Right To Die Debate

The slippery slope argument that I was wrong about...

A long time ago, over on Quora, I had a discussion with a woman about the right to die, or the death with dignity movement. It was a really interesting conversation, so much so that I kept it because I wanted to remind myself of her arguments. I disagreed with her at the time, and thought that she was being rather hyperbolic. However, as time has gone on I have watched her arguments come to pass one after the other, and I realize that I was wrong in my conviction that she was exaggerating the risks.

Let me say that I think that there is a lot of good to be had in the notion of allowing someone to end their suffering. I have seen many people die of terminal diseases, and it can be brutal for both them and their families. I have also seen people decide that suicide would be preferable to the suffering despite what the law thinks about it, so they take matters into their own hands.

Death to me is not a frightening thing. It simply is what it is. However, I fail to see the need for a person to suffer endlessly knowing what the outcome is regardless of the path they take. That seems unnecessary. The right to end your life on your terms makes sense to me.

It should be noted that death, while it may not induce fear in me, it is not something that I am rushing toward. I like living, and have no desire to have that disappear any time soon. Because I have this view on things, and despite my own sister taking her life, suicide to me isn’t something that people would undertake lightly, and certainly wouldn’t use as a means to an end in regard to someone else’s life.

My argument was essentially what I stated above. It should be someone’s right to decide what they want to do with their own end. They should have the power to opt out of a long-drawn-out illness. We allow animals to be euthanized when there is no hope for recovery and nothing but pain until they die, but we refuse this to humans. That seemed quite illogical to me.

Her argument was that it would not stop with humans that want to end their lives because they were going to die anyway. That this practice would be utilized to “humanely” remove undesirable elements from society like the mentally ill, people who are chronically ill and a drain on the system, and people that are mentally challenged. That this would be used to get rid of people that wouldn’t select suicide, but people in power, or in their own families would prefer that they no longer be around.

You have the premise of both our arguments, so now I will include the text of this debate. Normally I would remove someone’s name from posts as I tend to do when relaying what someone has said. I am including hers for two reasons, however.

1. She was right. She deserves that credit.

2. She has deleted her account and the I have no idea if she used her real name in the first place.

Adriana McGee

I don't understand in cases where death is inevitable anyway, why people would even consider Euthanasia… (apart from their own convenience.) A part of me did, before I became physically disabled, before I worked as a CNA in a nursing home… but now; thoughts like that just seem so selfish.

I think most people outside of the nursing, healthcare, and medical world don't understand the concept of palliative care (read: What Is Palliative Care? ) because they believe that life, survival, and ending physical suffering is the highest goal.

People who understand the concept and philosophy behind palliative care measures, understand that life is about so much more than that. And that the “alleviation” of suffering isn't just physical; but spiritual, mental, and emotional as well.

I think you said a very wise thing when you said that you “don't know you would react” in a similar situation; because you're right, you don't.

While most people can speculate… The reality is that most people have no idea what kind of “End of Life Care” that they would want or enjoy in such a situation.

That is why I don't believe in human euthanasia in any situation; because, quite frankly, it takes the locus of control away from the patient (or in this case, the survivor) and puts it into the hands of the doctor, paramedic, or rescuer, without any regard to the feelings of the patient/survivor.

Neil Gorsuch wrote an interesting book on the subject (read: The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia) about why taking control away from the patient/survivor is always wrong; and while many might agree that this child has a right to “choose” her death, (as a matter of personal independence and autonomy) the compassionate part of the argument comes very much of how one might like to be treated in death (and yes, you guessed it) that it is inherently morally, legally, and ethically wrong to take a human life.

As for your argument that you would be “Very frank with her” about her chances… Most likely this would fail to convince you to eat a bullet, or take a rock to head (or whatever else was lying around…) and it would probably scare her.

(I, personally, would feel insulted by it.)

Not only is it an unempathetic and… “dis-compassionate” position to treat a young girl with the same frankness you might treat an adult (though children can be surprisingly resilient and realistic) it's basically saying that the emotional needs of the child don't matter because of the potential of increased physical suffering.

While I agree that “hope” can sometimes be a bad thing… It's not “hope” that is comforting to a dying child (or adult for that matter) but “care” and the compassionate presence of others in one's final moments.

In that it is much more “compassionate” for those around her to make a useless effort, then it would be to forget about her, and leave her to die… or even to painlessly euthanize her.

