[HN Gopher] It's getting harder to die
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       It's getting harder to die
        
       Author : baud147258
       Score  : 223 points
       Date   : 2024-06-25 11:28 UTC (4 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.plough.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.plough.com)
        
       | Modified3019 wrote:
       | The topic of a "living will" came up in a family discussion after
       | my mother's funeral.
       | 
       | None of us have a pathological desire to live at all costs, but
       | as it turns out, figuring out when to say "yeah I'm done, see
       | yah" and halt treatment is way more complex than it first seems,
       | especially when making the decision for someone else. Things can
       | happen very fast, and there's a bunch of things that basically
       | require a job in the industry to know ahead of time.
       | 
       | If anyone knows of some comprehensive resources for helping
       | define reasonable limits, I'd love to hear it.
        
         | rustcleaner wrote:
         | There is the POLST form for governing interventions. There is
         | durable medical and general powers of attorney. There are
         | irrevocable trusts to protect trust assets from long term care.
        
         | complaintdept wrote:
         | Talk to an estate attorney and they can give you some advice,
         | but ultimately you'll never be able to account for every
         | possibility, and you're going to _have_ to trust somebody to
         | make the right decisions for you at some point.
        
           | onlypassingthru wrote:
           | Anecdotally, a family friend was barely clinging on to life
           | for a couple weeks enduring heavy pain meds and abject
           | misery. Only when his close friend, and executor of his
           | estate, sat beside him and told him everything was going to
           | be alright did he finally find peace and let go. He was gone
           | within 30 minutes.
        
         | magnetowasright wrote:
         | The Order of the Good Death has loads of resources on how to
         | have these conversations, what your options for advanced
         | directives etc. are, and guides on how to set everything up.
         | 
         | https://www.orderofthegooddeath.com/
         | 
         | They also do a lot of advocacy around green burial, alkaline
         | hydrolysis, and whatnot as well.
         | 
         | Caitlin Doughty (who founded the Order of the Good Death) Ask a
         | Mortician channel on youtube covers this stuff too, but the
         | older videos might be out of date.
        
           | zhynn wrote:
           | Thank you so so so much for posting this! I had no idea it
           | existed, and I am so happy that it does.
           | 
           | I also discovered that my home state has ZERO listed green
           | burial sites, which is shocking to me because... I live in
           | VT. I would have guessed it would be the leader in green
           | burial, it is right up our wheelhouse!
        
         | JansjoFromIkea wrote:
         | "especially when making the decision for someone else"
         | 
         | This gets additionally terrible when it's for someone else
         | whilst handling the wishes of everyone else with significant
         | ties to them.
         | 
         | Had a relative die a while back who was going through absolute
         | hell the final few days; some family members still have a
         | massive grudge towards the hospice for what they feel like were
         | moves done to ensure they died quicker. I've absolutely no clue
         | why they seemed to think dying in massive pain over a longer
         | span of time seemed better but they did.
        
           | LorenPechtel wrote:
           | I saw it with my father, also. Some people aren't ready to
           | accept that death is coming and blame anyone/anything they
           | can rather than accept it. Just try harder, you can do it!
           | 
           | No. The cancer was everywhere and it was aggressive. Try what
           | harder? There was nothing to do. Someone close to them felt
           | my mother was being evil and incompetent in not pushing him
           | to eat more. While he lost a lot of weight the cause of death
           | was when it got his kidney (one had already been removed when
           | it was thought to be stage 1.)
        
       | ericmcer wrote:
       | Kind of a tough read, I just turned 37 and this was the year when
       | it really hit home that your body degrades and sometimes it never
       | goes back to "normal". I was used to sports injuries being a
       | pattern of injury -> recovery -> ramp back up to 100%, but have
       | suffered some injuries recently and am coming to terms with
       | realizing I will never return to 100%. They will be lingering
       | things I deal with for the rest of my life.
       | 
       | It is terrifying transitioning from seeing health as innate to
       | viewing it as something you need to carefully nurture or it will
       | slip away.
        
         | silverquiet wrote:
         | Not everyone gets even that - I've had mobility issues since I
         | was seven years old. It's been strange to realize that it
         | probably shaped my personality somewhat; I always felt older
         | than my peers in some way. The silver lining might be that
         | while now they are starting to say how old they feel (I'm
         | basically the same age as you), I'll often tell them that I
         | don't feel any older.
        
           | ryukafalz wrote:
           | > The silver lining might be that while now they are starting
           | to say how old they feel (I'm basically the same age as you),
           | I'll often tell them that I don't feel any older.
           | 
           | As someone with chronic back pain since my late teens, this
           | is... a nice perspective. My friend group isn't old enough
           | yet for it to come up very often but I feel like I can
           | relate.
        
             | spoiler wrote:
             | Sorry if I'm being nosey, but I'm curious about the chronic
             | back pain. Is it something that developed over time, is it
             | gwneti, is it an injury? How do you cope and manage it?
        
         | cjk2 wrote:
         | Hey you're me 15 years ago. I stopped the sports and switched
         | to sustained low damage exercise like cycling, hiking, swimming
         | etc. While you can't undo the damage done if you have a very
         | high level of fitness, you can reduce the effects of the
         | further progression of time. Better be as fit as a 50 year old
         | with some damage when you're 70 than as fit as a 70 year old
         | with some damage.
         | 
         | End game is not pretty. My ex wife didn't do any fitness stuff
         | at all and she's walking with a stick while I'm doing 30km
         | hikes at 3000m...
        
           | rqtwteye wrote:
           | Same here. I had to switch from doing crazy stuff to just
           | maintaining health. Hiking really fits the spot. I still get
           | a lot of cardio (I have hiking trails with 1000m elevation
           | gain within 10 minutes of driving) that way. But things like
           | running or martial arts are out of the question. I am glad
           | that I was able to adapt to a declining body. Some people my
           | age still do high impact stuff and constantly get injured,
           | take lots of painkillers and get surgeries.
        
           | pavel_lishin wrote:
           | Part of me really wants to pick up hockey - just for fun,
           | recreationally - but at 40, I'm worried that I'll get injured
           | to the point where I won't be able to do other things I
           | enjoy, like cycling.
           | 
           | Hell, I fell off my bike from a stop a few weeks ago, and
           | landed on my knee, and it took a week and a half before I
           | felt like I could trust my leg to hold weight.
        
             | cjk2 wrote:
             | Don't do it. My sister took up hockey when she was 16 and
             | lost 4 front teeth within 3 months. She's 45 now and just
             | had the second set of replacements...
        
               | pavel_lishin wrote:
               | My teeth are already sufficiently bad that I'll likely
               | need implants in the future anyway; I don't _want_ to
               | lose them, but it wouldn 't impact my life as negatively
               | as, say, a permanent back or knee injury would.
        
               | el_duderino_ wrote:
               | Of all the hockey injuries, this one rates pretty low for
               | adult beer league if you just wear a cage. Wearing a full
               | face cage reduces the risk of losing teeth to almost 0%
               | chance of happening.
               | 
               | Hockey does have risks of course, but playing in a non
               | checking league takes the risk down to manageable levels
               | in my opinion.
        
             | el_duderino_ wrote:
             | I recommend it fully! I learned to play at 32 and I am
             | having a blast. Still some risk, but my local league is
             | very laid back and we run very safe games. Being kitted out
             | in protective gear really does make a difference in
             | preventing injuries.
             | 
             | Check and see if your local rink has an intro to hockey
             | class and use that to get a feel for hockey.
        
         | riku_iki wrote:
         | your situation is probably not completely relevant to age, many
         | injuries are not recoverable no matter how old you are. You
         | accumulated risks of such injuries which produced result.
         | 
         | If you switch to safer kinds of sport/workout, you still can
         | have a chance to be very active for many years until old age.
        
         | kingkongjaffa wrote:
         | This really resonates with me. I'm 30 now. I had a rotator cuff
         | injury last year and lost some range of motion in my shoulder
         | for about 6 months.
         | 
         | This year I got a personal trainer for the first time.
         | 
         | I'm really trying to fight to get in shape and stay in shape.
         | 
         | I spent my 20's working and for the last 5 years I work
         | remotely, largely ignoring my health.
         | 
         | Sitting in a home office all day is really bad for you.
        
           | xenospn wrote:
           | Go on walks! The sun/allergen exposure and vitamin D will be
           | good for you. Literally put walks on your calendar so it's
           | easier to remember.
        
           | blue_dragon wrote:
           | Use the next several years to build as much muscle as you can
           | without damaging your joints. It gets extraordinarily
           | difficult to add new muscle as you enter your mid-30s, but
           | fortunately you still have time. I work out 3-4 days per week
           | for ~90 minutes each.
           | 
           | If you've never done strength training before, you may be
           | pleasantly surprised to learn how much extra mass you can
           | add, while remaining on a typical diet, with zero chemical
           | assistance. Your trainer will be able to help you.
        
             | silverquiet wrote:
             | I started lifting weights at 37 after 10 years of being
             | very sedentary, and within a few months people were
             | mentioning that I had put on muscle. My impression was that
             | sarcopenia doesn't start until the 60's and even then there
             | are benefits to resistance training.
        
               | kiba wrote:
               | Reduced physical activity in old age will accelerate
               | sarcopenia. If you're hospitalized, especially for long
               | period of time, that will also accelerate muscle loss.
        
             | hombre_fatal wrote:
             | > It gets extraordinarily difficult to add new muscle as
             | you enter your mid-30s
             | 
             | Only because it requires you to create a major new habit
             | after 30 years on earth of not doing it, not because it's
             | difficult physically. If you are putting in the time and
             | especially the effort, it should be easy.
             | 
             | That said, the common mistake in the gym is when people
             | just kinda do reps at some easy weight and then stop short
             | with a bunch more reps left in reserve. Never really
             | pushing themself. I guarantee that describes anyone finding
             | it extraordinary difficult to build muscle.
        
         | adaptbrian wrote:
         | On the flip side changing diet and it's effects on what folks
         | might have seen as something they can never fix/change without
         | _____ drug, might be transformational.
         | 
         | With that said, my better half can't bend her arm past a
         | certain part on her body, however, b.c of a really small/stupid
         | collision/fall coming down a Tahoe MTN ski run. It always
         | depends on the problem.
        
