george
Cosmopolitan
Posts: 568
|
Post by george on Feb 24, 2007 12:51:55 GMT -7
A 32-year-old motorcycle accident victim has had enough of life-sustaining treatment, which offers no relief or cure, and wants it turned off. Catholics not happy.
His name is Janusz Switaj from Silesia and he is attached to a life support system all day, since his accident 14 years ago which left him paralyzed and in pain. He needs attention from his parents 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
His care is a two-person job and when one of his parents dies Janusz has requested that doctors disconnect his life support system and let him pass away.
Of course euthanasia is against catholic teaching, but over 50 percent of Poles asked in various opinion polls say that they support it, in principle.
But Poland is not Holland, and the ‘right to die’ is not going to go into the Polish constitution anytime soon. And should it anyway? I have heard of the ‘right to life’ – but should the right to death be a basic human right? Hmm, it’s sounds like a oxymoron to me
|
|
|
Post by joanzaniskey on Feb 27, 2007 20:00:18 GMT -7
George, I can't resist this. Euthanasia is not is not the same as the "right to die". 14 years on life support?? A SIN. The man has no quality of life as you describe it. If he wants to join God, who are those catholics to oppose his desires? For shame on them. Joan
|
|
|
Post by kaima on Feb 28, 2007 0:00:58 GMT -7
Right to die? It is more a right not to be tortured. Not only I but my whole family is strongly against prolonging life artificially. It is torture for the victim, a heck of a burden on the family to see them suffer unnaturally, unnecessary income for the tortures and perhaps a sop to some theoreticians who favor it and should be bedridden and tortured themselves - but not at the expense fo the taxpayer or other victims!
Kai the Calm
|
|
bujno
Cosmopolitan
Posts: 648
|
Post by bujno on Feb 28, 2007 7:16:48 GMT -7
I must say I don't know which right is right here. My main point of serious mental suffering and frustration while approaching this problem is concerned with one unresolved question. Who is to decide which suffering is unnatural? I thought that till now it was God who decided so. And when the suffering became unnatural he just let a human being die. So although frustrated and unsure I think I will stick to the old-fashioned ways and let God do the uncomfortable job for me.
|
|
|
Post by jimpres on Feb 28, 2007 8:32:11 GMT -7
I will let God decide when I die not the medical profession. I have a DNR on file. No artificial help needed.
Jim
|
|
|
Post by leslie on Feb 28, 2007 8:39:55 GMT -7
As I think I have stated before on this forum, I completely believe in an all-powerful, all-knowing God who put life on this Earth. But I also believe he is a non-interfering Creator who having given us life he also gave us the ability to think and make decisions - in this way I believe it is our duty to decide on issues such as this. I empathise with Wojtek's uncertainty and I too wonder whether we have sufficient skill/knowledge/expertise to make the decision to be the instrument in helping someone with their right to die (and I feel with absolute certainty that everyone has this Right) But i many cases mere mortals have to make an instrumental decision to let this happen and only when there is absolute certainty that this is the only solution - even the most skilled etc doctors may themselves doubt their ability to make this choice. As with Joan I see a strong divide between euthanasia and the right to die - the former opens up all sorts of mis-application - although under VERY controlled circumstances I see nothing wrong with it. If God gave us the right to determine our lives and development on Earth, what right has an artificially created organisation the right to say that 'the right to die' is a sin. Leslie
|
|
|
Post by joanzaniskey on Feb 28, 2007 14:09:35 GMT -7
Leslie, What is this artificial organization you refer to? Joan
|
|