Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
evil_kenshin

Belgian twins choose euthenasia

182 posts in this topic

Yeah, you're right. We should just help everyone that is too sad to live anymore, kill themselves. And to make it super easy, we should kill them so they don't have to do it themselves. After all, ultimately we're all going to die anyway so why not just do it and get it out of the way! :passifier:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, you're right. We should just help everyone that is too sad to live anymore, kill themselves. And to make it super easy, we should kill them so they don't have to do it themselves. After all, ultimately we're all going to die anyway so why not just do it and get it out of the way!

It is their choice regardless what you or I say.. If it is legal for them and they make that choice, that's it.. Our mere opinions will not matter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is their choice regardless what you or I say.. If it is legal for them and they make that choice, that's it.. Our mere opinions will not matter

Our mere opinions won't matter either when the Government Bureaucrats begin making that choice for them. No chance for recovery? Mandated Euthanasia! No reason to put out all that money and effort trying to save a live that can't be saved now is there? Stretch you say? Not so much...I say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our mere opinions won't matter either when the Government Bureaucrats begin making that choice for them. No chance for recovery? Mandated Euthanasia! No reason to put out all that money and effort trying to save a live that can't be saved now is there? Stretch you say? Not so much...I say.

Example - If it were legal where you are now.. And you are suffering badly, that doctors can no longer help you.. If you wanted to put yourself out of the misery, then you would own that right, if it is legal, then yes, the right would be all yours

It would not matter what medial reasons there are.. IF it is legal and IF you made that choice, then that is your own choice and your own right... Just like people chant about abortions being the right of a woman because it is her body ..I see no difference here..

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tbh I would have done the same thing too.

However I know a few deaf people from my days at Remploy.They just shrug their disability off and have a joke with the rest of the lads.They are just as able- bodied as the vast majority of us where they do have a semblance of life.And they're got pretty good eyesight.Even the language barrier isn't difficult through signing and lip- reading.

Being deaf isn't as bad as it feels. However if you lose your eyesight your like a boat without a rudder.Being deaf and blind is just like permanent twilight.So it's natural these twins would join in a pact to kill themselves.It's the added aspect of them being twins that makes it more likely or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Example - If it were legal where you are now.. And you are suffering badly, that doctors can no longer help you.. If you wanted to put yourself out of the misery, then you would own that right, if it is legal, then yes, the right would be all yours

It would not matter what medial reasons there are.. IF it is legal and IF you made that choice, then that is your own choice and your own right... Just like people chant about abortions being the right of a woman because it is her body ..I see no difference here..

You are right. I just think IF it is legal...it's still wrong. Just because it is legal doesn't make it right...but yes, if it is legal and you want to do it...well...where is the problem other than in the minds of others who hold moralistic opinions? That being said: IF it is legal to mandate that Granny be euthanized on her 85th birthday, regardless of her health...and Granny's opinion didn't matter, is that a problem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tbh I would have done the same thing too.

However I know a few deaf people from my days at Remploy.They just shrug their disability off and have a joke with the rest of the lads.They are just as able- bodied as the vast majority of us where they do have a semblance of life.And they're got pretty good eyesight.Even the language barrier isn't difficult through signing and lip- reading.

Being deaf isn't as bad as it feels. However if you lose your eyesight your like a boat without a rudder.Being deaf and blind is just like permanent twilight.So it's natural these twins would join in a pact to kill themselves.It's the added aspect of them being twins that makes it more likely or not.

They can still...feel. They can still ...taste. They can still...smell. So, they could set down together, enjoy a bowl of bean chili together...passing notes in braille telling each other how good that chili tasted and...excuse me brother...Whew! I know that didn't just rip out of my ass!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right. I just think IF it is legal...it's still wrong. Just because it is legal doesn't make it right...but yes, if it is legal and you want to do it...well...where is the problem other than in the minds of others who hold moralistic opinions? That being said: IF it is legal to mandate that Granny be euthanized on her 85th birthday, regardless of her health...and Granny's opinion didn't matter, is that a problem?