         | nsguy wrote:
         | I'm a fair bit older than you... What you're saying is true but
         | it's also worth mentioning your body has capabilities you're
         | probably far from reaching. Most people your age can still
         | exceed any physical accomplishment they've had in their
         | lifetime if they really want to. E.g. they can play sports
         | better than they ever had and they can achieve personal bests
         | in any physical ability. If you were a top level professional
         | athlete that's probably not true (though even professional
         | athletes have longer careers than they used to) or if you've
         | been a top 10 GM in chess than that's probably behind you too,
         | but otherwise you're young!
         | 
         | I don't know what specific injuries you're suffering from but
         | I've suffered from back pain and really improved my situation a
         | lot. I'm physically stronger than I've ever been in my life.
         | I've worked through some knee injuries. I've even recently
         | improved my gum health (in a way someone said wasn't possible).
         | It takes more work and more focus but our bodies are amazing
         | machines and 37 ain't old.
        
           | fibonachos wrote:
           | I'm in my late forties and sprained my back/hip pretty badly
           | right at the start of COVID. A year later I was having
           | trouble descending stairs and starting to develop knee pain
           | on the same side of my body. So I began a fairly rigorous
           | resistance training program about two years ago with hopes of
           | regaining full mobility. The results have been fantastic. I
           | still have a bit of pain from in both the knee and back, but
           | it's not disruptive. Most importantly, I have normal mobility
           | and the injured areas have stabilized. With any luck it will
           | continue to improve so long as I stick with it. That's in
           | addition to all the other benefits that come with being in
           | better physical shape.
        
             | nsguy wrote:
             | Nice! In my experience small issues can escalate if left
             | unchecked because you start compensating and your body also
             | "learns" to do things the wrong way.
        
           | squidbeak wrote:
           | I'm unsure your first point can be true. The pinnacle for a
           | 37 year old is surely lower than for his 23 or 24 year old
           | incarnation, if both life stages were given the same fitness
           | programme. 37 is still very young, but there's already some
           | trace of physical deterioration by then, most apparent in
           | athletes who in almost all sports aside from golf, are off
           | their peak by then.
        
             | hombre_fatal wrote:
             | They're saying that you can be the best shape of your life
             | beyond your prime potential years because almost nobody
             | reaches their potential in their prime, which is trivially
             | true, not that you can perform better at 37 than a
             | theoretical maximum in your 20s that you never achieved.
        
             | tnorthcutt wrote:
             | I think that's why they said "most people":
             | 
             | > Most people your age can still exceed any physical
             | accomplishment they've had in their lifetime if they really
             | want to. E.g. they can play sports better than they ever
             | had and they can achieve personal bests in any physical
             | ability.
             | 
             | So not people who were at the peak of their
             | ability/potential in their 20s - most people, however, do
             | not perform at their limits in their 20s, simply because
             | that isn't their priority, they don't train for it, etc.
        
         | ttcbj wrote:
         | I hear you. I'm almost 50, and see it coming as well. I highly
         | recommend the book Outlive by Peter Attia. Just found it
         | recently, wish I had read it at 37. It has really good ideas on
         | extending your "health span ".
        
         | crazygringo wrote:
         | It might not be applicable for you, but just in case -- take a
         | look at myofascial release, similar to trigger point therapy.
         | Basically foam rolling on your legs, using a lacrosse ball and
         | progressively smaller rubber balls across your back and
         | shoulders and pecs, and a TheraCane on shoulders, neck, sides,
         | etc. Also Alexander Technique lessons, which retrains you to
         | use your muscles without the tension habits you've accumulated
         | over your lifetime.
         | 
         | The two of them together have changed my life. A lot of acute
         | injuries of mine had healed, but had left my muscles extremely
         | tight and essentially kind of frozen, which then creates
         | problems with movement and posture and which then generates
         | other kinds of pain. I too thought I'd never get back to
         | "normal", and then was shocked to discover that I basically
         | could, after a couple of years of undoing all the muscular
         | tightness and "frozenness" through myofascial release and
         | Alexander Technique. (Basically, the myofascial release gets
         | rid of it, while Alexander teaches you how to prevent
         | immediately re-forming it.)
         | 
         | It's funny that myofascial release is only just starting to
         | gain awareness among the medical community, while Alexander
         | Technique still mainly only has awareness in the acting and
         | musical performance communities.
        
         | mock-possum wrote:
         | Same age, same realization - stuff that used to be just
         | 'tiring' now knocks me out the next day too while I recover;
         | and everything, bumps and bruises and blood etc, seems to take
         | nearly 3x the time to heal now.
        
       | complaintdept wrote:
       | ...and it's getting harder on the families too with nothing to
       | really address it. It used to be one day you'd drop dead, or get
       | really sick and be dead not long after, and your family after a
       | terrible shock could begin readjusting to the new reality without
       | their loved one. Now you can have what used to be a death
       | sentence and continue living for years or even decades. But the
       | systems which support the patient's life are not supporting their
       | families, who have to live with the stress and financial burden
       | of keeping their loved one alive, and the prolonged grieving
       | process which can now take up a huge chunk of their lives and
       | still doesn't really prepare them for death anyway.
       | 
       | I'm not saying that we need to get rid of medical advances that
       | prolong life, it's just that these things have created new
       | problems that we aren't dealing with and that not many people are
       | really talking about.
        
         | cogman10 wrote:
         | The problem is it's not black and white what the long term
         | outcome will be. A cancer diagnosis that was terminal 20 years
         | ago could mean in 20 years you'll die of a heart attack with a
         | short period of horrible treatment.
         | 
         | It gets even more dicey when you start talking about things
         | like "well, the 20% chance is you'll survive this. The 80%
         | chance is you'll die". Almost everyone is going to want to roll
         | the 1/5 chance of living rather than taking the "you do nothing
         | and you die" path, even if the 1/5 path is horribly terrible.
        
       | FactKnower69 wrote:
       | a Christian fundamentalist doing a 180 on Terri Schiavo because
       | she rediscovered Luddism is certainly an interesting take
        
         | spondylosaurus wrote:
         | The fundamentalist stance on Schiavo's case (to continue care
         | at all costs) was always interesting/puzzling to me. On some
         | level I would assume that people with a strong belief in the
         | afterlife would be more open to letting people pass from this
         | mortal earth than those of us who don't have strong beliefs
         | about an afterlife... but clearly that wasn't the case :P
        
           | downrightmike wrote:
           | Fundamentalists don't do things for others, they do them for
           | themselves, to make themselves look better, or to be praised.
           | They are superficial and fake. No one will miss them when
           | they are gone.
        
           | qgin wrote:
           | Growing up in the church, it eventually became pretty clear
           | that nobody actually believed in heaven. Almost nobody's
           | actions were congruent with what you would do if you actually
           | believed in heaven.
           | 
           | The stances on death, the reactions when people died... it
           | all matched what you'd do if you believed death was the end
           | and none of it matched what you'd do if you believed people
           | went on to eternal paradise.
        
             | bigstrat2003 wrote:
             | These are easily explained, and not evidence of your claim
             | that Christians don't actually believe in heaven.
             | 
             | I assume that by "stances on death" you mean that
             | Christians generally believe that it is immoral to allow
             | people to die. That is because we believe that the life of
             | humans has a fundamental moral worth, such that it is wrong
             | to kill them no matter the circumstances. Many Christians
             | would agree that the patient of some terminal illness would
             | be better off dead, but that doesn't give us the right to
             | do the deed. We aren't consequentialists, we are
             | deontologists. If something (i.e. killing people) is wrong,
             | then it is wrong no matter if it leads to a better outcome.
             | 
             | As far as "reactions when people died", it should be
             | obvious but it sucks to lose your loved ones no matter
             | what. Even if you felt completely certain that someone's
             | soul was in heaven (and few would claim to be that certain,
             | more on that in a bit), it's still _very painful_ to have
             | to be separated from them. It 's comforting to believe that
             | someone is (or will be) in heaven, but that comfort does
             | _not_ just erase the pain that you have to endure in the
             | here and now. People aren 't Vulcans, who can shrug things
             | off through logical reasoning. They have feelings that are
             | sometimes irrational but no less real because of it.
             | 
             | Furthermore, nobody can have complete certainty of the
             | future. If I were to lose my job, I would be upset and
             | worried because of how that might impact my family. By your
             | logic, this would mean that I don't actually believe that
             | I'll be able to find a new job. But no, it just means that
             | I know that the future isn't certain. I believe I could
             | find a new job if I lost my current job today. But I'm not
             | _certain_ , and that means I would be upset if I did lose
             | my job. In a similar way, Christians believe in heaven but
             | we can't be _certain_ , so we still fear death sometimes. I
             | mean, Jesus himself was afraid of his impending torture and
             | death at the hands of the Romans! It's just part of being
             | human.
        
       | vundercind wrote:
       | Recently watched someone close die over a couple days, after a
       | long decline.
       | 
       | The last 24 hours were monstrous to inflict on anyone. Torture.
       | Evil.
       | 
       | Hours and hours of faltering breathing, often restarting with
       | what was plainly a panicked adrenaline-pumping response. It
       | looked like they felt like they were about to drown _every few
       | minutes_ , hour, after hour, no relief. No IV fluids (terminal
       | anyway, so no trying to keep them alive with techniques like
       | that) and unable to drink, so certainly terribly thirsty the
       | whole time. Unable to communicate or really engage with
       | surroundings, and quite high on pain meds anyway (the closest
       | thing to a mercy in all this). It's fucked up that that's a
       | fairly normal way for dying people to make their exit. I'm sure
       | there are all kinds of problems with trying to provide a way out
       | when someone can't make the choice for themselves, without
       | opening it up to abuse, but damn, I hope this isn't the best we
       | can do because it's _terrible_.
        
         | conroydave wrote:
         | Watched my grandfather pass in the same way. Didn't seem right
         | to let him pass of basically lack of food and hydration after
         | 95 years even though also terminal. I just wanted to see him
         | comfortable and he was far from it.
        
           | pineaux wrote:
           | Same here, but i have been told that dying is like that
           | unless thoroughly drugged.
        
           | dghlsakjg wrote:
           | In the last days when organs start failing, food and drink
           | don't necessarily make things more comfortable since the body
           | can't handle it.
        
             | conroydave wrote:
             | Thanks for sharing. Helps a little bit
        
         | spurgu wrote:
         | I'm sorry for your loss.
         | 
         |  _Edit: I feel a bit dumb now, I hadn 't actually read the
         | article yet, went straight for the comments. Seems like I'm
         | just reiterating what it says._
         | 
         | When I'm in that shape I just wanna go in peace. Preferably at
         | home, in my own bed, surrounded by loved ones. No tubes down my
         | throat, no shots to keep me alive at any cost, with no end in
         | sight.
         | 
         | Here's some good discussion on the topic between two doctors
         | that I watched recently: https://youtu.be/O0YIGAUDlzQ?t=242
        
           | lurking_swe wrote:
           | The problem with this perspective in my opinion is that many
           | times, especially for an elderly person, a small emergency
           | can very quickly escalate into a life and death situation,
           | and the outcome is not clear until it's too late. you may
           | enter the hospital thinking you have a decent outcome, but
           | you end up with a bad outcome.
           | 
           | for example, nobody plans to go on a ventilator. But if you
           | need one (like severe pneumonia), you're already pretty
           | messed up and you're going to have a painful death with or
           | without the tubes.
        
