His patients asked to die. He was never convicted of murder.

It is murder to help put someone out of their misery when they beg for it (and death is certain)? Sounds to me like compassion.

Glad-3560737

Why is is okay for animals when they cannot ask, but not okay for humans that can?

I'm not sure I agree with his methods, yet I have a degree of respect for his stand on ending human suffering. May he join his patients and hopefully all rest in peace.

GREAT MAN, he will be missed. Rest In Peace.

Glad, you're way off base pal.

So if you had the choice between living for years (I don't even want to call it living, let's call it 'existing in agony') in a bed, in pain, (with absolutely no chance of recovery) while the hospitals suck up all of your money just to keep you breathing for their profit......or.....dying with dignity and sparing your family years of drawn out agony watching you die slowly, you'd opt for staying alive while you and your family suffer?

You've got mixed up priorities.

Hello moron!!!

He was way ahead of his time and placed on this earth one or two generations too early. There will be a time when we are more enlightened but for now this man was quite brave to deal with the suffering of the dying so openly. I think he may be seen as a hero to those who deal with suffering and as a villan to those unaware how personal that decision is and how important it may be to you one day. Death is an end that we all face. Some are given much more agony than others requiring drugs that can make anyone into a living vegetable. I do not know what ingredient built into this doctor that could have made him so brave that he even attempted to help those who made a personal decision to end the suffering. He was a first who openly challenged our false sense of outrage, other doctors helped those suffering when requested, but quietly.

It will take time for the future generation of thinkers to catch up to Jack.

In response to Glad-3560737 > Apparently, you've never watched a loved one suffer in mortal agony while waiting to die "naturally". Losing Jack is a sad thing...he truly was a great pioneer...Sorry to see him leave....Godspeed, Dr. Kevorkain.

"Kevorkian, 83, died at Beaumont Hospital in Royal Oak, Mich., where he had been hospitalized subce last month with pneumonia and kidney problems."

MSNBC...can't your writers use spell check? Absolute disgrace how sorry writers are in this day and age.

Lucy1 here are some morals for you. It is ok to kill someone that killed someone else painlessly but it is wrong to kill someone who is suffering and wants to die because they have a disease that is killing them and there is no cure. I am glad I don't have your morals.

Lucy1 - no one is asking you to euthanize anyone, but everyone deserves that choice.

Actually fsw, he WAS convicted of second-degree murder.

Have to agree with CombatMedic69, I had to watch my grandfather die from pancreatic (sp) cancer, and listen to one side of my family argue with the other side on giving him medication, or keeping him alert to "visit" with them. The side that wanted him alert won out, and my grandfather lost. I will never put my family through that, if I had the choice let me go out with dignity and class, and of my choosing.

it's just a matter of time before the government will tell you when you will be put to sleep, I don't believe it will be the choice of the patient.

Really???????? Please put down the remote and turn off Fox! Sarah was out of her mind when she said these things and now has so many believing.

My grandfather was terminal. It was painful to watch him suffer and not be able to do anything about it. At least he didn't linger.

What's wrong with choice?? Nothing! Nothing at all!!

R.I.P. Dr. K was a "secret" hero to many of us in the nursing profession, esp. those of us who have done Home Health/Hospice. While every terminally ill person doesn't feel the need to end their lives, (my father died of cancer w/o pain, so it isn't always a dire situation with terminal people.) I have learned that we must respect people's wishes w/o long, complicated, issues to allow peaceful death.

Our opinions change as we grow older & start losing people we love. When I was young & "immortal," I could never have imagined taking my own life or the lives of someone whom I loved. Now, I feel differently. Horror of horrors, I could NEVER have expressed that thought when I was still working, but believe me, a lot of us feel the same way although we don't express it openly.

I've "put-down" 3 animals in my life & am staring 2 more in the face as I write. Allowing suffering IS INHUMANE WHETHER IT IS ANIMAL OR HUMAN. Could I "assist?" I have the technical skills, and I don't know for sure, but I believe I could & would in my immediate family. I've had a great life & if I were to serve time like Dr. K., then so be it. My conscience & strength of character would carry me through.

This is so incredibly ironic because an hr. & a 1/2 ago I got the call that my sister-in-law dropped dead @ 0300 this morning. So this topic is hitting me esp. hard right now. That's how we ALL want to go, but if we can't, then allow those of us who feel strongly about it to express our humanity in "easing suffering."

P.S. Euthanasia means "Good Death." Defination in my dictionary says: Mode or act of inducing death painlessly or as a relief from pain. Ironic?

Lew said "His patients asked to die. He was never convicted of murder."

Um, he actually was convicted of murder in the 2nd degree. Not saying he was wrong or right, just get the facts right.

The best thing he did was to raise the issue of compassionate assisted suicide for the terminally ill. American's benefitted from this dialogue and challenge to our morality. He was a brave man and a deep thinker who helped many dying people pass away dignified. RIP.

Combatmedic: If you all want to end your life, that is up to you, why do you need someone to talk you into it. As far as forcing a person to stay alive with machines that's not the same and suicide. Too hard to figure out??? And you are a nurse?? And as far as dying with dignity, whatever you choose as a form of dignity is up to you. You live your dignity, I'll live mine. I don't answer to you and you don't answer to me.

Fox News??? Why are they always getting blamed? That is as old as the libs blaming Bush and the repubs blaming Obama.

I could care less if you're a nurse or dr. or whatever. Makes me wonder how many of you cause people to die by YOUR choice. Cover up is real good in the medical field as you probably already know.

What's wrong with choice?? Nothing is wrong with choice, it's the choice you make that counts.

I disagree with this Dr, and that is my choice. You can agree with him and that is your choice. I'll stick with the Bible. And not the medical bible either. You don't like it, again, that's your choice. Have a nice day.

Some seem to have a severe reluctance to recognize or accept reality when it doesn't suit them. I don't go along with Kervorkian's idea for young healthy people, but for someone with a disease who has no real hope...

Lucy: I read a lot of anger in your words. It is your choice to linger and suffer with a terminal illness. If your religion expects this of you, no problem here.

However, my religion is compassionate and deals with reality. If given the opportunity, I want the choice to end my extreme suffering, should I develop a horrible disease and the end is fast approaching.

I think it's just a matter of time before the government will tell you when you will be put to sleep,

Wow that's a stretch. Going from: I'm in constant pain and I want to end my incurable suffering..........to..........'the government will tell you when you will be put to sleep'.

I bet you think that soon people will be allowed to marry dogs and horses too.

The choice is yours JM California. Hope it stays "your" choice and not someone else's to end your life if you are incurable. Imagine all the money they could save in DC. If your religion says go for it, then, by all means, go for it. Again, that is your choice, but don't bring others into it. Why should others have to be brought into your decision of committing suicide? Why would someone need to be put in that position. Then they have to live with the decision they may have helped you make. They could end up victims themselves and then need assistance in their own suicide from the mental guilt and pain they may end up suffering. Mental pain is more causes of suicide than physical pain. If you want to take your life, leave everyone else out of it. If the patient is alert but is on I.V's to keep from dehydrating, and they want to die, they should be able to refuse the I V. A living will should cover that as well.

JM California, anger in my words??? Guess you haven't read other responses to my opinions. Just because I disagree with many here does not make my words, "anger". And because I defend my opinions and defend myself from other remarks doesn't make it anger either. We all have the right to defend our opinions now, don't we??? Angry? Not at all. I will say this though, I cared for my dad while he was dying of cancer and it was very hard. But just because he didn't kill himself doesn't mean he didn't die with dignity.

If people are now saying die with dignity, including some here in the medical field, then why force people into getting chemo and other cancer treatments like they did to that little boy whose mom didn't want him to have it. The government took him away from her and forced him into the treatments. Where was her choice, where was his choice?

Miss Deanna

Lucy, with your morals, I'm guessing that you would have no problem birthing your daddy's, your brother's or your rapist's baby.

Hey, DM California, would you consider Miss Deanna's words angry?

Miss Deanna, I will not lose sleep over your opinion. Have you seeked assistance? Ever thought about it? I'm not talking government assistance either, sounds like you're all over that already.

Darthfrodo

Wo I bet you think that soon people will be allowed to marry dogs and horses too.

Nothing surprises me anymore darthfrodo.

Wow Miss Deanna mama, yo words are just full of morals. Now them words of yours are angry words, would you agree JM California?

Lucy the big problem I see is the bible put it down it clouds the judgement.

re: #1.35 You should find another site to get attention.

Lucy1: We all wish to live forever, free of aging, disease and death. Some of us, hopefully, you included, will not face unbearable suffering in your last days.

Why should others have to be brought into your decision of committing suicide? Why would someone need to be put in that position. Then they have to live with the decision they may have helped you make.

I am not advocating suicide with healthy people, nor anyone who has a chance to survive. I simply know that our precious and short life will cease one day. Some will be lucky enough to pass peacefully while others will not be so lucky. Those that want to end the anguish of suffering pain and indignities will require the COMPASSIONATE assistance from another individual to assist their inevitable termination of life. Yes, it is an unthinkable and horrid decision to assist a loved one to pass. I see refusing assistance to terminate the life is much worse because you are imposing religious principals onto a suffering human being, who's imminent death is around the corner.

Ask yourself if you would allow your cat or dog to suffer several months with excruciating pain and no more options to help? Only a sadist or someone too entangled in religious morality would say yes.

ok, so im gay, Yes, he did have a "dark side" that was never talked about too much. He did have a fascination with death. I'm not sure how I feel about this topic, but if I had asked someone to help me end my life, it sure wouldn't have been him. Too creepy !!

There need to be more doctors like him, ones who are willing to end people's suffering when they have a terminal illness. I watched shows about this never realizing how much agony some people have to endure before they die. Here in America, it is legal for the government to take your life, it is legal to withhold food AND water from comatose patients and it is legal to kill an unborn child; yet it is illegal to kill yourself or to get assistance with suicide. I am NOT saying everyone who has a terminal illness SHOULD kill themselves; only that it should they should have the right to decide what is best for them.