***

I don't know how to explain this to you emotionally, but I'll try:

I was born with a serious heart-condition; when I was young, I was very aware of Ableism (discrimination in favor of the able-bodied.)

And was also keenly aware at a very young age, that it was natural. (That doesn't mean it's right.)

I remember watching a documentary when I was younger… about a wild colt that was born to a herd of wild horses, but was paralyzed. The colt couldn't stand on it's own.

At first… The mother horse tried to help-up the baby horse… he could stand a little, but could only walk about a step or two.

The other mares tried to help him, by lifting him up by his mane and the scruff of his neck.

Then the father stallion tried to help him up…

At first the Stallion was very compassionate; he nuzzled the baby horse and let him lean against him while he got his bearings…

(The mother also nuzzled the baby colt.)

But soon the Stallion started getting angry..

He grunted and snarled; and started spitting snot from his mouth and nostrils.

Instead of helping the baby horse, he turned on him;

He started trampling the ground, and turning up the soil…

He grabbed the baby colt by the back of the neck;

And ripped off it's head.

***

When I was young I saw myself as the colt… and many of the commentators here as the stallions.

I was reminded that that's how nature deals with disability… not through compassion, but through violence.

However, such Ableism seemed “natural” to my naive and youthful mind… Just like tribalism (one’s preference for one's own tribe, or those who those who are most ethnically or culturally similar to them) makes racism perfectly natural.

This is very much the window in which I viewed human-nature, and the way the dying and the disabled are treated by society.

***

While there is much to be said about the “ethics” of Euthanasia (I personally live in one of the few states in which human euthanasia is legal) I personally do not believe that it can be divorced from this natural (but harmful) instinct we have against the sick, and aged, the disabled, and the dying… Which makes all acts of violence against such vulnerable person's, discriminatory in nature.

When people think they are reacting with the “logical” parts of their brains, they're actually reacting with the “emotional” and “instinctual” parts of their brains… just like a dumb horse.

While I believe in, and am an advocate for, Advanced Directives (read: Advance Directives: Definitions) because it gives the patient some control over their end of life care, that they may not always have otherwise, “Euthanasia” is never a compassionate option unless is at the expressed consent of the individual; and isn't given because of other considerations (such as “being a burden.”)

That might seem like the final word on the subject, but it isn't;

Because things like “consent” can be pressured or falsely obtained by an individual.

In many cases, such as that of Omayra Sanchez , “pressure” from individuals outside of herself may force her to choose the less compassionate option (which in my mind is always euthanasia, because of the many reasons stated above) in that way… she would be submitting to violence, rather than compassionate care in her final moments… Moments when things like love, care, compassion, empathy, and spiritual emotion, matter much more than physical comfort.

(Take my word for it.)

To think any less is somewhat cowardly to me... Because it it expresses the idea, or moral philosophy, that all that matters in life is physical comfort; or avoiding pain. (A rather shallow philosophy that I disagree with.)

But like I said… you won't know until it's you who's dying.

Athena Walker

I made it clear that it would be her choice. She has the right to make it, and I wouldn’t make it for her. I won’t lie to her though. The cold hard facts about what she is facing should be given to her so she can decide what she wants to do.

I don’t care if that would insult someone in that position. Facts do not care about feelings. It is only right and fair that she know what her death is going to look like. If she choose to go by natural causes, so be it. Forcing that on her is not an option when it comes to the right thing to do. I believe a person is an individual and that each one needs to be allowed to know where they stand without pussyfooting around.

Televising her suffering, making her sit through that, and deciding the most “humane” thing was to let her die on the other hand is not compassion. It is people not wanting to make hard calls and letting her know where she stands.

Adriana McGee

Lol, I don't think I would be insulted by you “wanting” to kill me (especially if you thought it was in my best interest) though I would be insulted by you killing me instead of caring for me.

Not just you, but any rescuer who thinks that’s a viable option… I'd think, “Hey, what am I chopped liver?” Lol. Though I'm not a coward, either. I've submitted to many medical procedures where the odds of “waking up” were not good, (my doctors of course had to let me know “where I stood”) which is arguably the closest any living person has ever gotten to medical euthanasia (excluding maybe Romell Broom: Judge: State may execute inmate who wouldn't die .)

Though my point may seem like an “emotional” one, I think best way I can describe it is that one's priorities change in death.