             | tremon wrote:
             | _you're going to have a painful death with or without the
             | tubes_
             | 
             | But I feel that was the main point at the start of the
             | thread: if death is certain and going to be painful, why
             | must we drag it out? Why is that additional lifespan
             | (measured in days) so much more important than comfort?
        
               | kqr wrote:
               | The point is that it's not certain. With the medical
               | assistance you might recover fine and live another five
               | happy years.
               | 
               | Is it really worth trading away that opportunity just to
               | not accidentally die on a ventilator? I'm not sure.
        
               | AlexandrB wrote:
               | There's a good article[1] on this topic that talks about
               | how older doctors generally choose to forego lifesaving
               | measures. I think about it a lot because it seems like
               | when a professional who's in the best position to know
               | the tradeoffs makes this kind of decision for themselves
               | they probably understand the risk/reward better than you
               | or me.
               | 
               | [1] https://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2013/03/how-
               | doctors-die/
        
               | criddell wrote:
               | I think that's the article that made me change my opinion
               | on CPR. When the hospital asks me to sign the form
               | indicating if I want to be resuscitated, I answer no
               | without hesitation. It's harder when my vet asks before
               | operating on my dog, but in the end I made the same call
               | for my dog that I would make for myself - do not
               | resuscitate.
        
               | anonymouskimmer wrote:
               | Plenty of people who make the sausage don't want to eat
               | it.
               | 
               | I never wanted to go into medicine. Thus I do not believe
               | the preferences of a typical older doctor represent my
               | preferences in this respect.
               | 
               | I read an article once of a nurse who kept CPR going on
               | her husband for somewhere around 2 hours until they could
               | get him to a hospital that was able to restart his heart.
               | I believe he ended up okay. CPR obviously isn't invasive
               | tubing, but it's still kind of hard on the body.
        
               | LorenPechtel wrote:
               | It depends on the situation.
               | 
               | If it's part of a long decay I would categorically refuse
               | anything like that. If it's due to an abrupt and fixable
               | thing give it a try.
        
             | anonymouskimmer wrote:
             | https://www.sciencealert.com/study-more-patients-could-
             | survi...
             | 
             | > Yet families are often asked to make the call within 72
             | hours of someone sustaining a severe brain injury. Unless
             | patients make a rapid recovery in the first few days, it's
             | thought they are unlikely to survive or recover much at
             | all.
             | 
             | > The data Sanders and colleagues analyzed tentatively
             | suggest otherwise.
             | 
             | > The data revealed that 31 of the 56 brain trauma patients
             | who stayed on life support died within six months; and 45
             | percent survived. Of the 25 patients who survived, more
             | than 30 percent recovered enough in that same six-month
             | period to have at least some independence in daily
             | activities.
             | 
             | > Just four patients recovered 'fully' to how they
             | functioned before their injury.
        
               | dralley wrote:
               | > some independence in daily activities
               | 
               | "some" is doing a lot of work in this sentence.
               | Recovering enough to have "at least some" independence
               | after several months is not a great outcome. That very
               | likely means lifelong daily care is required.
        
               | anonymouskimmer wrote:
               | I know. That objection was brought up in the first
               | article I read on this issue. Still, depending on the
               | care required, it's pretty bad to imply that someone is
               | better off dead.
               | 
               | And 7% of the study subjects recovered completely.
        
               | amanaplanacanal wrote:
               | The idea of living long term, near death, while medical
               | expenses slowly eat away the savings I would prefer to
               | leave to my loved ones makes me very unhappy.
        
           | nottorp wrote:
           | > I just wanna go in peace
           | 
           | I wonder what 'go in peace' means if you explain it
           | medically. Possibly abrupt heart failure?
           | 
           | From the deaths of older relatives that I've (sort of)
           | witnessed, if any other part of your body fails it's going to
           | be slower and a lot more unpleasant.
        
         | briffle wrote:
         | > and unable to drink, so certainly terribly thirsty the whole
         | time.
         | 
         | I know people that work in hospice, and they say this is a big
         | misconception (the article hints at it too). they patients
         | don't die from lack of water, they don't want water because
         | they are dying, and their body can't process it. In fact, as
         | you kind of touched on at the start, giving them IV fluids can
         | cause them to drown since their body can't process the water.
         | 
         | Death is pretty ugly thing, that comes for us all. I got to
         | learn the fun way that in the state of Oregon, it is illegal to
         | disable a pacemaker. Even when the person has a DNR, and it is
         | really the only thing keeping them alive. The best the doctors
         | can do is turn the pacemaker down as low as possible, and hope
         | its not enough to keep the person artificially alive. Which
         | seems kind of really weird, when its also the first and one of
         | the only states that allows medically assisted suicide..
        
           | Flumio wrote:
           | The best thing they can do is shoot me with a nice does of
           | heroin and after the high.just ending it.
           | 
           | We know how to end life's.
        
             | FerretFred wrote:
             | It's probably ironic that it's never been easier to buy
             | that drug (and others) and decide your own fate compared
             | with trying for a dignified and hopefully pain-free death
             | the "legal" way.
        
               | throwup238 wrote:
               | Doubly so given the epidemic of fentanyl contamination.
        
               | FerretFred wrote:
               | We haven't had that (yet) on this side of The Pond but
               | I'm sure it'll happen.
        
               | throwup238 wrote:
               | Brexit benefits! It's the one thing Tories got right in
               | 14 years. * _laughs maniacally_ *
        
               | FerretFred wrote:
               | I suspect it's the only Europe-UK supply chain that
               | hasn't been affected by Brexit :) Maybe the Tories need
               | to persuade a few drug dealers to go straight and fix the
               | whole supply chain problem.
        
               | throwup238 wrote:
               | _> Maybe the Tories need to persuade a few drug dealers
               | to go straight and fix the whole supply chain problem._
               | 
               | They'll get Michael Gove right on that!
        
               | FerretFred wrote:
               | He's the right man for the job!
               | https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48572982
        
             | KMag wrote:
             | Granted death penalty opponents are biased, but it's often
             | said that barbituate overdose is a very unpleasant way to
             | die. I've also heard opiod overdose is unpleasant.
             | 
             | I was once helping take down a 10-foot weather balloon full
             | of helium, and took in two breaths in a row of pure helium.
             | I started to get tunnel vision, said "whoah", sat down when
             | I realized I was about to lose consciousness, fell down,
             | and twitched just long enough for my friend to realize I
             | wasn't joking around before I woke up. From my experience,
             | hypoxia from pure helium is slightly pleasant all the way
             | to loss of consciousness. I presume pure nitrogen would be
             | nearly the same.
             | 
             | Let my last words be something witty in a high-pitched
             | helium voice.
             | 
             | (Side note: pure nitrogen hypoxia would not be a
             | particularly humane form of execution because the condemned
             | would likely fight it by holding on to their last breath.)
        
               | LorenPechtel wrote:
               | Yup, AFIAK hypoxia is the best way to go. Survivors who
               | are rescued in time (or, like you, self-rescue) don't
               | have a bad experience. The MAiD protocol used in Canada
               | likewise appears to not be a bad experience as the only
               | thing the patient experiences is anesthesia.
        
               | _a_a_a_ wrote:
               | I'm also coming to the conclusion that inert gas hypoxia
               | is going to be my way out. My end has to be, as far as I
               | can make it, painless and polite, meaning a happy exit
               | with minimal inconveniencing of as few as possible other
               | people. Any suitable substance for this seems to be taken
               | off the market, even basic stuff like metal nitrites (as
               | used in curing meat. Try getting hold of a nontrivial
               | amount of this in the UK). I don't have the inclination
               | to follow up Project Peanut; I don't have the background
               | for this.
               | 
               | I fully understand why this has been done, to stop people
               | who only intermittently get the urge, but for someone
               | like me it's a major bloody inconvenience, so inert gas
               | it most likely is.
               | 
               | (The above is not an opener for a discussion, it's an FYI
               | for a different perspective. Please don't respond).
        
               | Flumio wrote:
               | Any thoughts on how to inhale it without risking others
               | finding you in a oxygen deprived setup?
               | 
               | Like a warning sign or some fan kicking in later?
        
               | LorenPechtel wrote:
               | You don't set up such an environment in the first place.
               | Tank to flow limiter to hose to bag.
        
           | Der_Einzige wrote:
           | Oregon pioneered death with dignity so this is a huge
           | surprise.
        
             | CoastalCoder wrote:
             | Does the pacemaker law predate the death with dignity law?
             | 
             | I'm wondering if it only anticipated pacemakers being
             | disabled for malice or out of negligence.
        
               | LorenPechtel wrote:
               | All the US death with dignity laws are lethal
               | prescriptions only, the patient must self-administer.
               | Turning off a pacemaker would be the doctor doing it, not
               | the patient.
        
         | louwrentius wrote:
         | I'm quite convinced that I live in a country where we never let
         | people die like this.
         | 
         | Also, I guess prolonging treatment is in the interest of for-
         | profit hospitals as found in other countries, thus as long as
         | your suffering is profitable, you wil...
        
           | bamboozled wrote:
           | I made a similar comment already but I kind of agree. I'm not
           | sure if it's about profit it's also about legal concerns. I
           | think legally doctors are supposed to keep you alive until
           | they can't anymore?
        
             | ksenzee wrote:
             | No, truly, doctors are not legally required to keep people
             | alive against their will. It's just that you have to have
             | made it clear in advance what kind of life-saving and
             | comfort measures you want. You have to say "yeah actually I
             | don't want all that." It's hard on the doctors to watch
             | people dying painfully with too much life support, too.
             | They know what kind of death they want, and it's not that.
             | (As the article reflects.)
        
           | ksenzee wrote:
           | I would be surprised if there exists a country where people
           | never die like this. You would have to euthanize every single
           | person who died of a long list of natural causes.
        
             | mensetmanusman wrote:
             | Maybe NK will implement mandatory euthanasia at 63 or
             | something crazy.
        