JM California, I guess we have different views. You were raised one way, I was raised one way. And to be quite honest, my dad was a man who had more devotion to God than many I know. If I even suggested he take his life, he would have become very angry at me. God was first in his life, and his beliefs and faith were incredible. Please don't put him down for his beliefs. He made his choice and I was there to help him as much as I could. Again, if people want to end their own life, then let them, but bringing others into it is not fair in my opinion. And just because others don't agree to assist in someone elses death doesn't make them selfish and lacking compassion. If I wanted to end my life, I would not be selfish and ask someone to assist me in doing so. I would never put someone in that postition. But that is my choice. The doctors did nothing to force my dad to stay alive. They gave him meds for the pain and that was it. He never even had chemo. They didn't give him chemo because they said his heart wouldn't be able to stand it and the chemo would kill him. I guess he could have demanded chemo if he wanted to die quicker, but would the doctors have consented? We'll never know.

I have lost 3 pets and yes they were put down. Again, I think our views will differ there as well, so lets just leave it at that.

goodbye, humanitarian!

Lucy1: I have no doubt about your desire to do the right thing and I'm sorry that you've lost your Dad, and that he suffered.

in 2003, I, too, lost my father to an incureable, rare and horrible form of cancer that began with paralysis in one hand and migrated. At 81, he really suffered and I'm sure would have preferred a few less days of torturous agony. But, because of he didn't have a living will, he died dehydrated and writhing in pain. His heart would not give out, so an agonizing death was prolonged.

In 1973, I also watched my mother die from a terrible cancer, over the course of 8 months. She was only 47 and I was 8. When her disease was discovered, it was already too late. Doctors tried everything, chopping away, here and there at metastases, including the removal of one eye. She was on very strong pain meds and eventually went into a 2 week coma, prior to expiring and leaving 9 children.

So, as you can see, I am no stranger to death, disease and suffering. My support for compassionately assisted suicide for terminally ill people is based on very personal and sad experiences, like yours. Just that we disagree on this issue. Peace.

JM California, I can understand your point of view. Seeing and living what you did while watching both parents just suffer and feeling so helpless while you feeling helpless is horrible. I know the feeling. I hope our parents are together in a better place watching you and I have a peaceful conversation about this and sharing our views without spewing hatred at one another.

Again, if the decision of wanting to die to end the suffering is left in the patients hands that's one thing, but if the decision to end the life of the one suffering is taken away from them and the government is the one to decide when their life will end is another. That is my concern. My sister succeeded in taking her own life btw.

Peace to you as well.

Lucy1, you keep talking about CHOICE...

The choice is yours JM California. Hope it stays "your" choice and not someone else's to end your life if you are incurable.

I disagree with this Dr, and that is my choice. You can agree with him and that is your choice.

And as far as dying with dignity, whatever you choose as a form of dignity is up to you.

...but you are missing the big picture, probably because you are so misguided by your bible, and yes, probably Faux News. As you know, we do not currently have the legal CHOICE of assisted suicide, the government has CHOSEN to make assisted suicide illegal.

So your argument that the government will make that CHOICE for you in the future is actually our current reality. The government is making the CHOICE for you right now, but they are not euthanizing anyone.

But for argument’s sake, let’s say the government did CHOOSE to start euthanizing. You would have a problem with that, right? The government would be infringing on your personal human rights, correct? You would want to be able to CHOOSE for yourself your own fate, as would most people. It is all about CHOICES, right?

So why should we not have that CHOICE RIGHT NOW?

It is because of people like you that we do not have the CHOICE...people who insist on forcing their opinions and ideas on others instead of simply making their own personal CHOICES and leaving it at that.

May you rest in peace Dr. K!!!

Lucy1: I take back my comment about "angry". I should have said "passionate", now that I know of your difficult experiences. My apologies. Your opinion is worthwhile, to say the least.

Gert, what does the Bible OR Fox news have to do with the current law not allowing end of life choices to end life on your terms? Why not make an argument without bringing it to that place? I don't bother reading anything anyone says after they start their arguments that way because they are usually just spewing their own brand of prejudice.

That goes for Christians who slam athiests, Republicans v Dems or anyone.

Gerty954

I'm sharing my opinion and not forcing anything on anybody, and at the same time you are doing the same. You want to kill yourself you go right ahead, I won't stop you but I won't help you do it either. Yes, CHOICE, the word the libs have become so popular for. And yes, if the government starts to euthanize, then there goes everyones choice. You don't get it do you? You give the government an inch they take a mile.

There is a huge leap between allowing doctors to assist someone end their life under rigidly narrow circumstances and the government having the authority to euthanize people. Such a law isn't something that they could slide in under the radar.

JM California

Lucy1: I take back my comment about "angry". I should have said "passionate", now that I know of your difficult experiences. My apologies. Your opinion is worthwhile, to say the least.

JM California, if I offended you I apologize as well. Your opinion is just as worthy. I just hope there is more to life than what we go through here. Hope, that is what I try to hold on to. Keep in touch. : )

Lucy1 and JM California - You guys are more fun when you are angry..lol

lol, I was wondering how long it would take for someone to say something like that.

JM California and I have a lot in common, even though we may have different views on certain things.

PC101: I like to reserve my anger for those deserving it. The discussion got a little too real. Sorry for the sad notes.

I find this topic quite intriguing, and enjoy other's heart-felt point of views.

Lucy said: "If these people really wanted to end their lives, they didn't need his help to do it."

Lucy: Can you please explain to me how a person crippled with Lou Gehrig's disease who cannot even move a finger is going to take their own life without any assistance?

Lucy said: "And I think it's just a matter of time before the government will tell you when you will be put to sleep, I don't believe it will be the choice of the patient."

Ahhhhh Lucy: I think you've gone to too many of those Koch brothers funded Tea Party rallies. They're not very good for the intellect, you know. If the government is trying to DENY us our right to choose doctor assisted suicide, why would they then turn around and tell people it's time for them to die?

Lucy said: "If you all want to end your life, that is up to you, why do you need someone to talk you into it."

Sweetheart: You're totally missing the point here. NO ONE who supports Dr. K. is saying we should encourage the terminally ill to consider suicide. I certainly wouldn't support that either. This is a choice made by the patient and ONLY by the patient. It is the patients idea from the beginning and should only be considered by the patient with no influence from anybody else. Dr. K. never tried to convince a terminally ill patient to consider suicide. He came to their assistance only after they had already made that decision themselves...and quite often, their own family was AGAINST it!

Lucy said: "Again, that is your choice, but don't bring others into it. Why should others have to be brought into your decision of committing suicide? Why would someone need to be put in that position. Then they have to live with the decision they may have helped you make."

First of all, the only person who should be assisting the terminally ill to end their life early should be a qualified physician who is WILLING to do the job...someone like Dr. K. And if a patient of sound mind chose to end their life on their own volition, then explain to me what the other people in his life have to do with his making that decision?

Lucy said: "And to be quite honest, my dad was a man who had more devotion to God than many I know. If I even suggested he take his life, he would have become very angry at me. God was first in his life, and his beliefs and faith were incredible. Please don't put him down for his beliefs. He made his choice and I was there to help him as much as I could."

You're dad, God bless him, was made of strong stuff!!! If he wanted to remain alive as long as humanly possible and was more than willing to endure the pain of his illness, then by all means his wishes to live should be respected and carried out!!! No one here is advocating that you should try and convince him to consider an early death; And I certainly wouldn't have wanted you to do that with him either. But when my time comes to die a slow and agonizing death, I might not be as strong as your dad. And I would probably prefer an early exit out of this world than to live a couple more weeks in severe pain. And I would not appreciate the government telling me that I cannot make that choice. It's all about freedom of choice, Lucy: the freedom of your dad to chose to live on as long as possible to the bitter end, and my freedom to say: "screw the bitter end! I want out, NOW!!!"

Yam Digger

Yam Digger: I guess you didn't read others remarks saying that I was selfish to keep my dad alive. Or the other remarks about helping others kill themselves. Fine, if there ends up being a planned exithood clinic for terminally ill who want to die that is one thing. Then that is 100% the patients choice. I just hope it would remain the choice of the patients like my dad who chose to stick it out or the patients who just want out now. My concern is that the insurance companies and the government will end up making it one decision to kill all just to save money. Then ones like my dad would lose their choice to live on to the "bitter end "

Thank you yam digger. And I hope you never have to make that decision.

PS, I'm not a Tea partier either. Vodka at times, yes, tea no.

R.I.P. to Dr. Death, aka Jack the Dripper. My mother was terminally ill at the time Jack was making headlines and my opinion of assisted suicide was influenced by her's, and that is that while it could well be the thing to do for a family member who is suffering, where would the line be drawn?? Would it eventually be done as a matter of convenience for the family,hospital, insurer or government??

I believe a living will is extremely important to avoid a situation where a person is kept going as a vegetable and I support ceasing life support measures in that case, but I am very wary of any sort of general approval of medical suicide. Too many ways for it to go wrong !

Everyone should have the choice to die with dignity. Being kept a prisoner in extreme pain, until inevitable death of a terminal disease, is morally reprehensible. We have more compassion towards suffering animals than we do towards our fellow man. There should be a choice whether or not to end your own life in these cases. No one is saying for doctors to decide who should stay or go, they are saying that when someone is terminal, they should have the choice to die much sooner than when their disease will kill them, to spare them from the pain.

His patients never complained about the treatment.
RIP

The LAW is wrong in this case ,.... as it has been in many cases before. I watched my father die a VERY long and horrible death. I would choose this way and I know he would have and if its our lives then others should STAY OUT of the decision

David,

The illegal status of a thing doesn't make it morally wrong- nor does the legal status of a thing make it morally right. I don't believe anyone wants to "deify" Kevorkian- but I can understand why he believed in what he did for his patients.

@David,

This man was a hero. When I was younger I worked at a hospice. It was difficult to watch people with terminal illnesses suffer like many did. When I quit the experiences I had gathered there left a lasting impression on me. I would ask you why you don't think it's someones right to avoid the pain and suffering of terminal illnesses? This is the problem with the christian right. They want less government until it comes to something that they believe threatens their book of fairy tales.

He was a psychopath operating under the guise of mercy, an insult to his profession, a man who delighted in the publicity of his deeds-- much more, apparently, than any convictions on euthanasia. Take away the MD (he was a pathologist, and never dealt with live patients) and we'd be calling him a serial killer. Good riddance.