A fine example of this is how many people joke that they would rather “die than be paralyzed from the waist down” or something… but when they actually become paralysed their ideas about paralysis changes. Death is much like that (as are almost all forms of physical suffering.) Maybe an even better example is how people are constantly changing their end-of-life care decisions and advanced directives… What seems “logical” when you're young and healthy doesn't always seem so logical when you're old, disabled, or otherwise infirmed: Your ‘living will’: What happens if you change your mind?

I understand your point that this poor girl’s situation was hopeless; however, I don't necessarily agree that euthanasia is best option, or even necessarily decreases suffering: Cruel and Usual?: Is Capital Punishment by Lethal Injection Quick and Painless? but I do understand the psychology / philosophy behind such arguments.

Athena Walker

I don’t disagree at all that people don’t know what they want until the time comes. My only position on it is that the offering should always be there for her, or anyone to have control over those last moments. I think without that offering there an imposition on that person that goes above and beyond acceptable.

For the record, I don’t want to kill her. I want her to have that choice to be in her hands and no one else’s.

I don’t argue that euthanasia is or was the best option, what I argue is that withholding it as an option due to moralistic or religious grounds (it is a heavily Catholic area) isn’t serving the needs of Omayra, or anyone in that position, it is serving those that are attending her.

In that situation the needs of the attendants should not even be a consideration, only the needs and desires of the individual. Being trapped for sixty hours pinned beneath concrete, while succumbing to gangrene, and having your aunt’s body wrapped around your pinned legs is a situation that is without imagination. We can speak about it, but never really grasp it.

The physical condition of her body in those last hours was awful to say the least. This is why I would have been frank with her. Telling her what she is facing, and letting her make her choices. It’s not a fun option, and I don’t think that it is, but it is to me the most compassionate move. Placing myself as best I can in the position that she was in, granted cognitively, as I cannot imagine what that would be like emotionally, I would demand to know what the outcome looked like if we did nothing.

I wouldn’t argue that they should have gone ahead with amputation, nor that they should have left her alone, as neither of these choices reflect the spirit of compassion either. I think that her wishes should be honored, no matter what they are. If she wants to stick it out and go naturally, that is an acceptable option in my mind. Forcing that reality on her when there are other ways, that is a different conversation.

Psychopathy does not remove anything from this evaluation for me other than the emotional part. I have been in places and situations where I have been at the doorstep of death and returned. I know medical procedures quite well, I am by no means a novice when it comes to the reality of what a patient goes through. More than that I am unwilling to go into.

I am not speaking from a point of view of someone that has never had experience in the realm of death and dying. Rather I am speaking from the point of view that I have seen it, and I still believe that a person should always have the autonomy to decide what they want.

Adriana McGee

Then I would agree with other commentators that “implementation” is the primary concern.

I admit that my views on Euthanasia are biased, not just by religion, but by Ableism: (read: Not Dead Yet)

There are many in the disabled community that view “Death with Dignity” and “Right to Die” laws as a gateway to forced euthanasia, such as in Nazi Germany, and some other countries of note… There is no arguing that such laws favor the able-bodied, and disfavor the disabled.

Many disabled activists believe that “volunteering” to be euthanized is something that can easily be manipulated; such as a family pressuring a sick loved one to commit “assisted” suicide, so not to be a “burden” on the rest of the family… some people might see a decision like that as being “noble and self-sacrificing” (thus increasingly the positive perception of forced euthanasia) I, and many other activists see it as kind of “backdoor draft” (a reference to the “all volunteer” army)… Easily manipulating vulnerable people into believing that euthanasia is the “right thing to do”, when they're really being euthanized by friends, family, and a society that sees them as a useless inconvenience.

Since I personally, cannot cognitively divorce the idea of Euthanasia from that of Ableism (remember that human euthanasia was first proposed to get rid of “useless eaters” and “moral imbeciles”, psychopaths included) then I fail to see any useful way that such a proposition could be executed in the case of natural disasters, and other “Acts of God” if such a thing is often impractical to implement, even in hospices and nursing homes.

(And is discriminatory, besides the fact.)

In response to other questions of this sort, I've read you say things like, “Well that's where psychopaths come in, we're not afraid to make the tough calls.” Though the idea of flying one into a disaster zone, simply to “knock off” a patient in a Kevorkian-like manner, is also absurd… And if you were to take the task into your own hands, as a rescuer or paramedic, you would most likely be arrested.