             | raffraffraff wrote:
             | This is from personal experience, but there is a difference
             | between letting someone take 2 weeks to starve or die of
             | dehydration, and big-letters "euthanasia". Sometimes the
             | people who work in palliative care are nuanced enough to
             | ease you out when your _final_ days come. Where I live,
             | euthanasia is not legal. But when my sister was dying from
             | cancer she directly told her palliative meds guy  "I
             | watched my uncle gasp for two weeks. I'm not going like
             | that. You hear me?"
             | 
             | When it came to it, she didn't. It still wasn't petty
             | because death-by-cancer never is. She was extremely weak
             | and thin and tired. But on her last day she spoke to
             | everyone in the family, gave weak hugs, said goodbyes. I
             | guarantee you that guy took away days (at least) of
             | suffering. We all knew that. He knew that. She knew that.
             | Nobody said it though.
             | 
             | And I think that's better than someone who can't afford to
             | deal with a disability being asked if they're prefer to die
             | than cost the state lots of money. Horror stories _both_
             | sides of the nuance.
        
               | louwrentius wrote:
               | This is mostly how it works for most people who die like
               | this in my country where Euthanasia is legal.
        
           | Krssst wrote:
           | > I guess prolonging treatment is in the interest of for-
           | profit hospitals as found in other countries
           | 
           | France does the same but has nationalized healthcare, so it
           | does not seem motivated by profits. It puts pressure on the
           | healthcare system and only brings additional suffering. We
           | could change that, but implementing assisted death needs
           | careful consideration and defeating politically the small
           | subset of people that think life with extreme suffering is
           | precious.
        
             | anonymouskimmer wrote:
             | > but implementing assisted death needs careful
             | consideration
             | 
             | Yes.
             | 
             | > and defeating politically the small subset of people that
             | think life with extreme suffering is precious.
             | 
             | You don't need to defeat us. All you need is a clear-cut
             | agreement between the patient and the doctor, preferably in
             | advance for those who are physically unable to decide at
             | the end, similar to a DNI. Between the patient and the
             | doctor, and possibly the patient's family, it's no one
             | else's business (though I still think second-party
             | euthanasia of non-terminal persons is disgusting, and that
             | they should commit suicide without involving a second
             | party). It's when government or other third parties start
             | getting involved that everyone should have an issue with
             | euthanasia.
        
               | LorenPechtel wrote:
               | You're assuming the person has enough function to commit
               | suicide.
        
               | anonymouskimmer wrote:
               | If you reread my comment more closely you'll see that I'm
               | not. I list a couple of options, only one of which is
               | suicide. I'm willing to tolerate various things that I
               | consider repugnant, even though there is a limit.
        
         | camel_gopher wrote:
         | That breathing pattern is called the death rattle.
        
           | tmjwid wrote:
           | When my dad died last year from aggressive relapse of cancer,
           | his death rattle was so intense my mum couldn't deal with it
           | and had to leave the room when it was happening, it's a
           | disturbing experience. She's still traumatised by it today.
        
         | bamboozled wrote:
         | I've witnessed similar and in a way, I think the person was
         | kept alive too long. I personally think they would've died from
         | other causes well before it got to the stage they were at.
         | Euthanasia is probably a pretty important thing because of
         | this. If we're going to resuscitate people in their 80s, then
         | maybe we shouldn't let them go through the "long death" a few
         | years later.
         | 
         | All in all it's a tragic thing the only constellation is that I
         | guess after 24 hours in that, one welcomes death with open
         | arms.
        
           | LorenPechtel wrote:
           | I saw it with my father--to take the pain the morphine also
           | took his memory. And in the end there was only suffering--
           | fortunately, the problem would quickly kill making him
           | eligible for terminal sedation.
        
         | anonzzzies wrote:
         | Here they would ask you (unless dementia and not arranged,
         | which is an ongoing issue) if you want more morphine and you
         | can keep saying yes until you don't wake up. Or click the
         | button yourself; there is no limit (also; very hackable these
         | limiting machines). Probably many people in a long decline
         | would just hold the button until not waking up; that is the way
         | it should be. Some people worry about the gov making us wear
         | masks; I worry about govs preventing me from getting out when I
         | want to. Not your fucking business mate.
        
           | ozim wrote:
           | You know that government doesn't care about you.
           | 
           | They care about your relatives who are burdened not
           | "accidentally" holding that button for you when somehow you
           | would still like to live.
        
             | lotsofpulp wrote:
             | In the US, the big reason is religious groups that want to
             | force their religion onto others.
        
               | anonymouskimmer wrote:
               | There are anti-euthanasia atheists (E.g. Kevin Yuell).
        
               | dghlsakjg wrote:
               | There are pro assisted suicide religions too.
               | 
               | Neither of those matter because they don't hold massive,
               | disproportional influence over a huge part of the US
               | political establishment.
        
               | anonymouskimmer wrote:
               | In general in the US only White Evangelical Protestants
               | and Black Protestants have less than a majority who
               | believe assisted suicide / euthanasia should be available
               | for "great pain and no hope of improvement", and those
               | two groups still have over 40% who believe it should be
               | available.
               | 
               | And that's as of 2015, so the trend may be higher by now.
               | https://www.pewresearch.org/short-
               | reads/2015/10/05/californi...
        
               | anonymouskimmer wrote:
               | My bad, it's Yuill.
        
               | dghlsakjg wrote:
               | There's an interesting case right now in Vancouver
               | against the largest hospital downtown which is affiliated
               | with Catholics (I think, St Paul's is the facility in any
               | case).
               | 
               | Several in-patients that opted for medical assistance in
               | dying were refused that treatment by administrators of
               | the hospital on religious grounds, and their families are
               | sueing based on the additional suffering inflicted by
               | having to transfer to other facilities.
        
               | lotsofpulp wrote:
               | Catholic hospitals are a big problem in the US too.
        
             | dntrkv wrote:
             | That has nothing to do with it. Society in general is just
             | uncomfortable with the idea of euthanasia and politicians
             | don't want to be labeled as promoting "suicide"
             | 
             | It's just not a great hill to die on since most people that
             | actually care strongly about the issue are the ones bed
             | ridden in the hospital.
        
           | hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
           | Yes, this has been my experience with a family friend who
           | died of a brain tumor. Basically, once you're in hospice (in
           | this case it was home hospice) and it's clear you're going to
           | die, they just hook you up to the morphine drip that you can
           | press yourself.
           | 
           | Obviously for many people it's still very scary - it is
           | _death_ after all. But the self-administered morphine drip
           | has been around for ages and is relatively uncontroversial.
        
         | magicalhippo wrote:
         | My dad had cancer that had spread to the lungs.
         | 
         | He got pneumonia at the stage where he was having to use an
         | oxygen machine at home. At the hospital he asked the doctors if
         | he'd be able to go home, and they said it was highly unlikely.
         | 
         | So, he asked them to turn off the oxygen, which they did. He
         | passed peacefully a few hours later.
         | 
         | Sure, we might have gotten a few extra months with him, but I'm
         | so glad the doctors respected his wishes. My worst fear was him
         | having to endure something like what you describe.
        
           | LorenPechtel wrote:
           | That was my mother's philosophy. The hospital is for fixing
           | you up and sending you home. If the sending home part isn't
           | going to happen she didn't want treatment.
           | 
           | The reality is there comes a point where the doctors can only
           | prolong the dying--and in an awful lot of such cases that's a
           | negative for the person.
        
         | kstenerud wrote:
         | Someone I know acquired potassium cyanide for this reason.
         | She's getting up there in age and wanted some insurance against
         | a horrible death.
        
           | LorenPechtel wrote:
           | Yeah, we are so obsessed with keeping people alive that this
           | sort of thing is prudent behavior.
        
         | toss1 wrote:
         | So sorry to read of your loss, and the painful way it goes.
         | 
         | Sadly, this is just one of millions of descriptions of why the
         | phrase "Slow as death" exists. Generally, life _really_ does
         | not want to give up, and the process is indeed _terrible_.
        
         | ChumpGPT wrote:
         | I watched someone die of ALS for 6 months, it was pure hell on
         | earth. A middle aged guy who basically was vibrant and in
         | average health struck down from out of no where, the final
         | moments were horrific when they turned off the life support.
         | Even his diagnoses was difficult since no doctor wanted to
         | deliver the news and it required a trip to the MAYO Clinic to
         | finally get an answer.
         | 
         | I have often wondered why he was chosen to carry such a burden,
         | a harmless and kind person.
        
       | Theodores wrote:
       | This is a really good article, not least for the list of ways
       | that you will be kept medically alive.
       | 
       | As for the premise of the article, it is definitely getting
       | easier to die. We had the plumbers and the rubbish collecting
       | workers clear up our communicable chronic diseases, we de-
       | industrialised and cleared up the air, we quit smoking, put on
       | our seat belts and reigned in the alcohol. So far so good.
       | 
       | But, if you look at the physiques of people, the levels of car
       | dependency and the predominance of the Standard American Diet, it
       | seems that people are going the way of Joe Biden in old age, to
       | have what you might call a loss of cognitive abilities, yet able
       | to be preserved near indefinitely. The President isn't unalive,
       | but he isn't really there. Millions are in the same boat,
       | functionally alive but only from the eye-sockets down, and
       | probably with bits of their colon or bladder removed due to
       | cancer that they have bravely fought with a diet of highly
       | processed food and a sedentary lifestyle.
       | 
       | When it comes to how to live a healthy life, there is so much
       | misinformation that we are all an experiment of n = 1. There is
       | no realm of information that is anywhere near as confusing as
       | diet. Really you are forced to join one tribe or another if
       | longevity is your game. Either you are going to go all in on
       | 'everything in moderation' or go fully ketogenic meat only
       | carnivore, or the other way, full on vegan.
       | 
       | The Google confirmation bias is strong with the whole topic, and
       | I am sure that I could look up 'can I get omega three fatty acid
       | things from eating goat hair' and somewhere there will be an
       | article or 'scientific paper' promoting the eating of goat hair,
       | with a study from some goat herders living in Outer Mongolia,
       | thousands of miles away from any fish, with excellent omega three
       | things going on. There will also be an 'adsense' advert for where
       | you can get goat hair online and Reddit threads on whether you
       | need yak shavings instead.
        
         | 01HNNWZ0MV43FF wrote:
         | I mean Biden also comes off slow cause of his stutter. He just
         | has to survive inauguration.
        
           | blue_dragon wrote:
           | To me, Biden comes off as slow because he frequently trails
           | off mid-sentence without finishing his thoughts.
        
         | paulpauper wrote:
         | I am not a fan of Biden , but for an octogenarian to go on a
         | stage and debate extemporaneously like that , as poor as his
         | performance was, puts him in an above average category of
         | health or capabilities. The average 80 year old does not exist
         | (average life expectancy is 78) or much worse shape overall.
         | We're not talking doing crossword puzzles, but stepping up on a
         | stage before a national audience as President and debating. I
         | think part of the perception of his bad performance can be
         | explained by overinflated expectations. Trump's performance was
         | not much better--not answering questions and defaulting to a
         | few points that he attempted to shoehorn at every turn to
         | speak-- but, yes, he looked and sounded better. Again, Trump is
         | also an exception: it helped that his dad lived to 93; good
         | genes are a thing.
        