"If these people really wanted to end their lives, they didn't need his help to do it"

Yeah, because people that are terminally ill and in constant agony can get up and walk into the San Fran bay. Have you ever see a terminally ill patient? They really can't do much of anything without the aid of another. Have you ever watched someone you love die a long painful death? I seriously doubt it concidering your comments, Lucy.

RIP Dr. You did a great service to those that were in physical pain and wanted to put an end to it. I see nothing wrong in what you did for them. You were a hero and saviour to those in need of your services.

As if someone who was terminally ill and confined to a wheelchair or bed - as was the case with many of Dr. Kevorkian's patients - would be able to "go walk into the San Fran Bay". Lucy1, if you're against assisted suicide, that's certainly your right - but don't try to force your morality down other people's throats. That's especially true if you've never been in the situation of watching someone you love die a slow, agonizing death.

I find it ironic that the "religious" types who supposedly believe in an afterlife and the human spirit are the ones who fight tooth and claw to try and stop people from having the right to terminate their own physical body.

David - yes, what he did was against the LAW (like those caps don't you). And I would bet a hundred dollars you are conservative in your views and espouse the virtues of minimal government. Oh, except most of those same people seem to want to govern our personal behavior even where it doesn't affect others.

If you're a liberal, I apologize for the assumption but still disagree with your judgmental stance. If you're a Libertarian, then you must be schizophrenic or something because it would make no sense at all.

I'm a conservative Christian, and I support assisted suicide and the right to die with dignity. The problem is left wing liberals who think the problem is the Christian right.

David,

I think he was a sexual sadist who got his rocks off watching people die.

I understand why he was convicted he did do a crime at the same time terminally ill people cant always make that choice to just walk into a lake. A family member of mine has MS and has been bed ridden for many years I cant say she wants to end her life in any way but if it was what she wished so that she wouldnt suffer anymore i would hope there was an easier way out instead of the pain and suffering she is going through right now. What most people who havent seen the other side of sicknesses is the suffering it causes for others beyond the person who is ill. I dont condone what he did but he made the people who were suffering go peacefully instead of spend another day in a hospital bed where they have to watch there painful life pass beyond them and just sit and remember the GOOD old days.

Please before you think about what crime he commited think about the people who asked for him to take there suffering away. Would you enjoy suffering everyday and watching your family members suffer with you?

I believe in his work, and it's disappointing that nobody after him is going to push this issue. I wish I could have met him and talked to him. He was a true pioneer.

Dying with dignity should be everyone's right to choose. Dignity and choice as opposed to suffering. Dr. K had an empathy with every patient that he helped. We need more people to carry on his work. Assisted suicide should be a right for those that are terminally ill. It is a decision that the doctor and patient should make ahead of time, then be carried out when they both agree it's time. There should be no interference from anyone, especially the government and religious groups. Rest in peace, Dr. K.. We will keep working to make it legal.

He never "killed" anyone.

He allowed others, who were experiencing inhuman suffering, to choose how they wanted to live their lives.

What do Christians have against "Free Will."

I will never understand their constant inconsistency.

R.I.P. Good Doctor ~ You helped many, now you can rest knowing you did the right thing for so many who were at the end of their rope.

Terminally ill people have a choice. They can make up a living will and refused life-saving measures that they imagine would just prolong their life.

However, I just recently had a very good friend of the family's die when he refused a tracheotomy. He had ALS. Many people live for a very long time with a tracheotomy(case in point: Stephen Hawking). So is it right?

I don't support assisted suicide or the death penalty(as someone alluded to earlier) and rarely support euthanasia with animals(although, I would like to point out, animals are not the same thing morally as humans).

Sen. Ryan is taking his place. Watch how the elderly is treated if Ryan the sicko has his way.After the insurance run out, the old 3'0'clock A.M. needle will pay a visit.

I only obey the laws I like. What's wrong with that?

Every blog on here always degenerates to a question of Christian values. Nobody ever mentions what the Muslims and Hindus think of these issues. Maybe this is just a left wing blog visited mainly by aetheists and humanists. Nah! that couldn't be.

littleimp: Not surprised that you would miss the point.

And, yes I have seen a terminally ill patient littleimp! I took care of my dad why had cancer!And I was there for him! I took the family leave act as well. If you don't work you won't know what that is. Have you ever changed your dads colostomy bag???? You would probably love the smell. I also took care of my mom after her strokes! So don't go there you littleimp! Life is not a disposable object when you have no use for it or it gets in the way of selfishness. littleimp, the name fits.

You have the choice to feel the way you want to, but I also have that same choice.

I see my comment was collapsed by the "community". That's good! It will encourage people to read it. I know I always expand the collapsed comments just to see what they say.

VickiC-2653645

As if someone who was terminally ill and confined to a wheelchair or bed - as was the case with many of Dr. Kevorkian's patients - would be able to "go walk into the San Fran Bay". Lucy1, if you're against assisted suicide, that's certainly your right - but don't try to force your morality down other people's throats. That's especially true if you've never been in the situation of watching someone you love die a slow, agonizing death.

Another one who missed the point. There are many ways to take your own life. And as for your remarks about being in a situation watching someone die a slow death, I cared for my dad for months while he was dying of cancer! I was by his side when he took his last breath! He died at home. So, don't go there sweetie! Read post 2.24

Have you ever been in that situation with a family member?? Or do you have a family?

Mickey, why would you advertise your stupidity?

EngEsq,

Perhaps you would be in a better position to answer that question.

@Lucy:

Life is not a disposable object when you have no use for it or it gets in the way of selfishness.

If your dad had wished to die peacefully anytime during those months of suffering then your actions are a supreme form of selfishness. Maybe he didn't, in which case cu-dos for all your hard work. But if he did, then I cannot imagine anything more cruel.

Ho, how very witty. Fool.

Many people on this post agree with Dr. Kevorkian's premise that a humane and compassionate death should be an option of choice for terminally ill patients who are suffering prolonged and severe pain. Some like David 1161626 are unaware of the facts behind this man's struggle. He was acquitted many times by several juries for his activities, but continued to be persecuted by the Catholic Church and one particular Bishop in Detroit. The church pressed to get him convicted and finally found a judge who was willing to do it. She later lost her bid for re-election. The majority of the people were not against his service to the terminally ill, but the Catholic church was, and he lost the battle.

@ David--look how many times the "law" has been wrong and rewritten in this country. Just because something is "law" does not make it right. Slavery was "lawful" at one time. Was it right??!! Wrong/bad laws need to be challenged and changed. Other countries are ahead of the U.S. in end of life matters.

Lucy -- apparently you don't realize that everyone has a choice to how they want to die. Of course, that does not always end up happening. But a terminally ill patient does not want to jump into a body of water in front of spectators because only crazy, mentally disturbed people do that. A person who is dying wants the privacy of dying in their homes surrounded by their families.

And the fact that it is against the law in most states does not mean that it's morally wrong.

He never "killed" anyone.

Actually, he injected euthanasia into someone and that's what put him in prison. Before that, all of his clients killed themselves.

EngEsq: No, my dad did not wish that at all. He was a man of morals and a brave man as well. He died with dignity and he did die peacefully. It was the time in between that wasn't peaceful at times.

And as far as someone wanting to die, they can take their own life, but I would not take part in it. Would you?? If you would, what would be your part?

He was a very foward thinking doctor who realized that the continued long-term suffering of the terminally ill is totally unnecessary. The fortunate thing is that most of those sufferers can now find some relief through medical Marijuana in those states where it is legal. Yet the national government still refuses to recognize the pain and suffering these people go through and allow them even that much relief.

EngEsq,

You are obviously one of those people who are so intellectually gifted that anyone who disagrees with them must obviously and inevitably be a "fool". This raises the question: Is it really and intellectual gift or is it more a matter of ego inflation?

If the littleimp comment was towards me i take no offense to anyones opinion on the subject I just dont see why you have to be such a D**k when it comes down to the comments. I was stating my opinion nicely and I understand why people would hate him as well as why people idolize him. Like I said I DONT CONDONE WHAT HE DID. I just understand that some people who havent gone through life with someone suffering wont fully understand what it feels like to watch someone you love hurt. (I dont know who they would be so people who get pissed because i have said it you have to chill out cause i have no idea about your life) As for being selfish I have my moments but as for this one I dont believe I am. I would never want my family member or anyone elses to leave this life until they are fully ready or would want that for themselves NOT for me. But to watch them cry everyday cause they are hurting as well as crying because they feel like there hurting everyone around them is cruel to that person in the bed. So if they wanted to stop the suffering for themselves I understand.

The people who hate him the most are the same people that strongly support the death penalty.

The same people that believe "every sperm, is precious" and scream "government is too intrusive." Then, they vote for anti-gay, anti-women candidates, they vote for idiotic wars against Islam, all in the name of their mythical god.

Lord, protect me from your followers!

David, this man was ahead of his time. He was a spokesman for Obamacare. Criminal charges for him.....applause for Obamacare...I don't get it.

He never killed anyone, only gave them the means to kill themselves because they wanted to and deserved the only for of relief available.

No he killed a man on 60 min. On a TV show... Thats how sick this guy was.

BW - well put. Don't expect narrow minded people like David or Micky to even have the slightest clue when coming to issues like this. I didn't know Dr. K nor have a read heavily into who he helped commit suicide and his trials ect. The one thing I do know is that we are bassackwards in this country when it come to end of life decisions. The simple question that many have already posted is why don't people in these situation have the right to die with dignity? This is a very good question and our its sad that those who could make a change in our current policies can't be realistic and answer it. We are not talking about people with clear psychological issues wanting to kill themselves, yes please try to get help. We are talking about people with life ending injuries or that are terminally ill. If they want to end their suffer or choose to be strung out on morphine and have every life support machine hooked up to them fine, but there needs to be a choice. I've seen what alzthimers can do to a person and it is horrible - a death not even to be wishe upon your worst enemies. These people with diseases like this should have the option presented early on that when a point is reached they can have their lives ended. I know it is tough for family but I rather see a peaceful death for a loved one than stringing out the misery. This is also another issue with resources and health costs. There are times when these services are being used on someone who will ultimately die and could be better served for someone who still has a chance and could live for many years to come. That is why I think we should all have end of life planning services and wills setup not only for the financial side but the worst case side as well. Something you start when you are a legal adult and every few years revisit and update, including life changing events like married, having kids, ect, and continue throughout your life increaseing the frequency of the updates as you get into your later years of life or if you do get diagnosed with a terminal disease. This way people know your wishes and the wishes will be legally binding and carried out. I know these are far fetched thoughts and controversial (though having the regular sessions and last wishes updates would help alot) and its true the waters could be a little tricky to navigate (and only would be harder if the lawyers and lawmakers decide they need to make it even harder) but it can be done and should. It is time those who don't know or want to know wake up and those who do care and know to stand up, be heard, and demand this change. People in these cases should be allowed to make a life ending decision to end suffering if they chose. We need to get this right and do what we all know is right. Dr. K again didn't know you but I do thank you for at least the concept that you tried to push. I hope if I ever get put in this situation that I have the option to end my suffering if I so chose.

