I am putting this up for discussion among ourselves. Don't shoot the messenger please I am just posting this.

Parliament in Belgium has passed a bill allowing euthanasia for terminally ill children without any age limit, by 86 votes to 44, with 12 abstentions.

When, as expected, the bill is signed by the king, Belgium will become the first country in the world to remove any age limit on the practice.

It may be requested by terminally ill children who are in great pain and also have parental consent.

Opponents argue children cannot make such a difficult decision.

It is twelve years since Belgium legalised euthanasia for adults.

In the Netherlands, Belgium's northern neighbour, euthanasia is legal for children over the age of 12, if there is parental consent...
The law states a child would have to be terminally ill, face "unbearable physical suffering" and make repeated requests to die - before euthanasia is considered.
More Info:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26181615

QUICK EVERYONE SHOOT OP!!

>>2 Oho nooo! *shoots me* "I haven't...seen...the world...yeee"

OP this is fucking terrible, I can't believe you want to kill children.

But yeah, I'm not super sure of how I feel about euthanasia. Thought until I was ten that it was 'youths in Asia' and wondered why they were such a big issue.

If someone wants to die, who are we to stop them?

>>5 If someone wants to kill someone, who are we to stop them?

Even in the case of suicide, that action affects other people. It affects friends, family, etc.

I don't agree with the 'all life is precious' argument, but I still don't think it's as simple as a person's choice for themselves.

>>6 its restricted to terminally ill and in immense pain. What type of person would you be to allow suffering to continue unchecked?

>>7 How exactly does one define 'immense pain'? That seems very vague considering each person's different pain tolerance.

Why don't we just kill people who experience pain? What kind of person would you be to let their suffering continue? Obviously it is unreasonable, because their pain probably isn't bad enough to kill over. So, the whole case for allowing euthanasia hinges on 'immense pain'. When is the pain bad enough to die? Who gets to decide that?

>>8 Check back to us when you are slowly dying of testicular cancer.

My biggest problem with euthanasia is the room for abuse. I think every single applied case would have to first be taken through the justice system to check for fraud. It's a tricky thing giving people the power of life and death over others, you never know who'll abuse it.

>>6 >>8 Do you even understand what 'terminally ill' means? It means that they are afflicted with the incurable, experiencing a pain that can barely be controlled. There is no way out.
It's far worse to see your friend or family member die slowly than it is to just let them go.
>>9 Agreed.

I've been in a position where I felt that the pain was far too much to deal with - and it only lasted for a few days. I can't imagine living like that for weeks or even months, all the while knowing that it won't get better.
And it's not like they're going around forcefully euthanising the terminally ill. It's merely an option for those who are willing to go through with it, and therefore none of our business.
If you disagree, that's your opinion. But it's not a reason to limit the choices of others.

==

>>9 >>10

Why shouldn't people kill themselves? How can you discourage someone killing themselves when they are feeling depressed, and then encourage people killing themselves if they are terminally ill? What is the difference there? That is a question, I really don't know.

>>8 The person should decide for themselves, which is really the whole point. Potential abuse aside, it is the person's choice. May I remind you, people attempt and succeed in killing themselves daily, without legal consent, likely in respond to pain that is far less severe than that of terminally ill patients. I understand that it is impossible to define a point at which the pain is too much, and I don't think anyone is arguing that. But, why does that really matter? Also a serious question, I don't mean to attack, I just want to know.

>>12 permanent solution to a temporary problem vs permanent solution to a permanent problem is why the discouragement is there

>>13 Depression by definition is a condition which lasts an extended period of time. It wouldn't be depression if there were ups and downs, there is only down. Even if it 'only' lasts years on end as opposed to the rest of their life in the case of terminally ill patients, isn't it the same essential problem?

People can claim that a child can't make such a decission, but I'm pretty sure doctors will know if the child is going through an unbearable and unnecessary suffery.
It's ridiculous some coutries don't allow euthanasia, some even prosecute the families if they support the family member in getting euthanised.
Let people die with some dignity when they have nothing else.

>>12 >>14 Take it from me, in most cases, suicide is very different. Like Sleep said, it's a permanent solution to a temporary problem. One way or another, you can probably find a way out of the situation even if it feels you can't.
These terminally ill kids will never have that chance. They are going to die in one of the worst ways possible and euthanasia is their last option. A lot of people seem to forget that.