         | downrightmike wrote:
         | Or just like trump who shits his pants constantly
        
         | basisword wrote:
         | >> But, if you look at the physiques of people, the levels of
         | car dependency and the predominance of the Standard American
         | Diet, it seems that people are going the way of Joe Biden in
         | old age
         | 
         | If I can continue in my career at 80, let alone run one of the
         | biggest countries in the world, I'll be pretty happy. Car
         | dependence, the SAD and obesity are going to bring back heart
         | attacks in ones 60's - not a generation of hard working
         | octogenarians.
        
           | Theodores wrote:
           | Biden was not all there with his 'Cornpop' speech of 2017.
           | After that performance he should have made a dignified
           | retirement. The people around him should have shuffled him
           | off the stage too. There was too much going on in his
           | 'Cornpop was a bad dude' rambling that it really should have
           | been game over, there and then.
           | 
           | Notionally he has his finger on the nuclear button and he is
           | a decade past his sell by date. You have to question the
           | intellect of anyone, up to and including Obama, that do not
           | see this.
           | 
           | My cousin has an elderly dog that has a habit of knocking
           | expensive crockery off a coffee table with his tail,
           | blissfully unaware and unable to see the problems caused. We
           | love the dog and tell him that he is a good boy, but we don't
           | let him drive the car or light the barbeque. We commend the
           | dog for being able to lay a golden nugget in the park but
           | nobody else in the family gets told they have done well for
           | doing a number two.
           | 
           | For some reason people with Trump Derangement Syndrome seem
           | to ignore reality with Biden, if he falls up the stairs then
           | they make excuses for him, plus they know so much about him
           | that they have no knowledge of the legendary 'Cornpop was a
           | bad dude' speech, despite it being comedy gold.
           | 
           | I have no problem with people that have mental disabilities,
           | but the territory known as the United States can do better
           | than to have octogenarians that have brains clearly addled by
           | the American lifestyle of unhealthy food and unhealthy modes
           | of transport.
        
       | paxys wrote:
       | Regular reminder to read _Being Mortal: Medicine and What Matters
       | in the End_ by Atul Gawande. It offers a detailed and sometimes
       | shocking look into the end of life /palliative care system in the
       | country and show just how broken the incentives are industry-
       | wide.
        
         | gammarator wrote:
         | Strongly seconding this recommendation. Dr. Gawanda distills
         | down how to be led by the dying person's priorities.
        
       | pb060 wrote:
       | I faced a similar problem as my wife had a chorionangioma, a
       | placenta tumor. Or it was my son, it's even hard to tell who had
       | it as placenta is external to both. In the hospital where we
       | were, they were doing their best to keep the baby alive despite
       | all the issues with the rupture of the amniotic sac and body
       | damages that he already had, which I understand. What I didn't
       | understand, and still don't, is how they were getting ready to
       | try and keep him alive once he would be born, most probably at
       | the 6th month and with probable brain and other physical damages.
       | I respect doctors who can't choose between their patients life
       | and death, and most of all parents who love their to be born kids
       | so much that they are ready to face a life or hardship. I just
       | think that medicine should not just focus on keeping patients
       | alive, but also consider the quality of their life before taking
       | a decision together with the relatives.
        
       | mcshicks wrote:
       | Had a pretty close childhood friend choose assisted suicide (in
       | California) a few years ago after a year long battle with blood
       | cancer. It's not easy to do, I think his biggest fear was losing
       | his ability to consent as his mental condition declined rapidly.
       | The link below outlines the process. He was getting home hospice
       | care staying at an Aunt's house hear the hospital he was treated
       | at. I don't think it is the right choice for everybody, but I
       | certainly think in my friends case it was.
       | 
       | https://www.uclahealth.org/patient-resources/support-informa...
        
       | mbesto wrote:
       | We don't let people die with grace in the US. Not only is
       | pathetic and not very noble, but its a massive drain on the cost
       | of healthcare.
        
       | globalnode wrote:
       | if you opt to stay home to die but youre in terrible pain, who's
       | going to administer the pain meds? whos going to be there 24/7 to
       | clean up or get you whatever you need? what this article is
       | talking about is either very very very expensive home care or a
       | family that basically become full time carers. with our society
       | no longer advocating communal living and a sort of "every man for
       | themselves" attitude throughout life, how is all of this actually
       | supposed to work in reality? -- nice sentiment but unrealistic
       | except for a very lucky few it seems. this is what hospitals are
       | for now.
        
         | spondylosaurus wrote:
         | At-home hospice care exists for exactly this reason :)
        
           | globalnode wrote:
           | " very very very expensive home care "
        
           | everybodyknows wrote:
           | In California, "hospice care" consists only of drug and
           | supply deliveries plus occasional checkins from a nurse. The
           | rest of the 23/7 care falls to the family.
        
       | TriangleEdge wrote:
       | I'd like to see a survey about opinions on keeping people alive
       | using modern medicine. The survey would have a filter for people
       | who believe in evolution and survival of the fittest. How is the
       | cognitive dissonance around it resolved?
        
         | michaelhoney wrote:
         | Tell me more about the dissonance you see. "Survival of the
         | fittest" just means that in a challenging environment, those
         | who can adapt will survive to go on and have children.
         | 
         | If you are saying that modern medicine keeps some people alive
         | through to parenthood who would otherwise have perished: yes,
         | that's true. We have made our environment less challenging.
        
           | anonymouskimmer wrote:
           | I'm not the GP, but a social Darwinist would presumably be in
           | favor of medical extension of life (for those who can access
           | it), while a moral evolutionist would presumably be against
           | it. I think there is the possibility of a philosophical
           | dissonance here in some of the Randian types.
        
         | snakeyjake wrote:
         | "The fittest" isn't "the strongest" or "the mostest toughest"
         | it is "the best at procreation in the environment in which they
         | live".
         | 
         | Assuming that people being kept alive by modern medicine are
         | better at procreation, they are indeed the fittest.
         | 
         | Of course most of the people being kept alive by modern
         | medicine are old as hell, though, so they are hardly the
         | childbearing or rearing type.
         | 
         | So now I'm confused as to why you brought it up?
        
           | anonymouskimmer wrote:
           | I think this: > The survey would have a filter for people who
           | believe in evolution and survival of the fittest.
           | 
           | Just means that the survey would ask that question. I'm
           | guessing that GP wants to check whether those who believe in
           | the Darwin awards as well as the moral justness of
           | evolutionary pressure killing certain people earlier that
           | other people, would be more opposed to using modern medicine
           | to keep people alive.
           | 
           | Maybe? It really depends because modern medicine is part of
           | social Darwinism, even though it is against evolutionary
           | biological survival of the fittest. So I could see this going
           | multiple ways among this subset of people. I'd expect the
           | richest of them to believe both in medical extension of life
           | (and fertility treatments) as well as believing that only
           | those who can personally, or societally, afford such
           | intervention should get it. This may be the dissonance GP is
           | mentioning.
        
       | j_bum wrote:
       | Slightly tangential, but I believe this article segues into a
       | discussion about assisted suicide or euthanasia at the end of
       | life.
       | 
       | My entire family has been suffering over the past 18 months
       | watching my 88-year-old grandmother slowly pass away from age-
       | related deterioration and AD.
       | 
       | I worked with mice during my PhD training in the US. If a lab was
       | caught with lab mice suffering like my grandmother is without
       | euthanizing them, the lab would be liable to be shut down.
       | 
       | So I ask: why am I forced to sit and watch my grandmother suffer
       | slowly to death? Why can't there be assisted suicide/euthanasia
       | protocols in place to prevent this suffering?
        
         | squigz wrote:
         | Because far too many people believe that human life is the most
         | precious thing on Earth and willingly ending it is literally
         | the worst thing you could ever do.
        
           | candiddevmike wrote:
           | Or even more grotesque, that the suffering for death is a key
           | part to a righteous afterlife.
        
           | tsol wrote:
           | There's also the worry that it will be abused. Kids who want
           | their inheritance, people who have been abused and told it's
           | the right thing for them when it's not, or just insurance
           | trying to save money by avoiding more expensive treatments
        
         | anonymouskimmer wrote:
         | You aren't forced to. You can take matters into your own hands
         | and trust that a jury will let you off the hook.
         | 
         | > Why can't there be assisted suicide/euthanasia protocols in
         | place to prevent this suffering?
         | 
         | Even most religious people believe in mercy killing. The issue
         | is the slippery slope, and the fact that various people have
         | slid down this slope in every country with legal assisted
         | suicide or euthanasia. Whenever you are going to have a third
         | party, or even just a second party, involve itself in someone's
         | death, you have to figure out how to deal with issues every bit
         | as serious as letting someone suffer to death.
         | 
         | https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2015/10/05/californi...
        
       | Perenti wrote:
       | It's worse than the article says, because it's from a doctor's
       | perspective.
       | 
       | I have CRPS, one of the contenders for worst chronic pain you can
       | have. It's a "suicide disease", because if it advances to stage
       | 3/4, there's a suicide rate of about 70%. It sucks a lot. I've
       | had well over 200 spinal procedures over the last 30 years to try
       | to mitigate the pain, with dozens of other surgical procedures in
       | less tricky spots.
       | 
       | I also have Brugada Syndrome, a "drop dead suddenly without
       | warning" disease. When diagnosed, I wanted to take my time before
       | consenting to having an implanted defib. The doctors announced
       | that "Mr Foster, we believe you are not rational at the moment",
       | fortunately I had a friend with me who assured them I was
       | probably the most rational man in Brisbane.
       | 
       | I was threatened with an ITO (Involuntary Treatment Order) if I
       | didn't go ahead with having an internal defibrilator put in me. I
       | went ahead with the procedure.
       | 
       | So I can't even die by refusing treatment, as "sane" people
       | resist dying at all odds. If I don't want invasive, painful
       | procedures that take over a year to recover from, then the courts
       | will claim I'm suicidal and issue an order to the hospitals to
       | proceed with more bloody cutting.
       | 
       | No, sane people say "I've had enough". Fortunately my current GP
       | understands, as he says "Sometimes people feel they've had enough
       | medicine".
        
         | nextaccountic wrote:
         | > I was threatened with an ITO (Involuntary Treatment Order) if
         | I didn't go ahead with having an internal defibrilator put in
         | me.
         | 
         | Did this threat come from a doctor? What an astounding lack of
         | empathy.
         | 
         | I would switch medical providers in a heartbeat if at all
         | possible.
        