Another one who missed the point. There are many ways to take your own life. And as for your remarks about being in a situation watching someone die a slow death, I cared for my dad for months while he was dying of cancer! I was by his side when he took his last breath! He died at home. So, don't go there sweetie! Read post 2.24

Have you ever been in that situation with a family member?? Or do you have a family?

I agree, there are many ways to end one's own life. Name ONE that would not cause considerably more distress to the deceased's loved ones than allowing a person to die peacefully via the administration of drugs. There's also the fact that for many people, making the decision to put a gun to one's head/slit one's wrist/whatever is psychologically much more difficult than making the decision to allow someone else to administer an overdose of drugs to them. Finally, most other forms of suicide aren't especially reliable- as many people find out who unsuccessfully attempt suicide.

For the record - yes, I HAVE had to watch people die slow, lingering deaths - both family members and beloved friends. And many of them would have given anything to be able to take advantage of Dr. Kevorkian's services.

The bottom line is: if you don't approve of assisted suicide, that's your right. But you DON'T have the right to take away that option from other people.

And as far as someone wanting to die, they can take their own life, but I would not take part in it. Would you?? If you would, what would be your part?

Not only would, but have - although somewhat indirectly. A dear friend who was dying of AIDS asked several of us to help him die. He was fortunate enough to have a caring physician who wrote prescriptions for sleeping pills for several of us - who then gave the pills to our friend. And most of us were by his side surrounding him with our love as he died. Legal? Probably not. Compassionate and loving? Absolutely.

What about retarded people? Alzheimer patients? Crippled children? Mentally ill? People with chronic arthritis? People with any chronic pain? Your arguments "can" to include them. Where do you stop? Who decides?

Mickey,

I will admit I have an ego (partially due to the fact that I am very smart). My rational for my posting was that I found your earliest comment in bad taste, trivializing the role and motivation of the good doctor, and generally unintelligent. Then you subsequent comment was intended to further draw attention to it.

I agree to this. I think the people who are close minded and say that you don't have the right to die with dignity, have never been around someone terminally ill before. I watched my dad die. I sat with him day in day out as he suffered. He was on hospice. The look of agony and pain in his face. Watching him sit there and having him tell me that he just wanted to die and not suffer anymore. To watch someone go through that is the hardest thing you can do. I respect the choice in those situations for the right to die with dignity and peace than to suffer in pain and agony. For those who have never been around this horrible tough situation. The pain of watching someone go through this really should keep their opinions to themselves. I think what that man offered these people who were suffering was a gift of freedom. A gift to be at peace, end their suffering of a terminally ill situation. (which the outcome is the same in assisted or just let them suffer) which is mor humane? We put our animals to sleep to end their suffering, is that wrong too? Really look at the big picture people. What would you want for yourself. To spend months of pain and suffering knowing you are going to die or say your goodbyes, be at peace and go with dignity?

let me tell you a little about his victims... There are 109 that we know of The youngest was 34 years old and the average age was around 50... About 19 of them were dead in less that 24 hours after they met the death man. He killed many in his WV van. He lost his med licence in 1991 and should have been no where near patients. He had little access to things like med records and got few second opinions. Many of his victims were despondent over things other than their illness. The man liked to kill...

@Lucy:

I'm glad you were able to support your father during a very difficult time, and that he died peacefully. My point is, that if he had wanted to end his suffering during the "unpeaceful" time, would you have denied him that basic compassion.

If it was my parent I would help them, even if it meant injecting the morphine myself. I'm not saying it wouldn't be painful or hard to do, but in some cases it is compassionate and right.

Cautiously Optimistic One, ROFLLL! Your lack of thinking an issue through is very evident in your post. I see all life as sacred and oppose the actions of this "doctor" as well as the death penalty AND abortion! It doesn't surprise me that many of the left are for this doctor's actions.

To Workin Hard: Kevorkian helped those to die who chose it for themselves. All of them were hopelessly suffering severely and felt death would relieve the endless struggle to live. I have a friend with severe chronic pain and he has run out of medical options. Everyday, he spends all of his energy to just get away from the pain. The high dosages of narcotic pain killers barely keep him comfortable. I think when you see someone in this condition and realize that Western Medicine still knows very little about chronic pain, it is indeed sobering. There are folks who will read my comment and who will understand completely. Unless you've been there or watch another, you just can't believe how bad the suffering can get.

With the Right To Die movement, no one is talking about taking the lives of people who do not consent.

Even if Dr. Kevorkian didn't succeed in making assisted suicide legal in most states, he did open people's eyes up when it comes to dying. I think that living wills and do not resuscitate, allowing people to refuse being hooked up to machines or turning off the machines can all be indirectly attributed to Dr. Kevorkian and his belief that people should be able to choose.

That's what his crusade was about. Not that the terminally ill should be euthanized, but that they should be able to ask for help to die with dignity on their own terms. His patients weren't forced, they made the decision themselves and they were the ones that turned the drugs or gas on when they were ready to do so.

Before he started, living wills were unheard of. Doctor's would automatically hook patients up to every life prolonging machine available and it took the courts years sometimes to allow those machines to be turned off. If a patient refused treatment, the family could get them declared incompetent simply by saying that refusing treatment meant they weren't sane.

Lucy I guess your folks were lucky and didn't suffer unmanagable pain. As for the FMLA, it is called the Family Medical Leave Act. You don't seem to bright so maybe it is just a blind religious belief?

and rarely support euthanasia with animals(although, I would like to point out, animals are not the same thing morally as humans).

Yeah, we're permitted to end the suffering of our animals when they lose the ability to control their own body, and do so without their permission. Yet when it comes to a human being suffering it's okay to watch them waste away unable to perform basic functions. Forgive me for not seeing how that is the morally correct thing to do.

Cautiously,

One of the best summations of the critics of this practice. Notwithstanding Angel's little rant, I thought your comment was brilliant!

Workin Hard,

I know this probably falls into the category of "don't try to teach a pig to sing. It doesn't work and just annoys the pig" but you missed the most relevant point. Physician-assisted suicide is just that, "suicide". Someone taking their OWN life. No one is advocating putting people to death because of frailties, mental conditions, etc. But again, I'm probably just annoying you by pointing out the obvious. Oh well ... now where's that pig?

@workin hard

Like many people you confuse euthanasia with assisted suicide. Euthanasia is deciding that someone else should die and then killing them. Assisted suicide is helping a person who has decided they want to end their life to do so.

Please note the enormous difference between the two actions.

Thus to answer your question of "Who decides?": The person decides for themselves and no-one decides for them.

Whether to remove life support for a person who is unconscious and has no hope of ever recovering, I would say that is another question entirely.

@ Lucy et al: the people he actually assisted were unable to take part in their own suicide (other than to beg someone else to help them) because they were either paralyzed or in some other way so severely incapacitated that they were totally dependent on others. So when you say that if someone wants it they should just go jump in a lake, that is very foolish. As for Sarah Palin's famous "death panel" speech, even she admitted that she made that up. Do a bit of research and you will find that to be true. There are doctors all over who humanely administer enough morphine to terminally ill patients who are in constant pain that it equals an over-dose. (i.e. anything less would not relieve the pain.) These doctors are angels. I hope that if I ever need assistance at the end of my life I will have the good fortune to receive someone's assistance.

Cautiously Optomistic One,

You say that the ones who "hate Kevorkian the most" are the ones who also support the death penalty?

Whoa, that sounds way off.

Logic would state that the people who are most against assisted suicide are people who are pro-life. Those people are usually the ones that are against capital punishment as well.

From your angry post, it would seem you have a little "hate" stirring inside yourself.

PJB, if these people wanted to die, then so be it. That is their choice. And as long as it remains their choice that is fine. I just worry that down the road with the way things are going, that it will be someone else's choice.

yearight

Lucy I guess your folks were lucky and didn't suffer unmanagable pain. As for the FMLA, it is called the Family Medical Leave Act. You don't seem to bright so maybe it is just a blind religious belief?

You have no idea about the pain my parents were in, so don't assume for your convenience! They had 24 hr nursing care and my dad was on morophene. Maybe one day you will have to go through it with your parents or your child, and maybe you will all get to take a stand for what you believe in. You say I don't seem to bright, I could say the same about you, but maybe we just have different views and we are both bright.

I swear humans are the most ridiculous species to roam this planet. We don't let four legged animals suffer because if we did, then people would bitch about letting the animal suffer. The same goes to a human being. Last I checked, we are animals as well.

What Kevorkian did made sense. These people were in agonizing, 24/7, 365 days of pain. WHY would you want that person to continue to suffer?! To satisfy your selfish need to keep them in your physical presence?! Humans are pathetically and hypocritically ridiculous I swear.

Hitler and his cronies were murderers.The KKK are murderers. O.J. Simpson is a murderer but Kevorkian wasn't because unlike those idiots, those he helped to die CHOSE to die. Until you find me a video of Kevorkian asking one of his patients if they want to die, they say no, but he has them die anyway, you can't call him a murderer.

@!$%#ed it up. what can i say

"Death smiles at us all, all a man can do is smile back"

Is it just me or does he actually look like the "trololo" guy?

Sophie,

We will see you there.

I think if someone wants to end their life, that is their choice...
And NO ONE, least of all the government, should have the right to remove that freedom from you.