I'm not trying to make light of the subject… But your comments make me imagine some kind of dystopian future; in which society, hoping to kill “two birds with one stone” recruits “Moral Imbeciles” (psychopaths) in order to get rid of it's “Useless Eaters” (the physically and mentally disabled) by hiring the one to kill the other… then throwing the former in prison for murder.

(That certainly would fulfill such dystopian purposes.)

But to add a bit of clarity to the subject of medical euthanasia, though I morally and ethically disagree with it; I don't it takes a psychopath to engage in such a thing, considering it was safe, painless, and legal, because many doctors and medical professionals already do. There are many proponents of voluntary euthanasia that aren't, *technically*, psychopaths…I just see things from a different perspective because of my physical disability.

Athena Walker

I have known a few people that opted to end their lives facing terminal illness. I am glad they had that option and I will never stand to remove it from them. I still stand for individual choice. Arguments about worst case scenarios to me equate to fear mongering. I do not see that legalization of abortion has led to killing babies after they are born because the mother changed her mind. I think that playing things out to the worst possible outcome is useful only in justifying thoughts that are comfortable.

Personally I do not have religious ideation or belief of any kind. What other people think is their choice. I won’t attempt to change it, so long as their beliefs stay out of my ability to choose what I want to do, and others having that same choice, I don’t care. The moment that becomes my problem, then it’s a problem.

We do not live in Nazi Germany. It’s not even a close call. It is a bit intellectually dishonest to even compare the countries. There is no movement for euthanization of any group of people in this country, and as much as I have been around the sick and dying, I fail to see the rampant belief that removing them from the populace is the right direction to head. You mention things that were issues in the past. That makes no allowance for the progress and changes that have been made.

To remain rooted in a worry that old beliefs might come calling, as remote as they are, and allowing others that would very much want to end their lives to suffer because it soothes your interpretation of how the world should work is you deciding misery for them. I remain grounded that a person’s choice is paramount, and it belongs to no one but that person. I have seen both sides of the argument, but all I have seen in the argument against is religious, which has no basis deciding anything for anyone, and fear based, also not something that should be given power.

To address implication, the only implication here is that a person be able to decide their fate. If anyone reads beyond that, it is something that is internally projecting onto my words.

Adriana McGee

The old adage “those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it” applies here, I think.

After we elected our first Black President, Barack Obama, many believed that “White Supremacists” were a thing of the past, though many of the more prominent voices in the White Supremacist movement (members of the KKK and ANP) were credited with helping to elect our current president.

Before the invention of “smartphones” police violence against minorities was thought to have been a problem left back in the 60′s …Afterwards, the cry often heard in the national news broadcasts is “It's 1968 all over again!” Referring to the growing outrage over police brutality against Black minorities in 2016/17. (Mostly thanks to cell phone captured footage.)

Do I believe that the news (or rather, what is chosen to be reported on the news) is often biased, political, propaganda laced with manipulation? Of course I do, I'm only human… but just because stories and opinions are easily manipulated, does not mean that it's all untrue.

I do agree that arguing things to their logical extremes and absurdity, is a lazy debate tactic… But you're not seeing things from the perspective of someone who has to face Ableism everyday… If you were in wheelchair, for example, and people came up to you and told you how, “Strong” you are, and how they would rather “die” than be in your position, methinks you would see things a bit differently. That isn't to say that you don't face any discrimination.. Only that psychopaths are generally seen more favorably, at least here on Quora, than many other “differences” are seen by society at large, particularly when it's something you cannot hide, like a visible disability.

(The psychopath in you might seem go use their sympathy to you benefit… but the human in you would likely find it more than a little insulting. Even I can't predict how you would react to such a thing… and most likely you can't either.)

There are now, just like there were in the 1930s and ’40s; prominent philosophers who advocate for the killing of disabled babies and such; people like Professor Peter Singer of Stanford University. Stanford, is also famous for it’s Eugenics Program that inspired Adolf Hitler: (Eugenics and the Nazis -- the California connection) Times may change, but human nature does not.

Late-term abortions are a thing, but I've never argued that issue from a religious perspective… Though I do think induced labor, and the killing of “viable” fetuses is wrong… That is a separate issue though.