It should be up to the person themself, if they can't, then their significant other or someone close to them. Any law that says a person should be killed for any other reason but (IMO) murder and rape, is wrong.

Edited by Hasina
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have agree with the not using the medical profession to assist.

Was just wondering if they had committed suicide themselves without assistance, if it would have affected the wills and what the family would have been able to receive? Do not know how the laws stand on this there, was just a thought if the assisted suicide would guarantee the wills being honored.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It should be up to the person themself, if they can't, then their significant other or someone close to them. Any law that says a person should be killed for any other reason but (IMO) murder and rape, is wrong.

Oh, I can think of lots of other reasons besides murder and rape. Bank Robbery, Kidnapping, Armed Robbery of any kind, DWI or DUI where someone else is killed, Child Molesting, Maiming someone intentionally. I have rethought my previously held opinion that Jay Walkers should be on that list. I will have to go with Life without the possibility of parole for JayWalking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, I can think of lots of other reasons besides murder and rape. Bank Robbery, Kidnapping, Armed Robbery of any kind, DWI or DUI where someone else is killed, Child Molesting, Maiming someone intentionally. I have rethought my previously held opinion that Jay Walkers should be on that list. I will have to go with Life without the possibility of parole for JayWalking.

Terrible thing is, we're dinosaurs Joc, our stance that crime should be punished not 'put away' or 'rehabilitated' is archaic in this 'enlightened' age of ours. The death penalty? Why it goes against human rights don't ya know! Poor cwiminals~ D:

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But this is not what justifies euthanasia, at least in my book. I'm not saying they don't have the right to die - everyone does if that is their wish - but they certainly, in my view, don't have the right to be killed by a medical professional when they could do it themselves. A medical professional who became a doctor to save lives, and will have to live with this on his conscience for the rest of his life.

Hire a hit-man. They're the opposite of doctors :) Seriously though, euthanasia should be reserved for people who do not have the ability to kill themselves, otherwise it's just legalised murder.

If you don't have the courage to kill yourself, then this tells you that somewhere, deep down, you actually want to live/don't want to die.

I agree with you, but then there is the fact that our instinct is hard to overcome with suicide, which is why suicide is usually linked to someone with mental problems as their mental problems affect their instinct. Where as with this, they would have to go against their instinct.

Also as a doctor wouldn't it be harder to have to clean up a "mess". Most suicides are very messy because people don't usually do them properly. My friend is a nurse and she has told me some horror stories of suicide attempts. 70% people are unsuccessful and actually make their lives a million times worse by causing problems like paralyzing their wrists/hands, damaging organs or giving themselves serious mental disabilities.

Edited by Coffey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That being said: IF it is legal to mandate that Granny be euthanized on her 85th birthday, regardless of her health...and Granny's opinion didn't matter, is that a problem?

That is different. You are suggesting that granny wont be given a choice even if she is healthy.. It doesn't work like that... I am talking about the right to your own choice if it is your life and your body.. You own the right if it is legal do to do...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For all those who believe in this, do you think I was in the wrong when I physically prevented a man from jumping to his death from a bridge last year?

Because believe me when I tell you he was not happy with me.

To me it's one thing to choose to die when you are terminally ill and are getting to the point where you're totaly disabled, or like these two apparently did, become very depressed about how you were going to eventually be over the course of time and go before you are incapacitated. That's the part that bothers me about this, is that these two were not terminal and had not yet lost thier sight.

edit to add: BM that top part is for you.

Edited by OverSword

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems very selfish of them....what about their friends and family.

Supportive, I hope.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are too many tangents in this thread!

Were I in the same position as these two brothers, I would opt out myself. Nobody has the right to decide my life/death, or the manner in which I choose to live and die. If I want to die for whatever reason, then that is my choice......period! As long as no one else is injured or killed in the process.

