Opskrifter:
Forumtråde:
Profiler:

Skal der være en juridisk ret til at dø?

 

Filosofi, Etik & Religion

Curator
Forum-indlæg: 659
Område: KBH
Dato: 14/11 2014 04:13 | Indlæg redigeret den: 14/11 2014 17:31


Should there be a legal right to die?

D. Benatar, PhD

"The decision about whether to continue living in such conditions is among the most important that can be made. Just as people value having control over where to live, which occupation to pursue, whom to marry, and whether to have children, so people value having control over whether to continue living when quality of life deteriorates. That is why the right to life and the right to die are not two rights, but two aspects or descriptions of the same right. The right to life is the right to decide whether one will or will not continue living. The right to die is the right to decide whether one will die (when one could continue living). If the right to life were only a right to decide to continue living and did not also include a right to decide not to continue living, then it would be a duty to live rather than a right to life. The idea that there is a duty to continue living, regardless of how bad life has become, is an implausible one indeed.

The right to die requires clarification. It need not be a right to assistance in ending one’s life. Instead, it need only amount to a right not to be prevented from gaining assistance in ending one’s life. This distinction is crucial. If the right to die were a right to positive assistance, then others would do wrong if they failed to help. What is worrying about such a rights claim is that it could impose on those who have moral qualms concerning euthanasia or assisted suicide a duty nonetheless to help others die. That claim is more controversial. Thus, the right to die need be interpreted only as a right not to be prevented from being assisted by those who are willing to help. In other words, those who think assisted suicide and euthanasia are immoral should not be forced to (help) kill others. However, they should similarly not be allowed to prevent others from giving assistance to those who have reasonably determined that their lives are not worth continuing. Nobody should be forced to assist, nor forced not to assist."


Den hele tekst kan hentes her:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2949364/?report=classic

Curator
Forum-indlæg: 659
Område: KBH
Dato: 14/11 2014 04:20

Benatar's opfølgende svarartikel :

A legal right to die: responding to slippery slope and abuse arguments

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3185895/
Curator
Forum-indlæg: 659
Område: KBH
Dato: 14/11 2014 15:44 | Indlæg redigeret den: 14/11 2014 19:08

91-årig vil ikke leve mere: Hvem kan hjælpe mig med at dø?

http://ekstrabladet.dk/nyheder/samfund/article4907740.ece

"Kurt Olav Oest er mæt af dage , men han har et hjerte, der - indtil videre - er stærkere end ønsket om at dø. Han mener, det er uværdigt at han skal ligge og rådne op i en seng og efterlyser derfor hjælp til at dø"


Zhcoop
Forum-indlæg: 661
Opskrifter: 10
Område: Sjælland
Moderator Denne bruger har i år '14 doneret penge til at holde Vegetarkontakt.dk kørende.
Dato: 14/11 2014 17:59

(jeg havde lige skrevet en herre langt indlæg, som nu forsvandt da emnet rykkede...)

JA! :] er mit korte svar.

Selvfølgelig skal "ulykkelige teenagere" o.l. ikke få tilladelse lige med det samme, nogle procedure og psykologiske samtaler er måske lige på rette at få igennem først. Men mht den gamle mand, så synes jeg man skal lave en lov/ordning, som i andre lande (vist nok) fungere fint. Så er man også ude ovre problem med mandsdråb, hvis personen er ude af stand til at begå selvmord, og derfor behøver hjælp.

Et andet problem jeg ser mht dette emne, er at lægerne kunstigt holder folk i live, for ikke at fremstå som en dårlig læge/hospitals afdeling.
Curator
Forum-indlæg: 659
Område: KBH
Dato: 14/11 2014 20:37 | Indlæg redigeret den: 30/5 2015 09:00

"(jeg havde lige skrevet en herre langt indlæg, som nu forsvandt da emnet rykkede...) "

Hmmm... Øv...

"JA! :] er mit korte svar."

Min personlige holdning er også et ja. Jeg ser retten til at dø som en slags selvforsvar over for livet der trænger sig på. Hvis ikke man har den ret, så har man ikke meget, synes jeg. Det er her man stopper den dybe lidelse og tab af værdighed.

"Et andet problem jeg ser mht dette emne, er at lægerne kunstigt holder folk i live, for ikke at fremstå som en dårlig læge/hospitals afdeling."