I guess my problem with Euthanasia is how it colors our perception of things…

If someone who is merely depressed is discouraged from committing suicide, and someone who is chronically ill is encouraged to do so… Then what does that say about the way we as a society value disabled life?

It's a double-standard that unless if affects you directly is hard to understand.

*[Note: I'm totally sorry, I meant “implementation” not “implication,” apologies.]*

Athena Walker

I find the reasoning that you are using to be quite faulty. If we are going to deny the progress a society makes overall, then why bother making any is basically what you are arguing.

You are making a great deal of assumptions about a situation you know nothing about, and that is my life and my experience of it. You have no idea what my circumstances are, and I have no intention of sharing them with you either. For you to make arguments on false or made up ideas regarding someone else’s existence says you have no argument to make, but are relying on an emotional response to win.

I don’t have those. I simply see an argument that relies on faulty logic and worst case scenarios. I see no further point in continuing to deal with a straw man argument. I never said anything regarding forced euthanasia, I don’t support it, nor have any first world nations that has had euthanasia laws on their books begun rounding up and executing the disabled. It is intellectually dishonest to imply, or outright say that this is something that is a real risk of happening.

If you are planning to have effective debates in the future, I would encourage you to not make assumptions about the person that you are debating. It only weakens your position.

Adriana McGee

Death itself is perhaps the least “elitist” thing on earth… as an old poet once said, it comes to paupers and kings alike.

Few of us can predict the circumstances of our own death, and so it our “fear of the unknown”, rather than a fear of death, that rules many of us. It's perfectly natural that you would want to have some control over that “ Undiscovered county from once born, no traveler returns…” it's natural to want to have some control over the timing and circumstances of that journey into oblivion… (your pain, peace, or suffering) or wherever else you personally believe souls go once they die.

While I believe death to be a personal spiritual and emotional experience; where our actions and feelings are hard to predict; death is also a natural part of life… one, that I don't personally believe should be controlled by artificial means.

This, in my opinion; isn't an unempathetic position to take. Nor do believe that modern medicine has no place in our journey into the unknown:

Medical comas, barbiturates, epiderals; all can come to aid of failing and suffering patients. And, as anyone has ever owned a pet, or any kind of small animal likely knows, living things only cling to life… for as long as they have The Will To Live; a will that differs from creature to creature, and person to person. (“Frankenstein’s monsters” and other experimental models excluded, or course.)

Additionally, I'm not against the individual's decision to commit suicide, (though it is a sin, it's not for me to judge) a patient who hides oxicotin in their pillow, until the accumulate enough for an overdose is acting as a free agent, no different than a depressed teenager, even if doctor assisted suicide is murder. It's murder for a reason, and I am not a believer in “compassionate violence” when it comes to how we treat human beings.

I apologize if I overstepped my bounds; I would never knowingly belittle another's life experiences. I can understand your unwillingness to share personal and private experiences on a public forum; so I will instead share one of mine (since I believe it to be relevant to my position.)

Again, I didn't always the world the way I do now. Though I was always aware of “Ableism”, or that particular form of prejudice lobbed at the “less than perfect” (the sick, the old, and the lame), I had very different views about the nature of life and death as a youth:

As I've already shared; I was born with a serious heart-condition. (It's not a “sob-story” just part of what makes me who I am.)

As I've also shared, I was in very precarious health; so precarious, in fact, that I wasn't supposed to see my second birthday…or my twelfth, or my twentieth. To give you some kind of mathematical means to understand what I mean when I say “precarious”; every other child in my mother's “Parents of Children with Heart Surgery” at Children's Hospital died… except me and a little boy about my age.

When I was young, I had a very romantic view of my situation; a very romantic view of my own death, and of death in general… Though I was aware that some deaths are far more pleasant and peaceful that others.

“Near-death Experiences”, “Out of Body Experiences” and other circumstances in which the heart stops beating, and the lungs stop breathing; are again, quite common, and hardly belong to the elite. A swift blow to head or chest can do that to you… as long as you are brought back in good time, and your body is kept sufficiently cool.. You can escape brain damage, and are really no “worse for wear” than you were before you died, but you will come back with a cool and fun story to tell to your friends.. Something that's almost worth the danger of brain damage, lol.

Because as a heart-patient, I had so many of these “near-death” experiences (or rather just death experiences), I never really had any fear of death, growing up.

