i think you should have the right to end your life but only if you are terminaly ill and are in bad pain and cant do eny thing for thumselves
You destroy someone by knocking their confidence to zero and making them terminally depressed.
No. it is their life, they should have the right to do as they please with it.
If terminally ill person approves change it is legal If terminally ill person disapproves change it is illegal If terminally ill person is not able to approve or disapprove it should not be changed
It should only be for patients who are terminally ill, and no longer wish to suffer. Not people who've just 'had enough' of life.
you keep attacking them until theyre terminally depressed.
No, I do not force feed the terminally ill. It is important to respect their wishes and provide care that aligns with their preferences, especially when it comes to end-of-life decisions related to eating and nutrition. It is essential to have open communication and work together with healthcare providers to ensure the best possible quality of life for the terminally ill individual.
Its every persons own life so why shouldn't they? If a person is terminally ill and suffering horribly why not take a less painfull way out. But not by hanging ect.One should not use any nasty method of self deliverance. Its every persons own life so why shouldn't they? If a person is terminally ill and suffering horribly why not take a less painfull way out. But not by hanging ect.One should not use any nasty method of self deliverance. Its every persons own life so why shouldn't they? If a person is terminally ill and suffering horribly why not take a less painfull way out. But not by hanging ect.One should not use any nasty method of self deliverance.
If you are terminally ill, many policies will allow withdrawals.
Terminal illness is a state of illness from which one is not expected to recover. The expectation is that the illness will take the person's life.
There has to be a balance between respect for life at all costs, and the reality of maintaining and using scarce resources for those who are healthy and/or those whose illnesses can be cured. It is a dilemma, and an ethical issue that we have not really solved at state or federal levels. Is it reasonable for us to maintain someone who is in a persistent and intractable vegetative state even if the vegetative state may last for many years? If someone is conscious but terminally ill and either in unbearable pain or in a medically induced coma, should a patient's desire to end the pain be recognized as a legitimate treatment given the physician's oath to 'do no harm'? Could it be argued that maintaining life while there is no quality of life whatsoever is really a form of doing harm?
I wasn't aware it had any affect.
Simply say: life's fine