Ja, og især med livsforlængelsen og de kommende medicinske indgreb, vil de kunne holde os i live selvom vores livskvalitet er svært forværret. Spørgsmålene om ’retten til at dø’ og at ’dø med værdighed’ kommer efter min overbevisning naturligt til at antage presserende betydning. Lægeassisteret selvmord og frivillig euthanasi bliver nok større sager i de kommende årtier.

"Selvfølgelig skal "ulykkelige teenagere" o.l. ikke få tilladelse lige med det samme, nogle procedure og psykologiske samtaler er måske lige på rette at få igennem først."

Den er jeg måske nok med på...
Zhcoop
Forum-indlæg: 661
Opskrifter: 10
Område: Sjælland
Moderator Denne bruger har i år '14 doneret penge til at holde Vegetarkontakt.dk kørende.
Dato: 14/11 2014 21:59

Well, livet er ikke lutter lagkage, og det tror jeg også der er en grund til - hvis man ikke kan føle nedtur er der heller ingen optur.

Jeg tror vi er her for at lære noget og sætte vores præg/spor. Hvis et liv skal slutte inden det er født, så var det det, hvis et liv slutter ved de 110 år, så er det sådan det skal være - måske.

Jeg har selv overvejet at tage afsted før tid, men siden jeg stadig lever, går jeg udfra at der er en mening med at jeg ikke er død endnu - har været en del gange hvor det har været tæt på, og derfor konkluderer jeg sådan. Jeg vil åbenbart gerne leve.

Ser livet lidt som en puslespil - man samler en brik op hver dag, og den dag man dør, kan man få lov at se det store hele - hvis man er heldig. Nogen siger i hvert fald at man kan vælge, om man vil tilbage til jorden eller videre et andet sted hen, altså, ens sjæl... er ikke helt klar over hvad jeg egentlig tror på, men lyder meget sjovt :] og glæder mig til at se hvad der egentlig sker, når dette liv i denne krop er slut.

Hvis vores kultur (den vestlige kultur) var mindre destruktiv og konkurrerende men derimod mere opbyggende, hjælpende og forstående, så tror jeg at mange ville have en lettere tilgang til livet. Måske det ligger meget i de mandlige kønshormoner at der skal være fart over feltet, konkurrence og gerne også lidt destruktive tendenser med på vejen, og det er derfor samfundet ser sådan ud i dag, da kvinderne først er kommet på banen indenfor de sidste 100 års tid (mas o minus) det synes jeg i hvert fald kunne være en forklaring. I den vestlige verden hører folk også dårlige stemmer i deres hovedet, hvor imod i andre kulturer (mere jordnære kulturer) hører man positive stemmer, som hjælper en på rette vej. Plus at i vores samfund er døden et tabu, hvor man andre steder fejre de dødes dag (dia de los muertos) og på andre måder viser sin "forståelse" overfor døden. Hvis vi havde lettere ved at snakke om døden, tror jeg også det bliver lettere at snakke om livet, og derved få en bedre forståelse for hvad det at leve er, og på den måde få lysten til det?! who knows. Jeg synes i hvert fald der skal ryddes lidt op i vores samfund/kultur ;] hehe.

Jeg tror på at unge mennesker kan ha det hårdt, alle mennesker kan ha det hårdt. Det lille barn på 4 år der må lægge sin fordrukne forældre i seng, teenageren der skal høre på diverse ting fra "kammeraterne" i skolen, den voksne der skal tage stilling om huslån, pension og opsparing, pensionisten der bliver tvunget på plejehjem - det er ikke let i dette samfund, men som beskrevet i ovenstående 'kapitel' :P kan man måske lave dette om, så det ikke skulle være en lidelse at leve - men en (forholdsvis god/lærering) oplevelse (frem for en 'nedlevelse', hvis man kan sige det sådan).
Billie
Forum-indlæg: 98
Opskrifter: 2
Område: Østjylland
Denne bruger har i år '14 doneret penge til at holde Vegetarkontakt.dk kørende.
Dato: 15/11 2014 09:43

Ja det skal der :-)

Lene N
Forum-indlæg: 1233
Opskrifter: 4
Område: Sjælland
Denne bruger har i år '14 doneret penge til at holde Vegetarkontakt.dk kørende.
Dato: 15/11 2014 16:02

Ja i nogle situationer
Curator
Forum-indlæg: 659
Område: KBH
Dato: 15/11 2014 18:04 | Indlæg redigeret den: 15/11 2014 18:39

Fint med et par svar.

Jeg er lige blevet opmærksom på denne friske film om retten til at dø.

