Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by llad12, Jun 1, 2007.
Less than the electricity used up in the electric chair.
And here you are again, still going on about it costing millions to effect, and millions to audit, stop talking out your arse and start coming up with facts.
How much will it cost and why, how much does it cost to research, develop, manufacture, and distribute 1 new drug, and how much does allowing this compare to that?
0.1% or 200% ?
Why do we suddenly need a small army of people to enforce this, when we only need a handfull of people to agree to switch of a lifesupport machine for someone whos a vegtable.
Basicly, your talking bs, but im used to that.
Stop being dense, you know what i meant.
Your putting cost as the primary consideration, rather than putting the patient as the primary consideration.
your argument is like saying "We should stop wasting our money on research into arthritis and other non fatal illnesses, it costs millions and People are DYING of cancer!!"
It is all a matter of forcing your beliefs onto someone else. You're comparing apples and oranges.
Because the issue is that the life in question belongs to the person who wants to end it.
What can I say, you're always good for a laugh.
Change the issue and make a personal attack.
Normal for you.
Aw you poor thing
I think it should be legal.
Based on theory only?
does being a pal allow you to troll or something?
A more interesting question would be. If this forum was a video game. Would you get xp everytime you throw around the word "Troll" because you certainly seem to grind that alot.
I just love the word troll, troooll trollllll trollllyyy
It just rolls of the tongue
Man, this thread got stupid fast. On the plus side, some dumbasses got reeled in by Johnny.
The evolutionary time-scale of threads ain't geological on the OTF. :azn:
I somehow think i answered this question from you in an earlier life or something. To be honest i wouldn't know if your wife is lying about the subject, i hope and think not. You however don't understand fully the concepts of medicine as well as i dont understand geology.
The honest truth and the thing you have to understand though is that it would be quite hard to overdose morphine to a terminally ill cancer patient. Most of them have had pretty high doses of morphine for a long time to relieve pain and have a very high tolerance of the drug. This mean you would really have to give monster doses of morphine to get someone to stop breathing from morphine alone. And you dont do that although it is common for nurses that dont have the experience with cancer patients to hesitate before giving the usually high doses morphine intravenously that simply is a translation from the patients previous oral doses.
Where I have worked we usually dont give phentanyl so i haven't really got any experience with that. When patients are dieing they may get kind of a "watery" (dont know the english word) breath and then sometimes seem to get dyspnoic and more anxious, although in many cases its the relatives that gets anxious since the patients usually are very close to death by that point. In any case we usually give a mixture of morphine and scopolamine to relieve them from the discomfort.
When patients scream out in pain and agony when dieing, you havent been doing an optiaml job previously. You havent consolled them, you havent found the right pain medication or a number of different things you may not have been doing. I dont understand the meaning of "reps" but a low BP will occur when dieing as well in many kinds of severly ill patients and has in it self no bearing on how much pain and agony one have.
Agony or anxiety. It's a huge difference. but people can be afraid of dieing. Just look into yourself for that.
Sorry about spelling euthanasia wrong.
No doubt, terminal cancer patients tolerate heavy doses of opiates. As you well know, the pain relief from such drugs fades with continued usage requiring ever increasing dosages or other drugs. According to my wife (a RN for nearly a quarter of a century) Fentanyl is one of the most powerful narcotics available (although it does have a short half life). Regardless, the patient will reach a point where pain relief from narcotic usage results in a dangerously low respiration and blood pressure. If they are given any more, the patient will certainly fade out ... albeit peacefully.
Sometimes the best you can hope for is to die in your sleep. The goal is not necessarily to end their life ... it is to end their suffering. The medical personnel understand the risks involved with such high dosages of opiates and the results that it can ultimately bring. In the end, it is a disease that is killing them, the narcotics just ease the process.
Not only that you have to know when to hold them Know when to fold them and know when to walk away and when to run.
You never count your money when you're sittin at the table.
Therell be time enough for countin when the dealins done. :wink3:
Um..I don't really agree with that because parents have an obligation to pay attention to their children. I am just basing this on my own experiences.
For ten years my son was the center of my attention. 4+ years ago, a kicking, screaming, poopie being came into the picture. It was hard on him. Even though my ex was around, he didn't do much. The kids pretty much rested on my shoulders. I tried to balance and I didn't do a good job.
I spent years building him back up. We all eat better and exercise for mostly his benefit. He comes to me when he is having a problem and talks. We sit here some days in the afternoons and talk for hours. I let him swear..let him do what he needs to in order to get things out. If he wants to throw a plate against the wall to get his anger and depression out..he can.
So, to me, teen suicide is partially the parents fault. If you are to busy in chat or on some forum from dawn until dusk..that is your issue to deal with.
Teens need their parents period. They should be exempt from wanting to die.
Adults who have serious medical or emotional issues are another story. That is really all I wish to elaborate on at this point in my life.
The ones who decide that way.
My position is simple, if people want to live then let them live and if they want to die let them die.
Perhaps the "normal" state of wanting to be alive is a chemical "imbalance". After all, the desire to live is thrust upon us by biology.
What am I, a spellchecker? I only chime in when it's funny. Or really annoying. Otherwise I'd be here all day.
Obviously no chance of malicious intents and violation of a person's rights therein, unlike the other example. My bad.
Ahhhh, classic Johnny.
I think you got him, Johnny, reel him in!
Woah, talk about beat to the punch.
Well, um, yeah, that's how you make decisions. Practicalities are a different matter.