I think it's ok to try to talk them out of it,
but if they still want to do it, that should be their right.
It's THEIR life.

And by the way Sophie-3519215...
I'm flagging you for calling Kreepy Krawler an idiot...
Name calling is not only un-Christianly behavior, it's also not allowed on Newsvine...
And P.S. Hell does not exist...

sorry sophie - "hell" is a construct of the religious mind to enslave the living with threats of eternal agony after "death". Strange concept - "death" and then "eternal agony" - funny, I've never heard an account from anyone "dead" so it's just religious HYPE.

One LIVES, one DIES - you only go around ONCE - there is no magical eternal "instant replay" - this is not a dress rehearsal.

Believe all you wish - there is NO SUBSTANTIVE EVIDENCE of the "magical instant replay" - just religious PSYCHOBABBLE! I know where there's a bridge for sale in Brooklyn...

There is no substantive evidence that heaven or hell doesn't exist either. So your point is invalid. sorry. So..like you told Sophie...believe what you wish. it's all faith regardless of what you believe.

Zorkmid

There is no substantive evidence that heaven or hell doesn't exist either.

There is no substantive evidence that unicorns, Leprechauns, and Santa's workshop don't exist either... Do you believe in them?

If not... why not?
What is the factor that makes you believe in Hell, but not in Unicorns and Santas workshop?

V....

I can't believe God into existence and you can't disbelieve him out of existence. Heaven and Hell are either waiting for us or they are not. I choose to believe there is more to life than death. Going through this world with men raping innocent women, women in despair killing their family by driving their van into a lake, wars, $14T deficits, etc. And then you die and have worms crawl through your eye socket? That's not good enough for me . . . .

By the way, a pretty intelligent gentleman looked into this creator thing pretty closely. This is what he came up with:

“Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind”

Albert Einstein

Wrong post. My bad. :P

And V............we have evolved even further since then. Even Einstien evolved further than that comment. He believed personal religion was childlike. I tend to agree.

workin hard

V....

I can't believe God into existence and you can't disbelieve him out of existence. Heaven and Hell are either waiting for us or they are not. I choose to believe there is more to life than death.

I don't recall saying I was an Atheist... or that I believe consciousness terminates with the death of the body... (in fact, through a personal experience, I happen to KNOW that consciousness exists outside the body, and after death... HOWEVER, this was a PERSONAL experience, and I would not seek to convince others, or sway opinions based on that.) I simply reject the concept of Heaven and Hell, and pretty much everything organized religion has come up with in a feeble attempt to explain the unexplainable...

Going through this world with men raping innocent women, women in despair killing their family by driving their van into a lake, wars, $14T deficits, etc. And then you die and have worms crawl through your eye socket? That's not good enough for me . . . .

So your belief is based on a sense of entitlement... you believe there must be more, because less is not good enough for you... the universe must be fair and balanced, and reward the good and punish the bad... pretty flimsy argument...

By the way, a pretty intelligent gentleman looked into this creator thing pretty closely. This is what he came up with:

“Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind”
Albert Einstein

Hmmnn...
Whether he actually said that quote has been debated...
He are some Einstein quotes, some with references...
Read these, and I think you'll understand how he REALLY felt...

Einstein quotes on Religion and God:

"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."
(Albert Einstein, 1954, The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, Princeton University Press)

"I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings."
(Albert Einstein)

A man's ethical behaviour should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death.
(Albert Einstein, "Religion and Science", New York Times Magazine, 9 November 1930)

"I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the kind that we experience in ourselves. Neither can I nor would I want to conceive of an individual that survives his physical death; let feeble souls, from fear or absurd egoism, cherish such thoughts. I am satisfied with the mystery of the eternity of life and with the awareness and a glimpse of the marvelous structure of the existing world, together with the devoted striving to comprehend a portion, be it ever so tiny, of the Reason that manifests itself in nature."
(Albert Einstein, The World as I See It)

"The idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I am unable to take seriously".
(Albert Einstein, Letter to Hoffman and Dukas, 1946)

"I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our own being.
(Albert Einstein)

V... what I believe could be different from others, which I'm ok with. I'm certainly not going to try and convince someone that something doesn't exist especially if they truly believe it. Who are you to try and change that by demanding to be so arrogantly correct. and I'll answer your questions. Unicorns..considering the legends of unicorns are mainly based in older legend, maybe they did exist and they are now extinct. Look at the Narwal, a whale with a "horn" like tooth. Leprechans are nothing more than Irish Dwarfs with a penchant for money. And anyone that gives gifts or makes children happy at Christmas could easily have or go to a Santa's Workshop. Believing in these things does not make them a reality, but it inspires people to have hope that there is something in this world that they can truly believe in. The world is an ugly place and believing in something so pure and good can be a great thing.

So I encourage people to believe in whatever they want. No one, not even you, can, or will ever, prove that God, Satan, or the biblical stories are not truth, or at least based on some kind of truth. After all, our forefathers believed in God. Our governement still prints money that says "in God we trust" and our pledge allegience still says "one nation, under God" so, instead of trying to make people believe you, why can't you just let them believe. If you want to belive your own way, I'm all for that. I'm not, and no one should tell you to do differently.

It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it. (Albert Einstein, 1954)

Sophie: Are you Yaya from the yogart commercials? You are, aren't you?

V.... (#3.13)

“Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind”

Albert Einstein

http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/einstein/einsci.htm

You are right, Einstein was no theist. He tried to disprove the existence of a creator and thought he had it. Turns out he was wrong and later admitted it. That doesn't mean that he believes in a "personal God" or not, just that there was a Creator. If there is a Creator, why did he create?

Zorkmid

I'm certainly not going to try and convince someone that something doesn't exist especially if they truly believe it.

I think you would, and I'll explain in a minute...

Who are you to try and change that by demanding to be so arrogantly correct.

I don't demand to be arrogantly correct... I demand that the arrogance of others, who insist that a place like Hell definitely exists, and that our thoughts and actions should be altered to avoid going there... I demand that THEIR arrogance be at least called into question.

and I'll answer your questions. Unicorns..considering the legends of unicorns are mainly based in older legend, maybe they did exist and they are now extinct.

Wait... you just said since a legend was based on an older legend, so.. maybe they did exist... let's ignore the silliness of that statement, and get back to my point that you said I can't prove God DOESN'T exist... to which I said you can't prove unicorns, Leprechauns, and Santa's Workshop DON'T exist... (You can't prove a negative) ... Now, you saying they MAY HAVE existed, is neither an attempt to prove that they didn't, nor is equating those myths with a real personal God strengthening your case for a his existence

Leprechans are nothing more than Irish Dwarfs with a penchant for money.

How do you no they are nothing more than that? You know only what you've been told... same goes for religion.

And anyone that gives gifts or makes children happy at Christmas could easily have or go to a Santa's Workshop.

Now, now.... you know very well that I was talking about THE Santa's workshop at the North Pole....

Believing in these things does not make them a reality, but it inspires people to have hope that there is something in this world that they can truly believe in. The world is an ugly place and believing in something so pure and good can be a great thing.

But what if there actually IS more than what we see... and believing in an inaccurate version of what exists beyond our senses prevents us from reaching out and discovering the TRUE hidden realities... things Einstein only scratched the surface of...

So I encourage people to believe in whatever they want.

(Here's that point I said I would get back to earlier)... You are wrong... You DON'T encourage people to believe whatever they want... ONLY to believe in ACCEPTED myths/legends/faiths... If someone believed, REALLY believed he was an alien from another planet... or any other random delusional fantasy... you would call them mentally disturbed, and suggest professional help, and/or medication...

No one, not even you, can, or will ever, prove that God, Satan, or the biblical stories are not truth, or at least based on some kind of truth. After all, our forefathers believed in God.

Some were Christians... Many were Deists... some were (gasp) Atheists...
Jefferson was a Deist, believing in a creator but not in miracles or in the creator influencing, or even noticing the everyday lives of men... He said...

"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." - Thomas Jefferson

Our governement still prints money that says "in God we trust" and our pledge allegience still says "one nation, under God"

"in God we trust" was first printed on US currency in the 1950's (During the dark era of McCarthyism).... The pledge of allegiance was composed in 1892, but "one nation, under God" was not put int ther until 1954... again during that same era... These were not handed down from our founding fathers... but by our paranoid cousins...

so, instead of trying to make people believe you, why can't you just let them believe. If you want to belive your own way, I'm all for that. I'm not, and no one should tell you to do differently.

I'm not trying to get anyone to believe what I believe...
I'm trying to get people to question things that may not be true (delusions)
Which they base their entire existence on...
And try to influence cultural, and even worse, political dogma upon...
And reinforce with fear and threats...

Sorry... but it's my nature and my right to question with boldness as Jefferson said.

workin hard

You are right, Einstein was no theist. He tried to disprove the existence of a creator and thought he had it. Turns out he was wrong and later admitted it. That doesn't mean that he believes in a "personal God" or not, just that there was a Creator. If there is a Creator, why did he create?

My understanding is that Einstein was more into the idea of Pantheism... that the universe is God and God is the universe... we are part of the universe and therefore part of God... but not that there was a personal God that decided to create the universe and be worshipped for it, and monitor every beings personal behavior, and reward or punish them for it...

"Energy cannot be created or destroyed, it can only be changed from one form to another."

Einstein believed in the transfer of our energy, which I guess could be considered spirituality of some sort.

My comment about Leprechauns was just a silly stereyotype but who knows. Santa Clause was based on a real person, I don't know for a fact where he lived or moved to.

My biggest point was about how in every single newvine, when someone mentions "thank God" or "may God bless..." there's always someone there to try and make themselves look better by starting the "there is no God" arguement.

It's no different and no dumber than someone chiming in with a stupid comment about making an article about politics saying "it's the tea-baggers fault" or "blame Obama" crap.

Instead of trying to tell people that their beliefs are trivial, stupid, and not valid, why not just shut up and let them thank God for what they want. Like I've already said..people need that type of faith to get through whatever it is they are going through. Who care what anyone believes. A belief is not necessarily wrong.

And if someone wants to believe they are an alien, then my first assumption is not to assume they are mental. I may think they are joking, but who knows. Maybe they are from another world. Maybe they are mental, but I'm not going to demand that they believe something different.