           | cm2012 wrote:
           | I personally would be so upset in that situation, that I
           | would refuse it on principal from that provider after being
           | threatened, health be damned.
        
             | fdsavjakslj wrote:
             | It's not personal-- the docs are there to cure disease and
             | just doing what they know, personhood be darned.
             | 
             | Also, in the moment, it's entirely possible that somebody
             | who is otherwise completely rational who just had a life-
             | altering experience is temporarily less than completely
             | rational and you're only hearing that one side of the
             | story.
        
               | LocalH wrote:
               | That's the problem. It's _not_ personal, and humanity is
               | not even a factor in that hospital 's assessment.
               | 
               | Why does society refuse to allow people to have mental
               | and physical autonomy in matters like this? Sure, they
               | pay lip service to it, but when it comes down to the hard
               | moments, we almost always end up erring on the wrong
               | side.
        
           | bowsamic wrote:
           | > Did this threat come from a doctor? What an astounding lack
           | of empathy.
           | 
           | Perhaps this is a US vs. other countries thing, but I live in
           | Germany and was born in the UK, and I'm quite shocked that
           | you are surprised by unempathetic (or downright evil) doctors
        
         | WhitneyLand wrote:
         | May I ask if you've considered taking measures to end your own
         | life?
         | 
         | I think I've had an unusual number of people close to me choose
         | that option, including my father recently so I guess I'm still
         | trying to reconcile it all. Their pain vs mine, what could have
         | played out differently, etc.
         | 
         | I sincerely wish the best outcome for you and yours.
        
       | pvaldes wrote:
       | And that's a good thing
       | 
       | Or maybe people got softer. Do we remember the 90% of time where
       | humans roamed this planet barefoot without painkillers, or
       | healthcare, or a guaranteed source of water that does not carry
       | those roundworm parasites that love to swim inside your eyes, or
       | anti polar bear sprays so they didn't tear you off and eat
       | alive?. Those were hard deaths.
       | 
       | The 120% of the times, being alive is the smartest option, even
       | if this carries a cost.
        
         | anonymouskimmer wrote:
         | : barefoot
         | 
         | That's what calluses are for.
         | 
         | : without painkillers
         | 
         | And poppies, and
         | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9785912/ . Even
         | animals know what plants to eat to help with pain.
         | 
         | : or healthcare
         | 
         | Someone in the tribe knew how to make a splint and what herbs
         | or foods were best for what ailment.
         | 
         | : or a guaranteed source of water that does not carry those
         | roundworm parasites that love to swim inside your eyes
         | 
         | In general I expect that there would be few enough people, and
         | they'd be sufficiently knowledgeable of the water sources among
         | the areas they frequented, that this usually wouldn't be a
         | problem.
         | 
         | https://askdruniverse.wsu.edu/2018/08/31/dr-universe-people-...
         | 
         | https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2020/01/how-did-...
         | 
         | > One group of students decided to put this method to the test.
         | They hoisted their water-filled deer hide directly over a fire,
         | and they planned to let it go as long as the hide stayed
         | intact. The hair on the outside singed, but the skin itself
         | held up just fine. So the students waited and waited and
         | waited. Four hours later, the hide was still intact. It did get
         | very hard, but neither sprung a leak nor burned.
         | 
         | : or anti polar bear sprays so they didn't tear you off and eat
         | alive?.
         | 
         | I'm pretty sure that by the time some of us migrated to where
         | polar bears live we had some pretty good spear technology.
        
         | wiseowise wrote:
         | > Or maybe people got softer. Do we remember the 90% of time
         | where humans roamed this planet barefoot without painkillers,
         | or healthcare, or a guaranteed source of water that does not
         | carry those roundworm parasites that love to swim inside your
         | eyes, or anti polar bear sprays so they didn't tear you off and
         | eat alive?. Those were hard deaths.
         | 
         | What's your point here?
        
       | qgin wrote:
       | ICUs are amazing technology. You can keep almost anyone in a
       | temporary state of stasis. This is great for people who have a
       | condition that just needs more time to heal (like a lot of people
       | with Covid, or people after car accidents). But for people who
       | have something unrecoverable, it's a very weird place to be.
       | You've been pushed off the ledge and are now frozen in midair.
       | You will hit the ground when the magic is removed, but you also
       | can't stay frozen forever.
        
       | 2-3-7-43-1807 wrote:
       | how about suicide? i'd compare it to knowing when the party is
       | over and then going home instead of getting yet another drink and
       | miserably trying to score with the last remaining woman. it's an
       | art and it can be trained at many occasions. now for the act
       | itself - the regular hn crowd should be technically apt enough to
       | assemble the required gear around a big gas cylinder of nitrogen.
       | that's as peaceful as it gets.
        
       | delta_p_delta_x wrote:
       | I'd like dying to be as easy as flicking a switch.
       | 
       | Medically-assisted suicide ought to be available to _anyone_ (not
       | only of sound mind and not only with a terminal condition), and
       | at any time. People ought to have the right to die, just like
       | they have the right to water, food, and shelter. In most
       | countries it is currently easier to take other people 's lives
       | than to take one's own.
       | 
       | People ought to be able to step into a hospital, ask 'hey, I'd
       | like to die', sign a couple of forms saying 'yes, I'd really
       | _really_ like to die ', step into an anoxic chamber, and be put
       | into hypoxia and brain death in a matter of minutes. Obviously,
       | an emergency stop plunger ought to be available in case the
       | person in question changes their mind.
       | 
       | The belief that life is a gift from a god is a highly
       | Christocentric, Western view that I disagree with. We are brought
       | into the world without any real consent; we should at least be
       | able to easily choose the date, time, and manner of our passing
       | if we so desire.
        
         | treprinum wrote:
         | Let's run a thought experiment - you make death super easy like
         | in a suicide booth in Futurama. How many people are going to
         | fight life obstacles, pushing society forward, or rather
         | terminally quit at the first sign of troubles? Nihilism was
         | quite popular in the 19th century and led us to two world wars
         | already. All you'll get is a quick extinction of people like
         | you in favor of those that persist and your opinion will be
         | eliminated from the gene pool.
        
           | mistrial9 wrote:
           | In the West I think alcohol is a massive factor, when talking
           | about the moods of large numbers of people in those days. It
           | is no accident that alcoholic drinking was banned outright
           | for some time, despite the deep cultural roots.
        
             | Liquix wrote:
             | booze has been around for thousands of years. it's not good
             | for you but it's also not a new phenomenon driving suicide
             | numbers up.
             | 
             | IMHO it's a combination of low wages, high cost of living,
             | and scrolling/gaming/streaming/porn addiction. we don't
             | know how to talk about it yet but it's fucking people up.
             | human brains were not ready for what the internet has
             | become
        
               | mantas wrote:
               | Booze - yes. Culture around booze... not exactly. Serious
               | drinking was reserved for festivals and generally frowned
               | upon. Nowadays... it's much more common and much more
               | abused. And modern alcohol is getting stronger and
               | stronger, same with other drugs.
        
               | LorenPechtel wrote:
               | If anything I suspect booze reduces suicide numbers. For
               | some people it's an escape that makes life tolerable.
               | 
               | I'm thinking of a book whose title eludes me at present.
               | It's by a doctor, talking about their ER experience. One
               | of their frequent fliers--and one time he talked a bit
               | about why. He had been a sniper in Afghanistan (Afghani,
               | fighting the Russians), he drank to keep from killing
               | himself because of the horrors he had experienced.
        
             | educasean wrote:
             | The west? Alcohol has a much, much firmer grip over East
             | Asia than any western countries I've seen. I think your
             | analysis is very much incomplete.
        
           | delta_p_delta_x wrote:
           | > How many people are going to fight life obstacles, pushing
           | society forward, or rather terminally quit at the first sign
           | of troubles?
           | 
           | Not many, probably, but the option should be available to
           | those who need it.
           | 
           | > Nihilism was quite popular in the 19th century and led us
           | to two world wars already
           | 
           | I'm sorry, but this is rubbish. Firstly, I'm not nihilistic,
           | but practical. Not everyone who wants to die is suffering;
           | sometimes they just want out of a pointless and meandering
           | life. They don't want to put in the effort to up themselves,
           | and frankly, why _should_ they? What right do other people
           | have to impose their views on someone who 's feeling like
           | this?
           | 
           | Sometimes one _is_ suffering, but can 't be bothered to, or
           | might suffer more while trying to convince the state and a
           | medical team that they deserve to die. It's 2024, and we have
           | increasing acceptance of the gender spectrum, of the autism
           | spectrum, of recreational narcotics, and more. Why is dying
           | so marginalised? Like I said, this is a Christocentric view.
           | A modern society must allow its citizens to die quietly,
           | peacefully, and cleanly, whenever they choose.
           | 
           | Next, what led to the two world wars was not 'nihilism', a
           | very loaded single word, but rather a bunch of overly-complex
           | defence pacts, treaties, and arms races in 1900s Europe that
           | eventually collapsed into a bloody shit show. The second
           | world war happened because of a feeling of revenge, anti-
           | semitism, and Slavophobia on the part of the Germans, and
           | imperialism on the part of all the Axis powers. Nothing more,
           | nothing less. Depending on who you ask WW2 began as early as
           | 1910 with the invasion and occupation of Korea by Japan.
           | 
           | > your opinion will be eliminated from the gene pool
           | 
           | Wanting to die is not (only) passed down in someone's genes.
           | It is highly environmental and depends on what people do, who
           | they talk to, and where and how they live.
        
           | Der_Einzige wrote:
           | Nihilism has nothing to do with either world war. You're
           | likely trying to blame Nietzsche, who was the polar opposite
           | of a nihilist, for German nationalism. The radical optimist
           | Nietzsche, in his old age while writing Ecco homo, disavowed
           | his German heritage and spoke about how awesome Poland and
           | his polish identity were.
           | 
           | Nihilism is only just now having an impact in the academy as
           | it is the intellectual foundation of post modernist and
           | critical theory.
        
             | mcmcmc wrote:
             | It's also vastly ignorant of the causes of World War I
             | which had fuck all to do with nihilism. A radical fighting
             | for Bosnian independence assassinated a Hapsburg, and then
             | entangling alliances escalated what might've been a
             | localized conflict into a world war.
        
           | drowsspa wrote:
           | Nihilism leading to the two world wars and opinions being
           | coded in the DNA are definitely two of the takes of all time
        
             | drrskino wrote:
             | Opinion and perspective are closely tied to cultural
             | upbringing which is closely tied to race and ethnicity.
        
               | drrskino wrote:
               | We hear about demographics of people and their beliefs
               | "dying off" all the time. It does happen.
        