That's maybe the only thing that I have in common with psychopaths… And it's also something that I don't often share because I know that it makes me “different” but also because I know it's a somewhat fragile “fearlessness” which is easy to belittle. As an adult, I see my youthful views regarding death a product of both trauma and innocence. “Death”, or being dead, seemed to me every bit as natural as life… I never viewed death or being dead as something to be afraid of. I simply knew no other kind of existence or experience besides the one I lived, in which death was just this ever present thing.

As an adult, the emotional side of me views that as being a bit tragic… That, although I was just as innocent as any other child.. I had these experiences that most other children didn't have. I never worried about being “sick” because when I look back on my childhood… It seems that I was either in the hospital, hooked-up to machines, with doctors either telling me I was going to die, to my face, or whispering and shaking their heads at my test results, behind my back… Or I was doing something athletic; hiking, camping out with friends, studying karate, or playing basketball.

I guess you could say I was one of those “miracle babies”; one that survived (andthrived) against all odds. I was only supposed to be 5′2 “… I'm 5′9”.

But because of my “success” as a heart-patient, because of the multiple heart-surgeries that I survived (7 open-heart, plus several “closed-heart”, or less invasive operations) I grew up to be kind of a ‘snob.’

Part of me thought I was invincible, that I was so much stronger than people who succumbed to illness, disease, or disability… The other part of me had an immense “Survivors Guilt”, (explanation: Survivor guilt - Wikipedia) a form of guilt that's so irrational; that it's hard to describe to your average “neuro-typical”, much less a psychopath. But even though I experienced this irrational form of guilt at times, I often “looked down” on others… I thought things like, “I survived because I'm strong, they didn't, because they're weak.”

I don't want to give you the wrong impression about me.. I was never cruel, I never felt like “punishing” others for their weakness, rather; I often looked at the rest of the world with pity… I felt sorry for a world that was so “weak”(as I viewed the sick, the old, and the lame) and “inexperienced” (as I viewed just about everyone else.)

My sense of pity towards others was so strong, that as an adult, it manifested itself as a kind of “codependency”; I only wanted to interact with people that I could “help” in some way way… I viewed almost everyone else as being less wise and less responsible than me.. I entered relationships with people who could barely cut their own meat, or blow their own nose, on their own…

This same kind of “superiority-inferiority complex” (which at its heart is insecure and narcissistic) followed me around for the rest of my life, and I still struggle with it at times..

But the “Survivors Guilt” I felt as a child never really bothered me again, until I started working at the hospital as a CNA, nursing student:

Suddenly, I became tragically and horrifically aware of all that I had experienced, all that I had survived.

Seeing people hooked-up to machines… looked different from the outside looking in.

I tried not to let my empathy and survivor's guilt affect my work; I had to be there for them, I had to look beyond my own experiences. I had to be a good nurse, professional and unaffected.

When I became physically disabled (for different reasons all together), I felt so “weak” and “ineffectual.”

(A fear of being “weak and ineffectual” is a fear that is hopefully easier to relate to, when you not…. and is probably the primary reason why most people say they would “rather die” than be disabled.)

For the first time there was no line between “me” (the strong) and “them” (the weak.)

You see… Up to that point I had been putting the needs of others before myself.. Partially because I was codependent, and partially because I never felt “fully human” myself. I denied my own humanity because I felt somewhat more like a “ghost” a traveler between life and death, than I did a real human being.

I felt that way because of my experiences, because of what other people told me when I was a child… I know that it's hard to understand, because it's also hard to describe.. But because of my heart-condition (rather than in spite of it) I felt like this superhuman, supernatural creature.. Something more like “Frankenstein’s Monster” or a ghost, or vampire… or perhaps more romantically, an “angel” or some other popular character or historical figure, who has overcome or escaped death, like Jesus or Snowwhite… Than I did I did a real human being.

Far from being delusional… I merely related more with those characters (and probably sought comfort in them) and their experiences, than I related with other people, and their perhaps more mundane experiences of life and death.

I related with vampires in particular (Note: I'm not a goth, or a Twighlight, or Ann Rice fan, lol) because vampires not only died and had the ability to come back… but were forever youthful; young and attractive.

Naturally, because I was told that I was going to die before age 20; I thought of old age and disability, as something that only affected “other people” (I suppose that is a bit delusional, lol.) And I thought that I was spared both the “indignity” of old age, and the tragedy and suffering of disability.