I for one am a Christian and I believe what I grew up on. I also don't believe that homosexuality is something you are born with but if you want to be gay, then be gay. I believe in swift use of the death penalty. I believe abortion should be a choice. I believe that if you are going to be in this country you should speak English and if you are not legal then get out. I believe in life on other planets. I believe in many things. But if you don't believe in these things, that's ok. The downside to this, is that if everyone felt this way...there wouldn't fun back and forth conversations on newsvines.

@ Zorkmid

I would never start a theosophical debate, just because someone said "thank God"... I would, however, when someone starts telling me or someone else that they are going to hell... because to me, that's a form of threat.

I for one am a Christian and I believe what I grew up on.

I think maybe you really aren't... Let's find out...

I also don't believe that homosexuality is something you are born with but if you want to be gay, then be gay.

A debatable point... with a quasi-sympathetic recognition of others freedoms... so far so good.

I believe in swift use of the death penalty.

Whoops.... I don't know about that one... Thou shalt not kill, and judge not lest you be judged, and all that love your enemy stuff Jesus spoke about... You may be in violation of house rules there...

I believe abortion should be a choice.

Well you're definitely off the reservation with the church there... but that's a modern issue, no comments from Jesus regarding that to follow.

I believe that if you are going to be in this country you should speak English

That would be helpful... but not very enforceable...

and if you are not legal then get out.

Hmmmnnn... I think the main gist of Jesus's teachings if it could be boiled down to a few words would be Forgiveness, loving God, and loving your neighbor and treating him as you would have him treat you... So you're not really rocking the REAL Christian flag right now, as far as I can see...

I believe in life on other planets.

HERETIC! He's a witch! Burn him! Burn hi... whoops, sorry... wrong century...
Actually, I believe in it too... But when we meet them, will they say to us that if we want to receive their knowledge of how to live in peace, and feed, and shelter ourselves and each other effortlessly, then we HAVE TO learn to speak heir Klaatorian language, and had better not try to bring our illegal butts to their garden of Eden planet where all your dreams are materialized for you, or we will be deported back to our planet of violence and greed where we belong... (am I screwing up this analogy? I haven't had my coffee yet... brain's stuck in 3rd gear...)

I believe in many things.

As you should... as we all should...
Bu we should also not be afraid to question our beliefs... any of them.

I think in order to truly have any beliefs, you should question them, if only to understand them more clearly. And you are right, there are things that I believe that may contradict how I was taught, but who doesn't have that problem. We're all humans (as far as I know) so we have faults. I could justify why I believe in the things I do...but really? who wants to hear any of that. There are plenty of people on these newsvines that just love telling why they believe something and not once have I ever seen a reply that said "omg..you've made me see the light now I think as you do" type of thing.

Ha.... touche'

Yes, he engaged in strange behavior but he relieved suffering.

This Dr. did offer a very beneficial service for those who were suffering. Those who suffered knew they could not continue on in this life, with the pain and suffering they experienced, not to mention the anguish their families also suffered, while watching their loved one fade away. I'm sure there are other Dr's who will be available to perform the same service.

Lorene Solivan, they are in every Hospital and Nursing Home. It is called the "ole 3'0'clock A.M. stick". Then you get a phone call , as they tell you. Your whatever just passed away.

He really did do good things

I agree. Our society looks at death as an unnatural event. He saw it as the end to some people's pain and suffering.

I don't think what he did should be labeled as "assisted suicide." That brings too many negative connotations and not enough empathy towards the individual who wishes to end the suffering.

Why is he demonized for aiding suffering humans but a vet is viewed as compassionate in helping dying animals?

Are we that arrogant to view ourselves as more important and special than the average dog?

He was a decent human who knew we have the right to control our own choices in life and death.

Good post Boston! Could not have said it better myself.

Go Bruins!

You people just need to keep drinking the kool-aid if you believe in Dr Death and want to join him in hell!!

Pain relief is good but not to the point you die from it.

Gone through cancer(chemo,radiation,BMT) so don't tell me about suffering.

GOD/Jesus Christ was and always be my pain reliever in the end.

CapPun, since you're still with us, your cancer obviously wasn't terminal. So - not to downplay the pain and suffering you went through (and I'm sorry you DID have to go through it) but it's not quite the same as someone who is suffering and knows that there is no hope for him, and that he will never get better. If you know you're going to die anyhow, why prolong the suffering?

GOD/Jesus Christ was and always be my pain reliever in the end.

Fine--you hang on to that just don't force it on any one else. I think we are all capable of making our own decisions about how we want our lives to end.

You people just need to keep drinking the kool-aid if you believe in Dr Death and want to join him in hell!!

I find it strange that someone who would say this would also choose CAPITAL PUNISHMENT as their username.

I agreed with Dr. K., individual liberty should extend so far as the ability to end our own lives.

@Capital Punishment

You commit the offense of many "religious" people: Because you fervently believe something, you wish to force your beliefs on others. If "GOD/Jesus Christ was and always be my pain reliever in the end", well that's your choice. If you develop a terminal illness and choose to suffer in agony for months on end until you die, with your "god" as your sole comfort, that is your choice too.

However, please allow others to make their own choice as to what they will do if they are terminally ill. To do otherwise is self-righteous and arrogant.

They have the right to take their own life, but why put others in such a position by asking them to help them kill themself. If others have no problem with assisting, then I guess it's a different story. But getting caught getting a doctor to write a script for pills and you and others go and give the pills to the one wanting to die, (as someone commented earlier that they did just that) then you are looking at legal issues. And if the doctor knew what was going on that doctor would be in trouble too. So the one who refuses to help someone kill themself is selfish, but the one who who wants to die and asks someone to help them do it isn't selfish.

You people just need to keep drinking the kool-aid if you believe in Dr Death and want to join him in hell!!

Pain relief is good but not to the point you die from it.

Gone through cancer(chemo,radiation,BMT) so don't tell me about suffering.

GOD/Jesus Christ was and always be my pain reliever in the end.

and this from someone with the name "capital punishment" which you no doubt support, along with killing in war and "collateral damage" of civilians.

blatant hypocrisy, I have no respect for such deranged, hypocritical stances.

I do respect the views of those christians that are against the taking of a human life in any form, but if you support war and the death penalty, you are a hypocrite, no matter how you try to justify your position.

Capital Punishment,

You are the definition of a moronic religious hypocrite.

You said your god and jesus was your pain reliever....well good for you.....that is YOUR choice......don't force it on the more enlightened folks. You see a smarter person realizes the absurdity of your statement. Since your god is all powereful and knowing ....you fail to notice the obvious. That being.....that you believe your god created the illness and thus the suffering. Yet he then created the brains of humans to find remedies to cure and relieve the suffering. Rather counter productive huh?

You stick to your methods of pain relief and let others chose theirs. It's my right to decide how I want to live and die.

He did indeed help end people's suffering in a very humane manner. I applaud him. I have already told my family that if I am ever suffering from a terminal illness I would like to be overdosed with morphine to end the pain and go out with (from what I hear) a very good feeling.

The Lunatic: I agree with you. I think that when your quality of life really diminishes, you should be able to decide if it's time for you to end your own suffering.

I am happy for those who had Dr. Kevorkian's help in making their wishes to die happen, and feel badly for those who have lost a tremendous advocate in the "right to die with dignity" battle.

A lot of people just don't see the value in being able to die the way you want to, rather than when life robs you of the ability to do so. Two different things, altogether.

RIP Dr. Kevorkian.

I think if more people had to watch their loved ones dying, little by little, by diseases like lung cancer, they'd understand why a humane ending to their suffering is okay. I watched my Mom struggle with not only the disease, but the effects of the treatments. I can assure you that if I had known how to lovingly & humanely end her suffering I would have done so.

I agree....He allowed his patients to die with dignity and at their own hands. It is difficult for people who have never seen real suffering to understand the power of what he did for his patients.

I am so glad to see that most folks here agree that assisted suicide for terminally ill people is a good thing. Now we need to band together and make sure our states legislation reflects our opinions, I think it will surprise you how the laws are written.

My own mother died of cancer in 1996. After a few years, she refused all further chemotherapy treatments. When I asked why, she said "The purpose of medicine is to prolong life, not prolong the dying process." I was struck by the wisdom of her words and I think of her often when this issue comes up.

Our society drives people to the brink of suicide and thumbs them there with constant reminders of societal controls on individual lives. It is the ultimate form of domestic abuse.

With home life like that, why would we ever think problems of foriegn relations will ever be reached with this western civilization approach?

I agree one hundred percent. Society has no problem putting down an animal who is sufferring or in pain, but humans have to endoure it. "Dr. Death"... I dont think so... He was an angel, and I hope God welcomes him with open arms.

The same people that hate Dr. K are the people who disagree with gay marriage. It doesn't affect them but they don't like it because it interrupts their perfect norm. He saved people from having to undergo any more hardship than they already have to which were along the guidelines of what the person wanted. Good on him.

Alleviating human suffering for those who can't do it themselves is a noble cause, especially when death is inevitable.

I watched my father die a slow, painful death. I wouldn't wish that on my enemies.

The whole concept of suicide, let alone assisted suicide, is a complicated one. Having seriously contemplated suicide around 5 or 6 times in my life, I feel that I understand this issue enough to comment on it.

Thankfully I was never terminally ill. Existence has dealt my an "interesting" hand and it took about 2/3 of my 20's to make peace with things. In the end, I realized that I had created mental walls through an expectation of how my life could possibly turn out. Once I realized that I was limiting my own choices, I was able to work my way through things and become a well adjusted person. However the whole process is also a positive one since seriously contemplating suicide forces you to decide what you believe and what you have left to live for.

After the fact, I had some interesting discussions with my parents about the subject. It came down to one essential issue. Is suicide for youself more important than the legacy that you leave behind for the rest of the people that knew you? To be honest, that's a very hard question and the root of many people's issues with Dr K. What if the rest of the family doesn't agree with someone who wants to commit suicide? Is it all right to leave everyone else with a sense of guilty and regret as they mentally and emotionally beat themselves up for years (or possibly a lifetime) as they blame themselves for not seeing your situation and trying to help you?