Inmendham vs. Dr. Frank Kavanaugh of Final Exit Network (Full Conversation)

LeneK
Forum-indlæg: 13
Opskrifter: 1
Område: Sjælland
Dato: 18/11 2014 19:43

Helt sikkert!

Det er næsten helt umuligt at få lov til at dø i Danmark


vericon
Forum-indlæg: 715
Opskrifter: 1
Område: Sydjylland
Denne bruger har i år '14 doneret penge til at holde Vegetarkontakt.dk kørende.
Dato: 18/11 2014 22:02

Hej
med begrebet EUTANASI i bakspejlet :

http://www.denstoredanske.dk/Sprog,_religion_og_filosofi/Religion_og_mystik/Almen_etik/eutanasi

Er det noget man bør være aldeles forsigtig med at lovfæste -
Sporene skræmmer -

Hilsen
Hans Jørn
Curator
Forum-indlæg: 659
Område: KBH
Dato: 30/5 2015 08:58 | Indlæg redigeret den: 12/6 2015 14:00

Frisk fra Nine-banded Books


Rethinking the Ethics of Birth and Suicide

http://www.ninebandedbooks.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/EveryCradleIsAGrave-INTERIOR-FINALFORPRESS-120614REV.pdf

Kapitel 1 og 5 har meget relevans for dette topic. Hendes vision om The Land of Free Disposal, hvor fleste barrierer ved at begå selvmord er elimineret, i kontrast til nu hvor barriererne er meget høje, er fascinerende at læse om. Hun skriver godt.
Curator
Forum-indlæg: 659
Område: KBH
Dato: 23/8 2015 08:21 | Indlæg redigeret den: 23/8 2015 09:26

Carina Jørgensen's vise ord i skakklubben.



Benatar – A legal right to die is long overdue (Cape Times 2011)

http://www.philosophy.uct.ac.za/sites/default/files/image_tool/images/160/Benatar%20-%20A%20legal%20right%20to%20die%20is%20long%20overdue%20(Cape%20Times%202011).pdf

Denne case er interessant
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/healthy-british-nurse-ends-her-life-in-a-swiss-clinic-because-of-fear-of-getting-old/2015/08/03/78c65680-39ab-11e5-9c2d-ed991d848c48_story.html?tid=sm_fb




Personligt mener jeg at Perry's bog i et af de forrige indlæg burde være pligtlæsning. Bogen afliver mange myter omkring selvmord. Hun laver også mere radikale filosofiske tankeksperimenter som dette:


The Land of Free Disposal

Bryan Caplan’s assertion that creating lives can never be wrong because we live in a world with many tall buildings to jump off of (yet only a small proportion of humans actually utilize these free disposal services) is based on a faulty understanding of reality. But what would Caplan’s ideal Land of Free Disposal look like? We turn now to imagining such a land in which suicide is really free—in which legal barriers to suicide are removed, and in which people are permitted to subvert the natural (but unwanted) barriers to suicide.

This imaginary land does not necessarily represent my policy prescriptions (for instance, I think parents lose their moral right to commit suicide when they take on the responsibility for a child), and we will find it is not a utopia. The thought experiment is meant to illustrate the high cost our own world places on “disposal,” and how this cost is related to the burden of having been born.

In the Land of Free Disposal, the main guiding intention is that it is easy to commit suicide. When a person makes a suicide attempt, he is not sent to a hospital prison; instead, if he has followed proper procedures for signaling his intention, he dies. The most lethal, comfortable methods are widely available, and since suicide is fine, a competitive market arises to provide the most appealing methods. The power of the market is brought to bear on the problem of finding desirable ways to die. Not just “Ask your doctor if Obliviall is right for you,” but also death arcades.

The technological burdens of suicide are taken care of in the Land of Free Disposal. The market is a powerful instrument, and allowing it to solve the problems of suicide makes disposal relatively comfortable and efficient. No one has to cut his arteries or shoot himself fourteen times with a .22.
Only rarely does someone jump off of a tall building. Suicide is easy, painless, and guaranteed.

Technology can go a long way toward undermining our unchosen, Nature-programmed, often irrational fixation on our own continued existence. Of course, it is unlikely to completely free a human being of the biological costs of disposal, but in the Land of Free Disposal these costs are at least minimized.

