True true

Sometimes the relatives would just want their parents to die.

Not because they hate them, but because they don't want them to suffer.

Yeah that always gets difficult

Questions like that

There is still the concept of "dignified death", and that even voluntary euthanasia is usually a crime.

I'm not really a fan of involuntary euthanasia conducted by a lone "SJW" of sorts.

I don’t think anyone is

But there's still legalized state-run euthanasia of sorts in Finland. While it's illegal for an elderly or terminally ill patient to request aid in committing suicide, the state can order a non-resuscitation order on an elderly without advising or even notifying the relatives.

Wtf?

That’s ass backwards

If you cannot have even aid to suicide, how is it right for the govt to order execution of an elderly without their approval?

It's nonsense. It is backward.s

Well there is always something wrong with a system in place

Thought it’s completely justified to be angry at that.

Sure, my grandma died while on non-advised, and non-notified non-resuscitation order. I wouldn't have objected to it since she had several strokes and was bedridden, and was a vegetable for a week. But it would be nice to at least know.

I did agree there was zero chance she cannot make it.

But when at the same time medical staff protect their sensibilities with Hippocratic oath so that they cannot assist on suicide **at request of the patient rather than the government**... that pure BS.

I mean, I wouldn't *force* any medical professional to assist on suicide, but when it's criminalized (asissting = murder) that is seriously fucked up... especially when while assisting = murder, committing literal murder is legal (if done by authorities who have the power to assert a non-resuscitation order against patients will).

I’m sorry about that man

Sucks

Anyway I’m going to head out

I hope things get better for you

That's like a decade in past.

I'm over that.

And like I said, I actually agree with non-resuscitation in her case. She live a loooooong life.

I just think it's a hypocrisy that govt can order non-resuscitation (regardless of patients will), but the patient itself cannot ask for help to commit suicide.

It is hypocritical

I agree.

That’s not something you think it’s provable

I guess they avoid "hypocrisy" by differentiating that non-resuscitation (even if against patients will) is non-action, where as assisting suicide is action (even if with patients agreement).

So they use a technicality of action vs in-action.

To justify basically functioning as executioners while refusing actual mercy killing on request of the person **ITSELF** (rather than govt).

Hippocratic oath is cancer.

Doctors argue for it's merits because with Hippocratic oath, the govt cannot command them to Holocaust (only order them to not resuscitate Jews shot by non-doctors). The cost of this "moral backbone" is that doctors cannot alleviate pain with morphine if it risks sleeping away, or cause death even at request of being granted death.

I think doctors have a Holocaust-fear. And they don't really fear killing itself, just being made responsible of it. Doctos are cowardly people without backbone.

Which is probably why lawyers and doctors are both at the center of biggest bloated public spending infrastructures, and without any moral dilemma of whether the world would be better if they killed themselves on the spot.

Pat @whiic

Why?

The Hippocratic oath feels a lot like Baby Hitler dilemma.

There's a legitimate question of whether killing baby Hitler would have saved the Jews (and Polacks, and French, and all the rest who died in WW, incl. Germans).