My grandfather was in extreme pain before his hip surgery and has also contemplated suicide. As he later put it, he was willing to deal with the guilt of hurting his very large extended family since it still personally weighed less to him than the pain he was experiencing. The only reason that he didn't kill himself is it would have completely broken one of my cousins who looked to my grandfather as one of the only things that can help to keep him grounded.

Another family that is friends with my mother also had to deal with their own family members commiting suicide. From an outsider's perspective, I can see just how much emotional weight and baggage it's put on all of them. To be honest, they'll carry that around in some form or another for the rest of their life.

Dr K's willingness to help people in pain was also a willingness to inflict emotional damage on everyone else who knew the terminal patient. How can anyone truly judge something like that? On the one hand, he helped to let people die with some sense of dignity while ending their physical pain. Yet on the other hand, he also helped to emotionally scar many others who didn't know about the thoughts and decisions of these patients. What is "right" and what is "wrong" in that complicated mess? I just don't know. In the end, I guess it's all what you choose to believe. Do we still live for ourselves in the end, or do we live for others?

Wiser with Age, reading the article it seems that you are half right. While some of the family members of his patients blamed him for the death of their loved one, others were at peace with it. As you say, it depends on what we choose to believe.

Assisted suicide is a complicated subject that I usually try not to touch with a ten foot pole because there really is no right answer.

I have to agree. Isn't this issue really about quality of life? The people that Kevorkian helped were suffering, and there wasn't going to be an end to their suffering until they died. I think if I were in that position I might choose to end my life as well. Kevorkian gave them the ability to do this. It shouldn't be a crime. He helped them.

A few years ago I was in an ethics class in college where we discussed the Death with Dignity laws. There was a lot of debate, but in the end it was pretty hard to come to any other conclusion than that it was cruel to make these people suffer more.

ManFromNantucket:

"Assisted suicide is a complicated subject that I usually try not to touch with a ten foot pole because there really is no right answer."

I think that there is a right answer, but it depends on the patient: What is it that the dying patient wants? If he/she is in constant unremitting pain and wants help dying, then assisted suicide is the right answer. If he/she chooses (for religious or other reasons) to live in pain and die a slow and agonizing (but "natural") death, then that is his/her right, and, in that case, assisted suicide is NOT the right answer. So I don't see it as being all that complicated.

It's only as complicated as one would like to make it. Life ends period there is no use debating when or why is the right time. We all have the ability to make our own choices, that's about all we do have.

For the government to tell people who are terminally ill they can't end there life is about the most hypocritical thing I have ever heard in my life. Isn't government the same people who send perfectly healthy people to war to kill and be killed?

Bobby, you are correct. Frankly, I don't understand the premise of life being sacred at all. There's 6 billion of us, seems to me that we're doing ok and no longer on the endangered species list.

Realistically, the only lives any of us really hold sacred are our own lives. It is a selfish perspective and has allowed our species to propagate. If I'm ever put into the position of choosing between being death or death f**ked over i'll choose the former.

A quick question to any of you anti dignity peeps, if I decided to end my life tomorrow by asking a doctor to "put me down" how would it affect your lives tomorrow, or a week from tomorrow? Would it bother you that I chose to kill myself? If i did, would you even notice?

If someone wants to kill themselves, it's their choice. Truthfully, I don't care if someone kills themselves or hangs on suffering till the end. We are all going to die, so what.

Letting the gubmint or its elected trolls who can't even keep themselves within any morals that are normally agreed upon by common folks. They lie, cheat, steal, murder, etc and we're supposed to have them enact "LAWS" that we had no opportunity to participate in making and we're just supposed to bend over for them?

Some of you are pure, unadulterated sheeple.

But, I do see a lot of common sense and compassion in a lot of these comments and I have to say Ooh-rah and thanks for your support to keep personal choices personal.

Why is that? Just because he believed people have a right to make a certain choice, doesn't mean he himself might make that choice. Besides, his death was from a pulmonary embolism ... it doesn't sound like he was suffering long-term from a terminal and debilitating illness; if so, maybe he would have chosen that route.

I didn't see anything about his illness being terminal. Did you? He was a brilliant man with enough compassion to realize that allowing people the choice not to suffer in pain was something worth doing and fighting for. We are a civilized society and yet we are more humane to our pets than to humanity?! I just do not get it!

Justme...you are so right about people being more humane to pets than to their fellow man. I saw a cat food commercial the other day advertising teriyaki chicken...those cats eat better than most people in the world.

Why is it ironic? the only thing he did was listen to the patient needs and give the patient the alternative of ending his/her life in a rational and dignified way. Dr. Kervorkian was not terminal, he had not asked to end his life.

His death is a great loss for all of us. We are loosing not only a brilliant man, but a person that put us face to face with the hypocrisy of society and death.

Nothing was mentioned about his illness being terminal, in fact it mentions he was making plans to leave the hospital and begin rehabbing... i don't think he would have assisted suicide for a patient in that position.

Well Tim, I would say that is because he was NOT terminal. If you read the article you would see that it said just last night he was talking about going home and rehabilitation. He died when a blood clot from his leg broke free and traveled to his heart. The idea of ending your own life when the only life you have left is full of pain, not only for you but the ones that love you as well should be something that is completely up to you and no one else. It's should NEVERbe an issue as to whether it is illegal. It is YOUR life.

Old age is a long term terminal illness. didn't you know that?

Life is terminal.

To Sosad: I often think we Americans will be eating cat food if this recession gets any worse! A very old Uncle born in Europe used to say that "in Vienna at the end of WWI, there wasn't a cat, dog, bird or rat still alive!" And probably no pet food either.

The last time I had to put a pet down, he was a cat with severe congestive heart failure who had hung on with medication until he stopped eating. He was the alpha male and I cried like a baby as I stayed with him. But I did tell the vet that these animals have it better than we humans!

Old age is indeed terminal, but it is not necessarily unremittingly painful. There are many who live into their 90's or better who remain active and then die suddenly and peacefully in their sleep from a heart attack or such. Dr K was in that group. There was no reason for him to ask for assisted suicide.

That is un-called for. And by the way that is wishful thinking.

If a terminally ill person ever wanted to talk about peaceful exit, would any of the hospital staff or doctors listen to that persons wishes. JK put himself in harms way, to help the suffering. Now that was very noble of JK.

How many people in this world would jeopardise their medical licence, and on top of that willing to face convinction? and that did not happen just once, JK carried out his benevolent work fearlessly.

Thank you all for your responses I enjoyed reading all of them.

Tim, I have to say, I respect that you read all the responses, even though not all of them were phrased so kindly, and just took them in. Why has America lost it's abilty to agree to disagree with grace?

Absolutely - and there is a real double standard... I think that in hospice, this happens more than people are willing to admit. This is how my grandma died... she was terminal with breast cancer, she was going to die, it was certain... but she stayed alive for weeks just suffering and paralyzed and moaning all of the time... so my Mom and my grandfather begged the hospice nurses to DO something because it was just terrible watching her suffer, so they gave her a huge dose of morphine, and her heart stopped. It was humane. You don't see nurses and doctors like that on trial for doing the humane thing though. Letting someone suffer like that to be politically correct is absurd.

Besides, it is a choice - a choice that those people made themselves. What right does the government have to tell us what we can do with our own lives??

kaily-suicide is illegal. All forms. That's part of the issue here. Terminally ill people may be suffering with physical pain(and the psychological pain that often accompanies) but what about those individuals just suffering psychological pain? There is a thin line and the government wants it to remain more clear and less grey.

There is no dignity in death. There is dignity, however, in bearing the pain because you believe that life is a precious gift.

Sorry, but life is not a "precious gift" when your body is ravaged by cancer, you must hold your arms over your head to even gasp for a tiny breath and you moan uncontrollably in pain.

There's no damn "precious gift" to that.

RIP, Jack. So many respected your sacrifice.

Kaily, I can see your point, and it is so very hard to watch someone you love suffer like that.

However, in the long run, if we legalize or decriminalize assisted suicide, would we be able to truly ensure that the decision always was freely made by the patient?

Aside from any ethical issues, there are practical considerations that really should be made before codifying the legalization of assisted suicide.

Please consider what sort of pressure very ill people might fall under from insurance companies to make this 'choice' (as it might be the most cost-effective for the insurer) or lose coverage. How many people would be faced with the 'choice' of either dying of natural causes or leaving their families in horrendous debt from medical bills that the insurance company refused to cover (because it would only cover what it considered the most reasonable and customary treatment)?

What would happen to those whose family did NOT care as much as they should, and pressured the patient to make that decision?

What would happen to those who had harvestable organs and fell under any number of interested parties' pressure to make the 'choice' for assisted suicide?

It seems to me that the 'looking the other way' approach to this issue may indeed be the safest for future patients who, if the practice of assisted suicide became legal, would find themselves faced with only one practical 'choice'.

I have been mulling over this issue for many years, personally. Truly it is a difficult one, and one frought with many dangers.

[edited a few moments later for spell-checking -- sorry about that!]

@Brian,

Living in incurable agony is not a "precious gift". And many times dying is far more dignified than how some people are forced to live due to illness.

kaily-suicide is illegal. All forms.

I don't know where you live, but in the United States, suicide is not considered a crime in ANY state. There WERE laws at one time making it illegal, but not any more. I would like to think that it finally occurred to sane people that it would be impossible to enforce laws against suicide, since the "perpetrator" would be dead!

Vicki; It is illegal to attempt suicide, it is considered attempted murder in some states and it will land the perpetrator in a psychiatric hospital for a time. I know this from personal experience.

To Brian: I'd like to see your dignity under insufferable circumstances. You wouldn't be spouting such moral garbage. Most folks don't want to suffer as Christ did on the cross.

Mormiganian raised some excellent questions. I do not see any attempts yet to answer them.

I too share concerns that over time assisted suicide could become the normal, therefore the forced "choice." Do not write this off and just say it can't happen. Have you ever needed a medical treatment or medicine only to have to make do with a less effective treatment or drug due to the insurance company only being willing to pay for a cheaper treatment of drug? What is to prevent insurance from doing the same with choosing to only pay for assisted suicide rather than hospice care and pain relief for terminal illnesses?