           | rrgok wrote:
           | People ready to die often don't care about pushing society
           | forward or ensuring the continuation of the human species.
           | 
           | I always ask: for how long? What is the ultimate goal? If you
           | don't know, it's time to seek answers before pushing society
           | forward carelessly.
        
           | manquer wrote:
           | > your opinion will be eliminated from the gene pool
           | 
           | The impulse to die being eliminated from the gene pool is a
           | good thing ? Or rather the characteristics to fight for life
           | at all costs is what one would want in the gene pool ?
           | 
           | If what you assume is true, at some point people will want to
           | die less and the problem will self correct .
           | 
           | Death is important tool in evolution delaying it is not
           | argument for it .
        
         | jezzamon wrote:
         | How do you reconcile that with many people that attempted
         | suicide due to some illness like depression, and then later
         | very much we're glad they didn't die. "Only of sound mind"
         | sounds difficult to measure.
         | 
         | Related: Majority of gun deaths in the USA are suicides. In the
         | gun control debate you might want to exclude those, right? But
         | actually having ready access to a way to die increases the
         | total number of suicides - it's not that all of those people
         | taking their own lives would use different methods of suicide -
         | some would but some would never die from suicide at all. So
         | it's used as a argument against having easy to access firearms,
         | and generally an argument against an easy way for suicide.
        
           | delta_p_delta_x wrote:
           | > How do you reconcile that with many people that attempted
           | suicide due to some illness like depression
           | 
           | I believe that depression should be treated seriously as a
           | mental illness. But treat the _depression_ , and not the
           | choices made while depressed (i.e. suicidal ideation, suicide
           | attempts), which are symptoms of depression. It's not like we
           | treat so seriously any of the _other_ choices made while
           | depressed like over /under-eating, alcoholism, impulsive
           | purchases, etc.
           | 
           | > So it's used as a argument against having easy to access
           | firearms
           | 
           | Personally I believe in restricting access to firearms
           | because they are usually used to kill _other_ people. If
           | someone wants to use their gun to take their own life, rather
           | than take their guns away, I 'd like to spare them and their
           | family the mess, and give them a way to die peacefully and
           | quietly in a supine position.
        
           | Der_Einzige wrote:
           | A permanent solution to a temporary problem still leaves the
           | problem solved.
        
             | rrgok wrote:
             | I usually say "No, death is not the solution, death just
             | removes the problem.".
        
               | anonymouskimmer wrote:
               | What it does is replace your problem with problems for a
               | bunch of other people.
        
               | rrgok wrote:
               | I don't quite understand this. Postponing my death won't
               | solve the problem; it's inevitable. The real question is,
               | whose time takes priority--others' or mine?
        
               | anonymouskimmer wrote:
               | This is a good point. I guess the only counter argument
               | is that, so far, in general, postponing elective death
               | also leads to a bunch of solutions to other problems over
               | the course of a life, even if the original problem is
               | unsolvable.
        
               | rrgok wrote:
               | People forget that the other problems are created by life
               | itself. There is no way out by playing its game. You
               | cannot escape the problem making machine by using it: it
               | will only produce more problems.
               | 
               | But the truth is that I'm not convinced that death is the
               | "the winning move is not playing it". You see death is
               | life: in order to die you must be alive first.
               | 
               | That's why lately I'm thinking unconsciousness is the way
               | out, but I'm not sure about that too.
        
               | anonymouskimmer wrote:
               | The end of the universe is created by pre-life physics. I
               | think it's unknown to humanity at this point whether a
               | sufficiently advanced technology can deal with that.
        
           | rrgok wrote:
           | What if they change their mind again? Years later, they might
           | have a fleeting thought: "I could have died back then."
           | 
           | The point is, the mind changes constantly; it's its nature.
           | What should one do?
           | 
           | Personally, I'd rather avoid the rollercoaster of "I'm happy
           | I didn't die" and "I should've died."
        
             | LorenPechtel wrote:
             | Which is why there should be a waiting period.
        
           | TexanFeller wrote:
           | > How do you reconcile that with many people that attempted
           | suicide due to some illness like depression, and then later
           | very much we're glad they didn't die
           | 
           | You don't have to, it's not your business, it's their right
           | to make that choice and no one else's. "My body, my choice"
           | applies to suicide even more than abortion, if you don't
           | control your own life and body you can't call yourself a free
           | man.
           | 
           | I disagree with dismissing someone's decision because they
           | have a mental illness like depression too. Depression and
           | other issues don't always respond to treatment, and even when
           | they do it's often after trying different treatments for
           | months! I've been through very dark times with depression,
           | OCD, and much more. I live a life of luxury now that most of
           | the country would envy with a wonderful wife. If I knew I had
           | to face a year or too of my past issues again and I would get
           | to spend the last 40 years in my wonderful life again
           | afterwards I don't think it would be worth suffering like
           | that for a year. Some issues like OCD really are that bad. If
           | someone with a mental illness wants to die, offer to help,
           | but respect their decision if they don't accept.
        
         | rrgok wrote:
         | I wholeheartedly support this point of view. Death should be an
         | option freely and easily accessibile to anyone.
         | 
         | Why have people here who don't want to be here?
        
           | andai wrote:
           | I like to use a metaphor.
           | 
           | You're at a party. You politely say goodbye to everyone and
           | start heading for the exit.
           | 
           | You are restrained and drugged.
           | 
           | Nice party, bro...
        
             | shawabawa3 wrote:
             | You're at a party. You politely say goodbye to everyone and
             | start heading for the exit.
             | 
             | You are restrained and drugged. You are coerced into
             | signing euthanasia papers and are swiftly killed.
        
               | dghlsakjg wrote:
               | In the real world, most people struggle to get permission
               | to opt for medical assistance in dying.
               | 
               | Nobody is getting coerced into suicide.
        
               | asynchronous wrote:
               | Canada would like a word with you
        
               | dghlsakjg wrote:
               | I live in Canada. I also have google.
               | 
               | You are referring to an incident where a caseworker
               | mentioned that MAID is an option to a permanently
               | disabled veteran suffering from pain, and it was deemed
               | out of scope for their job. The policy has now changed so
               | that caseworkers are not allowed to even bring up MAID.
               | No one was coerced into the option.
               | 
               | The outcome of the incident you are citing is that it is
               | now less accessible for people to learn about the option.
               | 
               | Meanwhile there are cases across Canada where people have
               | been blocked from getting MAID because of religious
               | hospitals, outside objectors, and debates about what kind
               | of permanent illness qualifies even if two doctors and
               | the patient have all agreed.
               | 
               | The process is not fast, requires psychological
               | assessment, and must be signed off by a doctor.
               | 
               | There is precisely no evidence that anyone has ever
               | undergone MAID when they weren't 100% consenting and
               | having made there own decision.
        
         | anonymouskimmer wrote:
         | > I'd like dying to be as easy as flicking a switch.
         | 
         | It is. Just flick the blade open on a switchblade and stab into
         | your temple. You don't need a fricking second or third party to
         | help you with this.
         | 
         | Some of us atheists view life as more precious than many
         | religious people do because this is it.
        
           | delta_p_delta_x wrote:
           | > stab
           | 
           | > fricking
           | 
           | Do you really have to be so violent in response?
           | 
           | There exist supervised injection sites for narcotics. You
           | bring the drugs, the healthcare workers give you clean
           | syringes/needles/paraphernalia and help you with the
           | injection. As a society we have decided that it is OK for
           | people to potentially wreck their own lives with narcotics.
           | 
           | Why not a similar concept for dying, where the end is only
           | eternal oblivion? Step into a room, step inside a pod, press
           | a button, pod closes, press another button to replace the air
           | with nitrogen, done.
           | 
           | > life as more precious
           | 
           | I'm sorry, but 'life is precious' is a religious view, even
           | if you call yourself 'atheist'. Life is just life, it is an
           | emergent property of chemical and physical processes and
           | laws. It is _interesting_ , to be sure, but precious? Sorry,
           | no. Humans have killed each other since they evolved from
           | _Australopithecus_ , and have only found more efficient,
           | violent, and deadly ways to do so in the intervening five
           | million years.
        
             | anonymouskimmer wrote:
             | > Do you really have to be so violent in response?
             | 
             | I was trying to meet your request for an option that came
             | as close as possible to just flicking a switch.
             | 
             | > Step into a room, step inside a pod, press a button, pod
             | closes, press another button to replace the air with
             | nitrogen, done.
             | 
             | I know of a friend of a friend who did this on his own. If
             | you are of sufficient capacity to step into some place and
             | press a button then you are able to buy or make this
             | equipment on your own and do it yourself.
             | 
             | > I'm sorry, but 'life is precious' is a religious view,
             | even if you call yourself 'atheist'.
             | 
             | And some religious people also believe that taking care of
             | Earth's natural environment is also a religious duty. That
             | doesn't make it a religious view, it makes it a general
             | moral view that is shared between some religions and some
             | atheists. The justification for a moral view is what makes
             | it religious or secular.
             | 
             | > Humans have killed each other since they evolved from
             | Australopithecus
             | 
             | And how many of these deaths have been because of religious
             | beliefs? I think enough of them to say that killing people
             | for moral reasons is a religious view, even if you call
             | yourself 'atheist'.
        
               | LorenPechtel wrote:
               | No. The tank that can hold enough nitrogen (or helium or
               | argon--same volume means the same pressure which means
               | effectively the same weight) to do the job reliably is
               | heavy. By the time your health is such that you would
               | choose that path you likely can't lift it. I have seen my
               | wife struggle with lifting that weight when it's in a
               | form meant to be lifted. I've seen her fail when it
               | wasn't as cooperative.
        
               | Nuzzerino wrote:
               | Too bad, I guess that leaves out the "use
               | disproportionately large amounts of the agent to hotbox
               | the room" method. But that doesn't invalidate the point
               | of the parent comment.
        
               | LorenPechtel wrote:
               | Which is completely missing the point. To hotbox a room
               | you need a bunch of the big cylinders. Look at the tare
               | weights on page 3:
               | 
               | https://www.airgas.com/medias/Airgas-Compressed-Gas-
               | Cylinder...
               | 
               | The have a volume in cubic feet specified, multiply by
               | the 165 bar that's what's typically used to see how much
               | space it will fill. Looking around our house there's a
               | very odd-shaped closet under the stairs that would be
               | difficult to measure. Of the more typical places the
               | smallest room in the house is a closet. 6' x 5' (minus a
               | 1' x 1' chunk that I believe contains an air duct) x 8' =
               | 232 cubic feet. Suppose you dump 232 cubic feet of
               | material into it--you'll displace half the air which
               | gives a time of useful consciousness of 20-30 minutes.
               | Not good enough. Let's try doubling that, now we end up
               | with a time of useful consciousness of 30-60 seconds.
               | That's probably enough. That's 2 cylinders at 137 pounds
               | each. Or if you use aluminum, 3 cylinders of 90 pounds
               | each.
        
