Hacker News Reader

Comment by coldtea | Hacker News Reader

That's a first step, under the pretext of dignity.

Next step: encouraging it. Why pay all those old-ish patients treatment, pensions, or end-of-life care? Encourage the poor to off themselves with "dignity".

Coming soon to a modern state near you...

View on HN

When you are dying of stage 4 cancer like my mother was there should be an option. Instead she received a six month prescription for liquid morphine, and they were kind enough to give her the entire bottle without requiring her to get refills.

You shouldn't have to off yourself, yet here we are.

So she got the choice. Even if it was given to her in a non offical way.

As-is, it's a very dangerous "choice" though. If you were to help someone who was unable to do it themselves, you could do down for a very long time.

For Spain in particular, the article states:

> Before the law's passage, helping somebody to die in Spain was potentially punishable by a jail term of up to 10 years.

Here's an actual case.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramón_Sampedro

> Ramón Sampedro Cameán (5 January 1943 – 12 January 1998) was a Spanish seaman and writer. Sampedro became a quadriplegic at the age of 25 (on 23 August 1968), following a diving accident, and fought for his right to an assisted suicide for the following 29 years.

> ...

> Sampedro died on Monday 12 January 1998 in Boiro, Spain, from potassium cyanide poisoning.[2] Several days later, his close friend Ramona Maneiro was arrested and charged with assisting his suicide. Sampedro had divided the elements required to complete his suicide into individual tasks, each small enough that no single person could be convicted of assisting the suicide process entirely. Maneiro was released due to lack of evidence. No further charges were ever filed in connection with Sampedro's death.

Amenábar (from The Others) depicted the events in a movie (not sure if known outside of Spain).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sea_Inside

>When you are dying of stage 4 cancer like my mother was there should be an option

Yes. When you have something less that should be treatable under good-ole socialized healthcare, but neo-liberal policies have privatized it, it shouldn't be encouraged to "not be a burden" or because they just wont treat you, though, and I'm pretty sure that will be the case...

This is a slippery slope argument.

I don't think this is an argument, it's just stating what happens.

Imagine how easy is to manipulate someone in pain, like an elder whose money you're going to inherit.

And then you have people who would like to live but don't want to depend on family members for everything.

Death on command is the closest thing to Hitler's eugenics.

> Death on command

Precisely nobody is proposing "Death on command". From the article:

> ...the person must:

> - suffer a "serious or incurable illness" or a "chronic or incapacitating" condition that causes "intolerable suffering"

> - be an adult Spanish national or a legal resident

> - be "fully aware and conscious" when they make the request, which has to be submitted twice in writing, 15 days apart

> A doctor can reject the request if the requirements have not been met. It must be approved by a second medic and by an evaluation body.

> Any medic can withdraw on grounds of "conscience" from taking part in the procedure.

The lengths the world has gone to in order to protect the elderly from Corona is at odds with your claim though.

The governments / corporations could not care less about "protecting the elderly from Corona". They have privatized care that helped the same elderly from all kinds of even more prevalent conditions in the past.

In fact they tried to downplay it at first. Only after Italy's massacre they picked up, and that's for optics, as it became an "arms race" between governments. You can't seem standing when others do something. Plus it was a good chance to increase tech profits, make structural changes they wanted to make, and get a "great reset". And a lot of cushy opportunities for big tenders...

The op talks about what the "next step" will be. And as it hasn't already been, it's clearly speculation and in no way "stating what happens".

So? Slippery slopes happen all the time.

You're a fool if you think that part of the elderly population every year doesn't already attempt to commit suicide to avoid being a burden on their family. At least this way, there's a safe option for them to do so that doesn't traumatize whoever finds them.

Your arguments sound incredibly similar to those of anti-abortists. The arguments against are also very similar.

Namely: same as people considering an abortion, people considering ending their life are in an incredibly difficult spot, and what they need is more options and help, not less.

My partner works in geriatric care, I doubt you realize how many old people are lonely and would take this way out if they could. But that's not what this law does right, this gives people who are suffering intolerably an option to not suffer any more. In this case it's not just about dignity it's about leaving their living nightmare.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com