But the technology is not everything. The guarantee of death is very important, perhaps more important than the technological aspect. Even a small possibility of surviving a suicide attempt, in maimed and helpless condition, is rationally a major concern. If one is at all tempted toward a Many Worlds8 analogy for probability, after a good, strong suicide attempt, most of the future selves are gone—but a few, the only conscious ones, are trapped in a hospital incommunicado for decades. Even if the probability is very tiny, the potential consequences are so bad that it may not be worth the gamble. But no one needs to worry about this in the Land of Free Disposal.

So everyone who wants to die may die. But to ensure that disposal is truly free, other costs must be removed from the suicide as well. Suicide has no stigma in the Land of Free Disposal. In kindergarten your kid’s teacher has each student draw a picture on the topic of “When Would I Kill Myself?” What has he drawn there? It is very sad when children commit suicide—and many of them do, even in our world—but preventing them from doing so is not free disposal.

Many people do not want to die alone. As in our world, people sometimes post pictures of their last moments to Facebook, but in the Land of Free Disposal the pictures are taken automatically at the death arcades and resemble onride photography at Disneyland. In this way and in many other ways, the path to death is made easier by the possibility of social connection. Unlike in our world, people in the Land of Free Disposal may sit with a dying suicide to comfort and even assist him without fear of imprisonment.

The desire for some kind of connection to the future after one’s death—a kind of immortality—is recognized as a strong psychological motivation, and provided for in the public policy allowing suicides to donate their organs at a hospital. There is no organ shortage in the Land of Free Disposal, and since suicide isn’t creepy at all, everybody wins.

There have been changes in lending and credit, and in contract law in general, in the Land of Free Disposal, but institutions have adjusted. Standard clauses have been drafted to amend insurance policies and other formal agreements.

Of course, the loneliness of family and friends must be considered a cost of suicide not likely to be attenuated by social interventions. We may not wish to reduce these bonds—to do so might create a very undesirable society— but they form a cost of suicide that may make a person suffer through a miserable, unwanted life for the good of others. The Land of Free Disposal might experiment with weakening social bonds through alternative methods of childrearing, as with kibbutzim, or alternative relationship structures, such as arm’s-length polyamory rather than mutually dependent monogamy. Policies designed to reduce interdependence between humans might make suicide easier for those who desire it, but to the extent they are successful, they would also likely reduce the aggregate quality of life experienced by everyone. A social species like ours is unlikely to achieve truly Free Disposal, except perhaps among our most isolated members. But other interventions could at least partially balance the burdens that social bonds place on the person desiring to be rid of his existence.

A posthumous tax credit for suicides, for example, might decrease the socially-imposed cost of suicide for a miserable person. And rather than spending tens of millions on suicide prevention efforts (as our government does through the National Institutes of Health, the military, and other agencies), the governing body of the Land of Free Disposal spends money on campaigns to promote the right to suicide. In the Land of Free Disposal, billboards, television, and the Internet carry the message that suicide is a sacred right, rather than the message that suicide is wrong and a sign of illness. PSAs remind people that “No One Owns You—Suicide is Your Right!” On the chance that suicide “contagion” is real and social proof removes a major cost of suicide, fictional and nonfictional accounts of successful suicides are broadcast widely in approving terms. Curricula in schools emphasize personal autonomy, vilify interpersonal possessiveness, and treat suicide as a positive life choice to be seriously

Sarah Perry Rethinking the ethics of birth and suicide (2014)

Kapitel 8 omtaler The Censorship of Suicide

Sex and violence are ubiquitous in high and low art today, but artwork depicting suicide remains in danger of censorship merely because of its subject. in London, Paul Day’s compelling, emotionally dense frieze was pulled from a rail station because it depicted a skeleton driving a train and a commuter “wobbling precariously” close to the tracks—alluding to suicide by train.

The Pepsi corporation apologized for and retracted ads (published in a German magazine) that depicted a “lonely single calorie” committing suicide. Chris Abraham, the selfappointed censor who received the apology indicated that electronic communication will help him carry out his inquisition into commercial art: “The lesson here,” Abraham declared, “is that social media has eyes everywhere and the network to make sure that advertisers can no longer hide stuff in niche markets.” Art, advertisements, and video games that deal with suicide—entry points for conversations about suicide among ordinary people—are unjustly criticized, censored, and destroyed. There is only one appropriate way to speak of suicide, one appropriate attitude toward it, and all others are quickly suppressed. This is not the case for other controversial topics—murder, race, gender, drug use—nor should it be. Suicide is tabooed in a unique and unfortunate way.