>>6 You're an idiot, I'm not going to waste more than this amount of time on you.

>>16 I know there are cases in which people will continue to go through a lot of pain until the day they die and there is nothing anyone can do to stop that, and in those cases I can agree with euthanasia as an option. No one can possibly argue with that. I just don't know where the line is drawn.

And, please don't shoot me, but I really can't understand why people shouldn't kill themselves. Their situation may get better, but does that really justify years of suffering?

>>18 That being the only situation where I think euthanasia is truly appropriate.
And no, that's a perfectly reasonable question. It's also one that I can't really answer for anyone but myself. Everyone has their own reason for feeling the way they do.

>>9 Wow, I guess I can't identify a single case in which euthanasia is obviously appropriate because I don't think there's a clear definition for the amount of pain at which euthanasia becomes appropriate for everyone. Thanks for clearing that up, I totally agree with you now.
Also, you don't die from testicular cancer.

>>10 Why don't seniors just kill themselves, then? They are most likely going to slowly deteriorate, mentally and physically, over a period of years, without any way out, before dying, maybe even very painfully. Yet, while some do, most don't. Most of them even know this deterioration will happen, and yet they live it out. What is the difference there?

I know what terminally ill means, and I know when I am in enough pain to make me want to die, but from the looks of this law it isn't completely up to me.

>>12 My grandfather was in a lot of pain for the last 5 years of his life, but that pain wasn't all physical. Most of his agony came from knowing he was deteriorating and knowing everyone around him was watching him die. That's not terminally ill, but I certainly see a case for euthanasia being appropriate. It 'really matters' because each individual doesn't get to decide.

>>17 I'm sorry you feel that way.

Also, how can children even give consent for their own death? Most children I know don't even know what death is. If they can't decide when it's okay for them for have sexual intercourse, how can they decide when it's okay to die?

>>20 Seniors are different. Not all senior citizens deteriorate like you say, and the pain they are experiencing is not usually close to the pain terminally ill people experience. Plus, a lot of the times the deterioration you are talking about involves not realizing that it's happening at all, and the worst moments for seniors are when they become lucid and realize they are dying. In the case of terminally ill people, they know they are dying and they know what situation they are in while it is happening. I guess you could say it's like the worst part of getting old, but much worse and more frequent.

I agree that the rules for when euthanasia is allowed are not completely concrete, but opposing the law because only some people receive the benefit they deserve is not really logical.

As for the consent, I used to think the same way, but I don't think it matters anymore. I guess I figure the risks of a child losing their life from a misunderstanding of death are very minimal, considering the state of the child and the potential life they could lead. Terminally ill children have very little left to live for, sometimes nothing at all.


I would also refrain from personal attacks if you wish to continue a reasonable discussion.

Man this site really likes to support suicide. Instead of focusing on giving people the option to kill themselves because of pain why don't they try to help them get through The pain. I guess it would be easier and less painful to just off yourself but I don't think that justifies it. I've never been in that situation so i don't expect my voice to have any relevance but still promoting suicide in any sense is a bad thing

>>22 What is the purpose of living when you have to sit in a hospital bed for the rest of your life? There is a point when it isn't really worth living anymore. The precise definition of that point it not 100% clear, but you have to admit there are definitely cases where it's essentially worthless to keep living.

The point of living instead of killing yourself in general is that life is probably going to get better. You'll probably still get to experience joy, because your life isn't going to be this bad forever. In the case of many terminally ill patients, however, the fact that your life will not get better is medically confirmed. True, it is possible that one day, someone could come to visit you in the hospital, and you could share a wonderful time with them, despite your physical pain. However, this is very unlikely, so unlikely that it becomes reasonable to assume it won't happen.

You said we should focus on getting them through the pain, which is exactly what the current system does. It pumps them full of drugs to numb it, but there is a certain point where the drugs can become very harmful, having other, more painful side-effects. There is also only so much pain you can block out.

>>22 So you would like to let those kids to suffer through the rest of their short life? I don't support sucide myself but this is a special case since the children are going through so much physical pain and they are only going to live for a short time and in that short time all they feel is pain.