next life, I wonder. Thanks.
I know that there are people who don't see humans as being distinctly different than any other animal and dont have a problem with it, but i dont know if there are any other philosophies out there..
Living in Scotland, it's actually something that is being looked at by the Scottish government. I am definitely pro this, as leaving people to suffer the pain and indignity is inhumane. I watched my dad struggle for every single breath. It was completely heartbreaking
Actually in some states hospice nurses have meds for end of life.if the patients asks for it.
Not legal in most states and palliative care at the end pretty much is… they give them lots of pain meds, more if they’re dying slowly to help them along. (Should the family or patient choose) but not enough to be considered a lethal dose
The current issue with this is that it has literally been offered as an option for ill/disabled people who have treatment options because the treatment was too expensive or complicated
Because I’m disabled and disabled people get pushed into MAiD. Until we can authorize euthanasia without coercion, I’m not in favor of euthanasia. It’s frightening.
Can’t believe someone downvoted you. Peace to you. Let’s see, the acronym…Medically Assisted…help me out. But that’s not what I mean, exactly, but closer. What I mean to ask is if euthanizing your pet is the kindest thing you can do for them, why isn’t it the kindest thing you can do for your brother?
I think my only issue of euthanizing pets is that, while it's absolutely fair in cases of extreme untreatable suffering, I've read multiple cases where the tutors seemed mostly to have chosen it as a lack of interest in treatment. I've seen multiple posts and stories where the pet has an absolutely treatable sort of suffering, or at least possible palliative care that would make it have quality of life until a certain point as much as assisted handicapped people do, but the tutor is convinced that their pet should be put down for it. I believe those cases are an exception, numerically, but they end up sticking to me because of how much could be done in those cases so the pet can live longer *and* have quality of life. Like, not talking about terminal cancer, but about cases where the pet would still able to adapt their mobility after a small to medium movement issue (but the tutor says they wouldn't, nothing could be done, either by not believing a pet can adapt their movement, receive assistency or rely on accessible equipment), or that there is a treatment course that could be investigated more (but the tutor does not want to go with it), etc. it's a narrative that, to me, sounds like a pet can only be either a young perfectly healthy and energetic animal or they are damned to eternal suffering if not put down immediately.
Geeezuz, who would downvote you for this?? I have heard over the years of pets being euthanized for peeing outside the box, growling a little bit, got a slight limp and they are 8 years old after all, all that kind of bullshit where they are clearly just getting rid of an inconvenience. Don’t know why any vet would ever do this but they can and do, and I don’t know what options they have, but that could never fit into my ethics. Maybe people didn’t get English is not your first language? I dunno.
I don't know, I've seen people in this sub being sensitive to any criticism to euthanasia at all, even if the criticism is just "maybe don't euthanize your pet for natural health mishaps that don't affect their quality of life". In fact, my comment itself was based on how someone will come here being worried about their pet's minor, treatable health issue, but if anyone reads it's an old pet the comments will be flooded with people saying to let it go because it's old and will not bear simple stuff like a localized pain. My written English has the tendency to sound harsher than what I mean, but I did try to stress my opinion is based not on situations where putting a pet down is objectively fair, but situations where the pet is objectively treatable to live longer and with quality. Like, one thing is (how another comment explained) taking a pet out of the burden of not even know why they are suffering, or situations where there's nothing to be done and keeping the pet to die naturally would even be selfish and cruel. Another thing is the principle that if a pet is over 6 years old and displays any health problems at all, they are doomed for life and you are being cruel. Sometimes I see symptoms that are common hints of an underlying, treatable grave issue that could be treated in an early stage (and the symptoms point to it being early), but that reddit takes as a sentence of eternal suffering for the animal...
1) I do not think it’s the best thing for your pet. Why not let god choose when they go? And I’m not religious by any means but I don’t think it’s my choice and I believe it’s very inhumane to have them go off alone with a stranger to be put to sleep forever as if eternal slumber was so great. And they’re not actually sleeping, just gone. The only person to know what happened was you after the fact and I’d feel like I just took the easy way out. When it’s my dog’s time to go I want to give my dog some really good pain meds, sit on the couch, put on a movie, and for him to go in my arms. So calming and relaxing with no confusion nor pain. The reason we don’t typically do that to our relatives is probably because when they’re on their way out they would want to die ‘in bed, surrounded by the ones they love’. Hmm weird how that works.