It saddens me to think that certain people think they have a right to dictate how others live and die. Nobody has the right over my life but me, and if I choose to end it for any reason at all, then that is of no one else's concern!

Quality of life means different things to different people. What one can tolerate another will find intolerable. I can see some counseling for some in certain situations and having end of life affairs taken care of would be nice, but in the end it is up to the individual person.

Nobody put a gun up to the head of the man that euthanized them and said do it or else.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are too many tangents in this thread!

Were I in the same position as these two brothers, I would opt out myself. Nobody has the right to decide my life/death, or the manner in which I choose to live and die. If I want to die for whatever reason, then that is my choice......period! As long as no one else is injured or killed in the process.

It saddens me to think that certain people think they have a right to dictate how others live and die. Nobody has the right over my life but me, and if I choose to end it for any reason at all, then that is of no one else's concern!

Quality of life means different things to different people. What one can tolerate another will find intolerable. I can see some counseling for some in certain situations and having end of life affairs taken care of would be nice, but in the end it is up to the individual person.

Nobody put a gun up to the head of the man that euthanized them and said do it or else.

Yeah but do you really want doctors that are willing to euthanize people who are not yet incapacitated? Where is the line drawn? Someday my family history indicates, I will die of a heart attack. It will probably come on with no warning. I dread it. Should it be legal to euthanize me now so i don't have to live with this constant mind numbing dread?
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is unbelievably sad to me, but I've never known a connection like they obviously had. I hope their journey beyond is a good one.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah but do you really want doctors that are willing to euthanize people who are not yet incapacitated? Where is the line drawn? Someday my family history indicates, I will die of a heart attack. It will probably come on with no warning. I dread it. Should it be legal to euthanize me now so i don't have to live with this constant mind numbing dread?

Should everyone who carries the Huntington gene or the Alzheimer's gene be put down too cause they could pass on their defective genes? No. It should be left up to the individual or (if they are unable to) their closest confidante.

Edited by Hasina
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah but do you really want doctors that are willing to euthanize people who are not yet incapacitated? Where is the line drawn? Someday my family history indicates, I will die of a heart attack. It will probably come on with no warning. I dread it. Should it be legal to euthanize me now so i don't have to live with this constant mind numbing dread?

Yes, I do want doctors that are willing to euthanize! It would show me that some doctors can have empathy for the patient and not force them to live in pain or in an empty life. Take away someone's hearing and sight and there's not much left to live for (my opinion of course). My opinion should count more than anyone else's opinion pertaining to my life!.

Euthanization is like abortion.......don't want one.....don't have one! Simple really. As long as it's your choice of course.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My opinion should count more than anyone else's opinion pertaining to my life!.

Euthanization is like abortion.......don't want one.....don't have one! Simple really. As long as it's your choice of course.

Excellent.. and right on..

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should everyone who carries the Huntington gene or the Alzheimer's gene be put down too cause they could pass on their defective genes? No.

This would be eugenics.

The parallels between euthanasia and abortion are completely ridiculous. In one scenario a doctor is killing something that isn't even a human, in the other a doctor is killing an actual, living human. The latter should only ever happen when the person cannot do it themselves and are in too much pain to live. A doctor killing someone simply because they cannot go on with life goes against everything doctors stand for, though if they wish to carry it out themselves, go ahead.

Coffey, the reason '70%' of suicide attempts don't succeed is in large part due to the persons actually not wanting to kill themselves. This has been well documented and is a result of various mental illnesses. If someone really wants to die then it's fairly easy: jump from a very high height into the ground or water. It is also one of the quickest and least painful ways to do it. I had an uncle do that. No messing around, no cry for help, no doubts, gone (happened before I was born).

Edited by ExpandMyMind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This would be eugenics.

