Euthanasia is legal for pets but not humans?

[Aznsilvrboy]

As of 2009, some forms of active euthanasia are legal in Belgium,[1] Luxembourg,[2] The Netherlands,[1] Switzerland,[1] Thailand,[3] and the U.S. states of Oregon[4] and Washington.[5]

Okay...so Canada isn't on the list. My question is why does our law permit humans to make these decisions for their pets, but not for themselves/family members? :confused:

[CCCC3333]

Pets aren't humans.

[Aznsilvrboy]

Pets aren't humans.

Obviously :rolleyes: what's your point?

[CanadianMike]

Okay...so Canada isn't on the list. My question is why does our law permit humans to make these decisions for their pets, but not for themselves/family members? :confused:
i agree.

IMHO, most of the detractors simply engage in fear mongering. people make faulty assumptions, like if you allow euthanasia....you'll have to fear getting killed 'by mistake'. moreover, people seem to have fears like the whole so called 'death panel' controversy....that someone else will be allowed to make the choice for you/your loved one.

really, we should allow it. most cases would be people quite elderly and/or with chronic medical problems.....it would allow for someone in palliative care to receive euthanasia, instead of 'letting nature take its course' as is practiced now (i.e. slowly have them starve to death).

for example, even with the present form of palliative care, 'indirect euthanasia' seems to be practiced....i.e. giving a patient who is in very poor shape higher amounts of their pain med to spur things along. rather than doing this in this 'turn a blind eye' fashion, the option should be clear and on the table to 'end it'. we do it with our pets when theyre suffering, why not our human companions?

besides the above commentary, i also just believe that we should all have the right to choose when to end our lives. prohibiting people from doing so in a safe, controlled environment creates more risk.....you dont prevent people from killing themselves, you just have them resort to methods they can do themselves, which have plenty of dangers associated.

[dighn]

Obviously :rolleyes: what's your point?

So why the comparison?

Anyway I think ultimately a person should be allowed to choose. In practice though there are obviously a lot of concerns that need to be worked out. It's just a whole bag of hurt.

[Aznsilvrboy]

Marriage is legal for humans but not pets?

Apples to oranges, silly to compare the two.

ibtl

There's nothing stopping pets from getting into "unions", unless their owners prevents them from doing so physically. Assisted suicide is outright illegal in Canada, your so-called "pet marriages" are not outlawed in this country. Poor example from you, really. Also if my comparison is so silly, then the countries I've listed which has legalized some form of euthanasia must be beyond silly to make it legal, let alone consider it.

So far the people who've questioned the validity of my comparison have yet to being up a point for or against euthanasia for humans in Canada.

[CanadianMike]

Marriage is legal for humans but not pets?

Apples to oranges, silly to compare the two.

ibtl
marriage......euthanasia?

apples to oranges, silly to compare the two ;)

no reason to lock this topic.

[Lone_Prodigy]

Okay so my comparison wasn't the best but this thread is definitely going to turn political so my "ibtl" comment still stands.

[Aznsilvrboy]

Okay so my comparison wasn't the best but this thread is definitely going to turn political so my "ibtl" comment still stands.

I think this topic is more of an ethical one than a political one, we'll see.

[ndrew029]

Pets are treated as property under most jurisdictions. Humans are not. Except animal abuse, the owner can decide what he wants to do with his/her pet.

[y2jversion1]

i agree.

IMHO, most of the detractors simply engage in fear mongering. people make faulty assumptions, like if you allow euthanasia....you'll have to fear getting killed 'by mistake'. moreover, people seem to have fears like the whole so called 'death panel' controversy....that someone else will be allowed to make the choice for you/your loved one.

really, we should allow it. most cases would be people quite elderly and/or with chronic medical problems.....it would allow for someone in palliative care to receive euthanasia, instead of 'letting nature take its course' as is practiced now (i.e. slowly have them starve to death).

for example, even with the present form of palliative care, 'indirect euthanasia' seems to be practiced....i.e. giving a patient who is in very poor shape higher amounts of their pain med to spur things along. rather than doing this in this 'turn a blind eye' fashion, the option should be clear and on the table to 'end it'. we do it with our pets when theyre suffering, why not our human companions?

besides the above commentary, i also just believe that we should all have the right to choose when to end our lives. prohibiting people from doing so in a safe, controlled environment creates more risk.....you dont prevent people from killing themselves, you just have them resort to methods they can do themselves, which have plenty of dangers associated.

+1

Well said.

[pupazzo]

Pets aren't humans you nitwit

[mart242]

All I hope is that the law changes before my parents get really old or I get really old.

What's the point of living if you can't enjoy anything and just want to die because you're really sick or can't do anything by yourself?

[Ryan]

Politics.