🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: talk.euthanasia
Article #174

Re: ACT

#174
From: Madeleine Croft
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 00:00
58 lines
3027 bytes
Newsgroups: talk.euthanasia,aus.general
Subject: Re: A.C.T.>Actually I would prefer that our government put
sufficient resources
>In his typical unbiased manner, David Moss wrote :

snip
>...into palliative care, and education about what to expect during the
>closing stages of life, so people could face it with comfort and
>courage.

Are you afraid that this is what will happen to you ? Would you rather
be the object of untold fuss in the closing stages of your days? Do
you dive in the pool or do you gently, slowly wonder into it?

You confuse cause and effect. The cause of death is an irreversible
mechanism. Such mecananism manifests as a decompensation of bodily
adaptive  functions. 
In euthanasia  the medical profession sets about to draw a conclusion
that the above mechanism will take effect with 100% of certainty. What
they decide to do is to harmonise a myriad of social forces so that
death will eventuate with the minimum of side effects.

>Of course the cheaper option is to snuff em' if they complain too
>much. Thats why the ACT might end up with a euthanasia law.

Costs are not just financial. 

Take the following illustration.
 
There ounce were two men.Mr A and Mr B
Mr A was trapped inside a carriage, his chest crushed by the metal. 
It was understood that death would eventuate with 100% of certainty.
The army had arrived. A helicopter had brought his family along. TV
cameras were reporting the news. Every thing was done to keep
 Mr A  alive. And he lived one week. He suffered untold agony.
Each minute of the day, sooth sayers urged him on, encouraged him, fed
him concoctions and anticommotion medications. Still he died. Was the
cost justified. Was it justified to flup up so much drama? Would not
death have been more human if had been timely?

Mr B  was also trapped inside a carriage along the tracks  somewhere
else. The rescue team had arrived. His family had been called. A
question had been asked. WHAT CAN BE DONE  TO SAVE HIM?  An answer had
been given:NOTHING can be done except delay the time of death, and
relieve the pain. While our man was still well he was asked WHAT DO
YOU CHOSE? Pain relief without life sustenance,? or pain relief and
life sustenance?  Our man choses Pain relief. He died at the end of
the day. 

I ounce witnessed such an accident. I was prevented from injecting
Morphia, which I had with me at the time, because it was against the
law.

David did someone KILL HIM?
Face the facts.
Madeleine Croft
mado @iinet.net.au
Technical Details
Message-ID: <5f3nlb$adb$1@opera.iinet.net.au>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mail

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 111fed,abcec8d131096872,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid111fed,public
X-Google-Thread: 1083c4,abcec8d131096872,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid1083c4,public
From: mado@iinet.net.au (Madeleine Croft)
Subject: Re: ACT
Date: 1997/02/27
Message-ID: <5f3nlb$adb$1@opera.iinet.net.au>
X-Deja-AN: 221797505
Organization: iiNet Technologies Pty Ltd
Reply-To: mado@iinet.net.au
Newsgroups: talk.euthanasia,aus.general