The parallels between euthanasia and abortion are completely ridiculous. In one scenario a doctor is killing something that isn't even a human, in the other a doctor is killing an actual, living human. The latter should only ever happen when the person cannot do it themselves and are in too much pain to live. A doctor killing someone simply because they cannot go on with life goes against everything doctors stand for, though if they wish to carry it out themselves, go ahead.

Coffey, the reason '70%' of suicide attempts don't succeed is in large part due to the persons actually not wanting to kill themselves. This has been well documented and is a result of various mental illnesses. If someone really wants to die then it's fairly easy: jump from a very high height into the ground or water. It is also one of the quickest and least painful ways to do it. I had an uncle do that. No messing around, no cry for help, no doubts, gone (happened before I was born).

I'm sure it takes a lot to come to the conclusion to end one's life. It is rarely a spur of the moment decision.

That said, many people that want to die don't have the fortitude to put a gun to their head or jump from a building, bridge, cliff, etc not to mention the fact that some may not be ambulatory. Most people want to die a peaceful, non-messy death, not be splattered all over the place.

The doctor's oath should be amended to also include euthanasia. While not all doctors would do this, there would always be those that would and although there would be legalities to work out, it should be legalized!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This would be eugenics.

The parallels between euthanasia and abortion are completely ridiculous. In one scenario a doctor is killing something that isn't even a human, in the other a doctor is killing an actual, living human. The latter should only ever happen when the person cannot do it themselves and are in too much pain to live. A doctor killing someone simply because they cannot go on with life goes against everything doctors stand for, though if they wish to carry it out themselves, go ahead.

Coffey, the reason '70%' of suicide attempts don't succeed is in large part due to the persons actually not wanting to kill themselves. This has been well documented and is a result of various mental illnesses. If someone really wants to die then it's fairly easy: jump from a very high height into the ground or water. It is also one of the quickest and least painful ways to do it. I had an uncle do that. No messing around, no cry for help, no doubts, gone (happened before I was born).

So you know what ALL doctors stand for? I understand they agree to the Hippocratic oath or have we forgotten Dr. Kevorkian?

What about people who attempt suicide, fail, try again and succeed? Did they want to lve for just a bit longer till they found the right coffin size? No, because there are differing circumstances for why people try it, why people can't go through with it, and why some succede. Sometimes it's a mental problem, sometimes it's a cry for help, and sometimes it's because you're inbetween a rock and an unknown hard place and at least the rock is familiar.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The parallels between euthanasia and abortion are completely ridiculous. In one scenario a doctor is killing something that isn't even a human, in the other a doctor is killing an actual, living human. The latter should only ever happen when the person cannot do it themselves and are in too much pain to live. A doctor killing someone simply because they cannot go on with life goes against everything doctors stand for, though if they wish to carry it out themselves, go ahead.

The unborn isn't human?

Why is it that the physician can be held liable for the unborn yet the pro choice crowd is allowed to kill the unborn? It's a double standard.

Same argument goes for the pro choice crowd for assisted suicide for individuals who deem their life too depressing to live. If it's their choice to end their life because they are too depressed to live any longer why on earth do we have seat belt and motor cycle helmut laws? Should it not be in each individuals best interest what safety precautions they exercise when making choices? Do these choices affect others? I think they do.... usually directly(family) but in some circumstances indirectly as well(monetary expense socialized).

I think it's because of the legalities involving contracts and the judicial system.

Some will try to argue that motor safety laws are justified because accidents happen. But don't accidental pregnancies happen too? Should there be laws prohibiting sexual intercourse without a contract signed by a physician stating what the individual future plans are? Like automobile accidents, unwanted pregnancies also are subject to a monetary fee which is passed onto others.

I could go on and on but I won't.

Life, IMO, should be respected. It should be valued and protected at all costs. You only live once. You also have the choice to procreate.(I do however make the exception to rape victims who had no choice - however there are estrogen shots which are highly effective)

Individuals will always find ways to suicide themselves but do we really want a society which incrementally decides over a period of evolving what is considered a good quality of life?

Again, it's a slippery slope...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.