Even more than that; I felt that not only would I never “grow old” and that I would very romantically “die young”; but that, because of my heart-condition; I would also probably die peacefully under sedation for open-heart surgery, or else die doing something fun like having sex, or playing basketball. (#WhatAWayToGo) lol.

But as I grew old and became disabled; sadly, my view of life was shattered. Everything that made me “superior” (other than the memory of my experiences) came crashing down around me. I was devastated, and for a long time I struggled with the question of “Who I am?” I couldn't see any kind of meaning in my survival. It was meaningless..

Like many people who support “Death with Dignity / Right to Die Laws ” I saw disability as the ultimate humiliation.

While I never had negative views towards disabled people, other than seeing them as “weak” (I was really no more Ableist than most people are, subconsciously) I saw disability as something that “couldn't happen to me”, that only happens to other people… And felt almost like I was being metaphysically “punished” for being so naive. (I'm obviously still coming to terms with it.)

Prior to my disability I was so idealistic; probably more than most people. I wasn't a “Nazi” by any means; but had sympathy for certain “ Eugenics” ideas and philosophies, the way that many able-bodied people do… Who wouldn't want to live in a world where no one ever grows old, gets sick, suffers or feels pain? Who wouldn't want to live in world without disability, or suffering?

But when I became disabled I realized that my life was just as valuable as it was before I was disabled; that I was still full of the same dreams and aspirations; joys and simple pleasures that I was before I became disabled. In short… I was the exact same person simply living life with a new experience. And I know that dying “old and disabled” will be just as important and meaningful to dying “young and pretty” when the time comes.

Being, essentially, the exact same person with a different point of view… Was the one outcome of disability that I wasn't expecting.

I know I criticize people now for supporting “Death with Dignity”, but that's only because it denies the idea that a natural death is also dignified. These are more than just words, they are ideas that hurt people.

Yes, I'm aware of all the physical pain and suffering associated with death… The loss of bodily function, and bodily fluids (I did work in a nursing home after all.) But I'm also aware that calling one person's death “dignified” is the same as calling another person's death undignified; and that it's a way of dehumanizing the dying.

Try to think of it this way:

What message does it send when Society itself supports the idea that one person's life is worth living, and another person's isn't? How long until that becomes “the norm” of what is expected?

If that's not a compelling argument think about all the people who are negatively affected by such a belief system; their point of view, their feelings, and their voices matter. They are real human beings who feel targeted and disproportionately and unfavorably affected by such standards. I don't call that “progress” I can it what it is: Discrimination.

That is more than an emotional argument; it is a logical sociological one. Listen to the voices of those who feel targeted, of those minorities who feel that their lives are inferior; that they are valued as being “less” than the rest of society, listen to the voices of those who oppose a society where the chronically and terminally ill, their stories and experiences, are considered “lives not worth living”… They are more than just “worriers” predicting catastrophe.

It's easy to say that their “feelings” don't matter… That the March of progress doesn't involve them... that the feelings of the healthy (who are unaffected by such laws and the perceptions they create) are more important than the feelings and views of those who are…but that too, is discrimination.

[Note: I know that I have gone a bit off-topic, and have made this conversation more than a little political… But these are all reasons why I believe “Palliative Care” to always be the better option. The lives of the dying matter too.]

That’s the entirety of the conversation. It was a good one, but one in which I didn’t take her points seriously, and I should have. A lot of the things that she was concerned about have come to pass, and if things continue along the path that they are currently set on, many more of them will as well.

There was a vet in Canada trying to get help for his PTSD. They offered him the option of suicide, not treatment.

A woman that was featured in a death with dignity ad didn’t want to die. She had a disease that she needed treatment for, but the government didn’t want to pay for it, and she couldn’t afford it, so she ended up taking suicide instead of suffering. This is a country that is supposed to be known for its universal health care. They took the ad down when her family and friends came out with this information. You can still find it on YouTube or Rumble.

Iceland proudly announced that they had effectively eliminated Downs syndrome through abortion in their population. Though not suicide, it is selectively killing a portion of the population that it considers undesirable.

Many things need to be taken into account when trying to make up your mind about something that you think is a good idea. It is important to hear the arguments being made on the other side of the coin because you may think that there is no way what they believe will come to pass ever will, but there is a good possibility that you are wrong about that.

In the next post I will discuss why this happens, but this one is already long enough.