               | Nuzzerino wrote:
               | Yeah, nobody is seriously suggesting to do that. It was
               | an example for the sake of argument.
        
               | anonymouskimmer wrote:
               | That's what white glove delivery is for.
        
             | bowsamic wrote:
             | Why are you against religious views?
        
         | LorenPechtel wrote:
         | Disagree. It should be a considered decision over time.
         | 
         | 1) Is the patient of sound mind when the decision is made? (Not
         | necessarily carried out. I have no problem with someone saying
         | "kill me when my mind is gone.")
         | 
         | 2) There should be a medical evaluation of whatever the problem
         | is with an eye to what can be done to make life more palatable.
         | 
         | 3) There should be a waiting period. (I would, however, say
         | that if the person is no longer capable of confirming it that
         | should count as confirmation.)
         | 
         | Suicide should only be for when one's remaining life is of
         | negative value, not because of temporary bad things.
        
         | Nuzzerino wrote:
         | > The belief that life is a gift from a god is a highly
         | Christocentric, Western view that I disagree with. We are
         | brought into the world without any real consent; we should at
         | least be able to easily choose the date, time, and manner of
         | our passing if we so desire.
         | 
         | Too bad that's only one of many arguments against euthanasia,
         | and one of the easier ones to grandstand against.
         | 
         | https://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/euthanasia/against/against_1.sh...
        
         | bowsamic wrote:
         | As someone with depression, I'm very very very glad that your
         | vision is not true
        
         | manfromchicago wrote:
         | I greatly offended my mother's psychiatrist once with a similar
         | thought. He was using my mother's suicidality as proof that she
         | needed inpatient treatment.
         | 
         | I told him - "She suffers from migraines, and for 3 out of 4
         | weeks in an average month she must spend the entire day
         | immobile in a dark room. There are no treatments in the near
         | term which are expected to improve her outlook. The pain is
         | debilitating. Doctor, who is "insane" - the person who wants a
         | way out of the constant agony, or the person who says "More,
         | please!""
         | 
         | I believe that the right to life as enshrined in the
         | Constitution (and endowed by my Creator) must, inherently, also
         | include the right to end that life, if a man (or woman) so
         | chooses.
        
       | timnetworks wrote:
       | Someone in the medical profession explained to me what 'do
       | everything you can' means to doctors and surgeons, it's a binding
       | command. My instructions are likely going to be 'do two things
       | that you probably should at this point and then go have lunch'
        
         | Zenzero wrote:
         | > Someone in the medical profession explained to me what 'do
         | everything you can' means to doctors and surgeons, it's a
         | binding command
         | 
         | I've found that usually the people who said that to me were the
         | least prepared for what that meant.
        
       | erie wrote:
       | It means also that "Do not go gentle into that good night" is not
       | realistic most of the time. We have a saying in Arabic that I
       | only understood after my father died, it to the effect that
       | something is so difficult that:'' it is harder than the spirit
       | leaving the body'. I think it is time that hospice care evolve to
       | make it easier.
        
       | julianeon wrote:
       | I think sometimes these articles don't pose the question all that
       | well. The way I would ask it is:
       | 
       | Imagine a pain scale of 1-10; pretend 10 is so high that you die
       | from the pain.
       | 
       | Is it worth living at a 7-8 at every moment continuously, to
       | extend your life for 2 months? How about living at a 9 for just 2
       | more weeks?
       | 
       | If you say "no" that just means you're not hooked up to a machine
       | where that's your living experience (not like someone is actively
       | killing you).
       | 
       | I think, when you put it that way, it becomes easier to set some
       | rules around it. Btw I'm pretty close to someone who would always
       | choose to live longer, but even I would say no to, for example,
       | living at a 10 of pain for just 1 more week of life.
        
         | Zenzero wrote:
         | Doctor here.
         | 
         | This is overly simplistic. There is little to debate about your
         | example of living at a 7/8 for 2 months. What is more realistic
         | is some hypothetical situation where the average patient has an
         | expected survival of 6 to 18 months, with the hope that the 7/8
         | pain can be reduced to a 4/5, and with acknowledgement that
         | some days may be a score of 5, some days may be a score of 9.
         | Then what?
         | 
         | As a provider on the other side of it you witness two similar
         | patients take two different paths. Perhaps the first patient
         | lives 36 months with pain score averaging a 3. The family will
         | often appreciate the intervention and effort. The other patient
         | experiences a string of complications and dies after 2 weeks,
         | living at a pain score of 10. Their family paints you as an
         | evil torturer who should have never been listened to.
         | 
         | In fact you can see both types of opinions in this very thread.
        
           | LorenPechtel wrote:
           | While I agree he's being too simplistic I think you're not
           | getting it, either. You're making the standard error of the
           | medical world of focusing too much on stuffing pigeons into
           | pigeonholes because once you have found the supposedly
           | correct (look at the patients who go to doctor after doctor
           | after doctor until someone finally finds the rare issue
           | that's the correct diagnosis--and realize that there are
           | those who never get answers) pigeonhole you see the
           | pigeonhole rather than the patient.
           | 
           | You're looking into that pigeonhole and observing the result
           | is anywhere from two weeks of horror to three years of not
           | too bad. Just because you can't predict how any given case
           | will turn out doesn't mean you can't look at the patients and
           | see how things are turning out. And recognize that things are
           | not static--your first patient doesn't exist. Things don't
           | just sit there at three for three years and then kill you.
        
             | Zenzero wrote:
             | > You're making the standard error of the medical world of
             | focusing too much on stuffing pigeons into pigeonholes
             | because once you have found the supposedly correct (look at
             | the patients who go to doctor after doctor after doctor
             | until someone finally finds the rare issue that's the
             | correct diagnosis--and realize that there are those who
             | never get answers) pigeonhole you see the pigeonhole rather
             | than the patien
             | 
             | This is another common misunderstanding of why people so
             | commonly struggle to get a convincing diagnosis. The
             | problem isn't a clueless doctor robotically listening for
             | keywords. It's that the doctor has 10 minutes to dedicate
             | to you and if it's not in the 80% of straightforward cases
             | for them, the patient gets the bare minimum and then
             | becomes someone else's problem. To solve that you need to
             | fix provider shortages and (in the US) remove the corporate
             | overlords constantly applying pressure on the little worker
             | bees beneath them.
             | 
             | > out doesn't mean you can't look at the patients and see
             | how things are turning out. And recognize that things are
             | not static--your first patient doesn't exist. Things don't
             | just sit there at three for three years and then kill you.
             | 
             | It's becoming clear to me you have a really odd sense of
             | what doctors generally know and don't know. I don't really
             | have an interest in exploring the left side of the Dunning
             | kruger curve with respect to how medicine works.
        
       | martinpw wrote:
       | > Spend your remaining days at home if possible.
       | 
       | This sounds appealing in the abstract but one thing to consider
       | is the impact on other family members. My parents had a neighbor
       | who chose to remain at home. However that meant his wife also had
       | to stay at home to look after him (yes there were nurses who came
       | in a couple of times a day, but a lot of the burden was still on
       | the wife.) This meant her own life basically shut down. She never
       | went out, and spent at least a year fully housebound for his
       | care.
       | 
       | Once he died, she was able to go out, reconnect with friends,
       | kickstart her life again. Couldn't help feeling the husband's
       | choice here was a selfish one.
        
         | scottcorgan wrote:
         | No place is rather be than with my spouse in a time like that!
        
           | martinpw wrote:
           | I think that's easy to say in the abstract, but the reality
           | can be quite different. Of course every case is different,
           | but for example:
           | 
           | * Spouse has dementia, does not recognize you, abuses you for
           | being an intruder in the house, constantly shouts for help
           | all times of day and night.
           | 
           | * Feeding, cleaning (double incontinence).
           | 
           | * Can't go out except for a few minutes when nurses are
           | present.
           | 
           | The above goes on for months and even years with no end in
           | sight. No chance to go out for exercise, hikes in nature,
           | meeting friends. Isolation. At home carers have significantly
           | reduced life expectancy for good reason.
           | 
           | Having hospice care where they can be well looked after is
           | not a bad option, and is not a sign of weakness or failure
           | for a partner.
        
             | LorenPechtel wrote:
             | Dementia is particularly evil.
             | 
             | As far as I'm concerned I am my mind. If my mind is gone my
             | body doesn't matter, please don't waste effort in caring
             | for it.
        
       | LocalH wrote:
       | Humans have long handled death in a very backwards and disgusting
       | manner.
       | 
       | We have humans, who can clearly assert a particular desire when
       | of sound, lucid mind. Yet we do not allow them to have any
       | control over one of the most personal experiences their life will
       | ever offer them, when in a medical establishment. We don't allow
       | people to assert a desire to be euthanized gently. We force them
       | to die on their own (by being unwilling to do anything more than
       | remove care), no matter how much they may be suffering. Of
       | course, we always have the option of taking matters into our own
       | hands, with all the potential stumbling blocks that provides.
       | 
       | In contrast, we have pets, who can not verbally assert any
       | particular desire, due to the lack of common language. We can't
       | ask them if they want to stay with their loved ones, or if
       | they're suffering and want to be free. Yet we make the decision
       | to _actively end their lives_ every single day in the world.
       | 
       | Logically, this seems completely backwards to me. It seems like
       | we should err on the side of not ending a pet's life when they
       | don't want us to, and that we should allow people of sound mind
       | to articulate a self-aware desire to have a more dignified,
       | gentle death as much as possible.
        
       | jl6 wrote:
       | I hope "noble sacrifice" becomes a viable end-of-life option one
       | day. Specifically, one-way tickets to Mars, which will be
       | invaluable for doing human-led research and construction, paving
       | the way for future colonists, but without the expense and burden
       | of a return journey.
       | 
       | There must be some ultra-high-risk test pilot jobs available for
       | 75 year olds with inoperable diseases. Go out with a bang!
        
       | salzig wrote:
       | The author doesn't believe his content is worth reading (full
       | page ,,popup"). Good he included this feature so I can leave the
       | page early.
        
       | 627467 wrote:
       | in this modern day of increased privatized medicine, health
       | insurances and self-absorbed people, what is the incentive to let
       | a person die?
       | 
       | the longer you keep someone with medical needs and decent
       | insurance the more you can milk the their insurance or whatever
       | wealth they may have accumulated.
       | 
       | self-absorbed closed ones can also easily dismiss the sick person
       | desires and needs.
       | 
       | I see no incentive for this to change.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-06-29 23:01 UTC)