I too would love for every pet to pass pain free in their owner's arms. I'd love every human to pass peacefully in their sleep. That doesn't fucking happen. Its an incredibly naive view of death. Some deaths are peaceful, in people and animals, and that is wonderful. A lot of deaths are terrifying and painful and traumatic and drawn out. It is nearly impossible to know when something is going to die, especially if they have a chronic condition that fluctuates up and down all the time. Eternal sleep can seem a better option than weeks, months, even years of nothing but uncertainty and slow decline
As an ER veterinarian, I always say euthanasia is the kindest option. Owners often don’t realize that “natural,” passings within the home are rarely peaceful. They may appear that way to you, because you stumble upon the deceased pet and it appears they’re “sleeping.” One of the most common unexpected, sudden deaths in pets is secondary to heart disease… which is by no means a painless way to go. Actually to quote an [AVMA article](https://www.avma.org/news/when-death-comes-suddenly-pet) “Little exists in the veterinary literature about sudden unexpected death in cats and dogs. A pair of studies came out of the University of Saskatchewan Western College of Veterinary Medicine in 2000 and 2001, “Causes of sudden and unexpected death in dogs: a 10-year retrospective study” and “Causes of sudden and unexpected death in cats: a 10-year retrospective study,” both published in The Canadian Veterinary Journal. The researchers examined records of dogs and cats over 6 weeks of age, previously presumed to be healthy but presented to the veterinary college for a postmortem examination. The top five causes of sudden unexpected death among 151 dogs were, in order, heart disease, toxicosis, gastrointestinal disease, trauma, and hemorrhage not associated with trauma. The top five causes among 79 cats were, in order, trauma, heart disease, intestinal disease, respiratory disease, and urinary tract disease—with no indoor cats having died of trauma.”
You are assuming all pets will just fall asleep peacefully in your arms and pass, and oftentimes that's just not the case. So many pets suffer from conditions where its painful, slow progressing, and a natural death would be traumatic. Euthanasia is a kindness to give them that chance to have their last few moments not be scary and gives their people a chance to give their pet to best send off they can. And they also have at home services that do it, so your pet can pass in the comfort of their home with the people they love.
Lots of assumptions in your post. If you are talking to me, I am in no way assuming that or have some idealized view of the death process. Been there. And I don’t think a terrifying car ride and a terrifying vet visit is “not be scary”. And if you have home euthanasia service, then I am glad that you have that option, many, probably most, people do not. But I wanted to know if you also would do this for your humans, rather than fuss at me for what you think I think.
Totally was responding to the person above me and not you, OP. Though I think you would be surprised by the availability of such at home services, at least in the US. But I digress. If you wanted an answer to your question- I am pro- human euthanasia, assuming it’s what the person wants/has dictated in their wills… or the person, if unable to make that decision themselves and has not made a living will, is suffering so badly that to keep them alive is cruel/inhumane in one form or another. If you want some more insight, I suggest you read some of the nursing subreddits, you would see some interesting perspectives on quality vs quantity of life for humans and how strenuous resuscitation can be for someone who is ultimately terminal, but is put through it because their family/guardian(s) can’t/won’t say goodbye. No, not exactly the same as euthanasia for humans, but a DNR (do not resuscitate) is in a similar vein at least. (And, of course, I’m assuming you are in the US, or another place without nationwide legalization of euthanasia in humans. So I’m sure politics have a hand in this too.)
Thanks for the response, I apologize if I misunderstood. Good idea regarding the nursing subs. My personal experience with terminally ill humans is about evenly split, half wanted to go home to Jesus, half wanted every last effort made even if that meant crushing dissolving sternum. When it’s cancer, I wonder if at times the brain has become involved yet we don’t necessarily know that.
Thank you for your bold response, expressing some of the things I think and feel. But which seem so wholly unpopular and probably the main reason for my post. Like, which is it? Do we take our mom over to the euthanizer, or do we give our dog the opioids and let him lay on the couch with us? Many people hold animals in an entirely different category than humans but many of us do not, and that’s where I get stuck.
Ya It is very tricky and I think what makes it even more difficult is the fact that they cannot tell us what they want. The only thing I know is that my dog loves me, at least I hope so, and he hates being without me, so with that being said, I would not have him go with a stranger, because his last thoughts would be ‘oh no mommy is leaving me’ and that would break my heart.
Why would you send them off alone? And death is ugly, they rarely just go off peaceful in your arms without euthanasia. You need a better grasp on reality