And before you say I don't know about caring for the dying, I have been a caregiver for my dad from the time he had major strokes until he died of heart failure a few years later. I was by his side as he died. I watched my mother-in-law die of cancer. I helped my mother care for my grandmother as she was dying of cancer when I was just a teenager.

As for those who knock the religious for opposing assisted suicide, it is not because of a lack of faith that many religious people oppose assisted suicide. It is because of faith that God gives life and it is up to God to take life. It is leaving the control in God's hands.

Most religious people (and I use religious because not only Christians, but there are other religions who oppose it for the same reason) do not insist on extraordinary measures when the diagnosis is terminal, nor do they oppose pain relief measures. But they do see a difference between a pet dog or cat and a human being with a God-given soul.

@gmross

Since suicide is caused primarily by mental illness -- depression, and I have had 3 people in my life commit suicide so I am well acquainted with it, it seems to me it would cruel and unusual punishment to make something illegal that a person couldn't help because they were ill.

But of course, if you're Christian, everyone who commits suicide is now burning in hell...one major reason I'm not Christian anymore. The idiocy of Christian hell doctrine is idiocy.

Marie pearle, I feel for you, I really do, my sister commited suicide and her kids are still feeling the pain. I have been dealing with Manic Depression all of my life and I am under the care of good doctors, but I do know that the last time I attempted the police put me in the hospital until the doctors said I was stable, the reason they could keep me in the hospital was because the police had placed me there under suspicion of Attempted Murder and had signed paper work that I was a threat to myself and others. Not even my wife could get me out of the hospital.

a pulmonary emboli is not a clot to the heart but to the lungs. and regardless of what they said, it is not quick, painless, or easy. he basically suffocated slowly because he lost his ability to oxygenate fully but at a much reduced level. and he'd have known what was happening as it happened, especially since he was a doc.

From the article:

"The lawyer, Mayer Morganroth, said it appears Kevorkian suffered a pulmonary thrombosis when a blood clot from his leg broke free and lodged in his heart, according to the Detroit Free Press."

A PE can indeed travel and lodge itself into a heart vessel or even an interior chambers of the heart. Can be found on a CT scan or ultrasound. Usually quickly fatal as it was reported in the story.

Yes, his death was karmically correct: painless.

Second degree, I agree though, entirely unjust. In my eyes he was a very compassionate human being who will be looked on as such by history.

Glad, I would never wish terminal cancer on anyone, but in your case I am tempted to make an exception.

No, I have seen it first hand, up close & personal. You would not wish it on anyone!

I think of the cancer victims the Dr. assisted and it can only be seen as compassion.

to help others commit suicide.

They asked & I believe they had to prove that they had a terminal illness.

It's amazing how many comments came here in the Dr.'s favor so fast. Perhaps our society really agrees with the Dr's work?

He ended their suffering at their request, I don't exactly consider that to be morally corrupt.

Perhaps our society really agrees with the Dr's work?

Yes, many of us do. Why are we allowed to end our animal companions' suffering through euthanasia but not our human family members? What's the difference? Suffering is suffering, whether you're human or animal. As far as I'm concerned, those who are against allowing humans with terminal illness and with no chance of recovery to have the dignity of death on their own terms are being extremely selfish. They don't care how much agony the person may be in, they can't face their own pain of letting go. Allowing your loved one to end their suffering on their terms is indeed painful, but it's also compassionate. Heaven forbid I should ever contract a serious illness. But if I should, I want the choice to end my life on my terms. I live in Oregon where doctor-assisted suicide is legal, and I will be allowed to.

Our society says it is ok to kill someone who has been tried and convicted by a jury of peers for a horrible crime. A doctor is the one who sets up and administers the lethal chemical dosages that puts the person to death in a humane way so they don't suffer.

Some of our society seems it is wrong to allow a person who is dying to be allowed to die. They choose to ignore the pain, both mentally and physically, these people go through as their bodies succumb to the disease there is no cure for. They would rather watch the family go into financial ruin as the hospitals treat the disease there is no cure for and let the suffering continue.

I personally would rather let the people going through that decide if they want to let go to go out with some dignity and without pain and allow them with assistance from a doctor instead of them getting the strength up one day to pull the trigger on the handgun from their wheelchair.

BobB- our society does not believe in the death penalty. Some of our society does, please do not include those of us who live in states where that is illegal. 14 states and DC do not allow the death penalty. The UN has passed several resolutions trying to ban the death penalty worldwide(non-binding, though). So it is not accurate to say that our society believes in the death penalty and it bothers me when the death penalty is compared to assisted suicide or euthanasia.

ziegl Our federal government has access to the death penalty. In fact it is still possible to be put in front of a firing squad for treason in the United States. 36 states as well have the death penalty for various crimes. I am not saying I agree with it but to see assisted suicide being labeled as wrong while we allow the death penalty to happen is hypocrisy of the highest magnitude.

It should be up to the states to allow it or not and thankfully one state does. I know that I will be moving to Oklahoma if I ever come down with some disease with no cure and all I can do is pay for treatment after treatment while popping whatever pain pill they decide to put me on. I personally don't want to live a life where you can't really live life and enjoy it.

Reminds me of the Star Trek TNG episode "Half a Life" even if you're not a trekkie, you would appreciate this episode

Brenda-is the idea really to spare our animals or our wallets? Because many times animals are put down for treatable conditions that we would not hesitate to pursue for our family.

I know a girl who put all her cats down because they got fleas.

I put an elderly cat down after she had a stroke and had slipped into a coma. The vet gave her shot after shot and her blood pressure was so low and heart so weak, that what should have put her down in minutes lasted over an hour. When the vet said she would not come out of the coma and would die anyway within 48 hours, I should have taken her home to die in her own bed. Thinking back on it, if she would not be regaining consciousness, if she would not last more than one or two more days, maybe only hours, why even bother to put her to sleep? I think it was because if an animal is terminal, it is automatic for the vets to recommend euthanizing it, and the vet kept saying she had no way to know my cat was not suffering.

Heaven help us, the day euthansia becomes automatic for terminally il humans!

Lucy1

"I know a girl who put all her cats down because they got fleas."

Sorry, I have to call bulls**t on this one. I do not know of any veterinarian worth a damn that will/have/had to euthanize an animal for merely having a flea problem.

Same as all of those that consider "all life sacred" but defend wars or kill abortion practitioners. It is just the hypocrisy of our society

I do not agree with Dr. Kevorkian in taking a life, and I do not agree with abortion for the same reason, I do believe a person has a right to turn away medical treatment. I also could never understand how a society could support abortion, oppose the death penalty and condemn assisted suicide of the terminally ill. I also believe the doctor meant well in his mind and did it to help people, I hope God takes that into consideration when judgement comes.

I don't believe in suicide but I do believe in euthanasia. They are entirely different things. Kevorkian should not have been needed to assist in suicide because it should have been a patients right to have a Dr. euthanize a terminally ill patient that is in unstoppable pain. The feat our society hs about euthanasia is tht it will be misused by the medial world or even the State for that mattr. They are afraid at some point the decision wil be taken away form the patient and made by someone else. This concept needs to be changed in the minds of people. too many termianlly ill people suffer far too long because of these ideas.

Lee--but are you against war?

Assisted suicide..what do you think a morphine drip is on a terminally ill patient? The drip is contolled by the patient as needed. They overdose from the morphine before the terminal disease kills them. As a child, back in the 60's I watched both my parents die a slow painful death from cancer. Two years ago I watched my sister in law die from cancer hooked up to a morphine drip. Her death was so much more painless and peaceful than my parents. This man was just very upfront, courageous and honest about his actions and his empathy for human suffering.

Sparkly, that's only partially true. You hit the button for morphine, you get some, and then are locked out for a period of time (10 mins I think.) so you can't OD.

Tam, the amount of time can be adjusted as needed. It was for my sister in law as her conditioned worsened. I also have a very dear friend who is doctor and gave me this inside info when my sister in law was so sick.

Rick, it is just a short step from legal euthanasia to govt. mandated euthanasia. Might even take a few years but eventually accepted. One need not look far to see what our society has accepted now that was once taboo.

Onefortheroad

Sorry but your argument is plagued with "Government Paranoia"...

One thing can be legal and never be government mandated. The clearest example is the Contraceptive Pill, back in the 50's and 60's the same argument was made... "The Government is going to force us to take The Pill...!!!!!" Was anybody "Forced" to take the pill?

Same happened with Abortion and the same will happen with the right to a dignified death. He/She who wants it and believes it is right, will choose to have it... and it is a PERSONAL decision.

The only way these things become "mandatory" is with totalitarian states (i.e. China's "One Child Policy", or Ceauceascu's "Total Fertility").

In our system the only way euthanasia will become mandatory will be when Insurance Companies realize it is cheaper to kill people than to try to cure them...

You may be right or you may not. Just throwing it out there. If you trust our govt. that much you are ahead of me.

Besides it was hardly an argument. Just more of an observation. There are already enough arguments on here to last us a lifetime. :)

Yeah, he definitely was a bit of a nutcase. Very intense, in your face, and rude (holy crap rude!). I think it may have just been a form of "Bitter Old Man Syndrome" lol.

Although what he stood for was genuine and good. I can't help but wonder if he had a more likeable personality (or if he didn't insist on being his own defense) if the debate would have swung in his favor.

Gramma,

"Peacefully and on her terms" was exactly what JFK, jr said about the way his mother died. I have always suspected that this meant assisted suicide. Interesting.

Sparklystar my friend!! How are you?

Interesting post. I remember JFK Jr saying that about his mother but never considered it as a veiled assisted suicide comment. Very interesting indeed!!!!

Hope all is well with you

HI Nikita!!! I am fine. Hope all is well with you too!

>". . . .since where there is life there is always still hope."

I'm sorry, that's bumper-sticker philosophy. Sounds really good, but is logically flawed. The 'Death Rate' has never changed in all of human history. It's still 100%.

All life will end, eventually. No matter what. "Where there is life, there will be death." is the real bumper sticker. There is only temporary hope that this thing won't get you, today. The rest is fallicy.

Nobody's getting out of this alive, folks. Death isn't tragedy, it's normal and necessary. Needless suffering, is neither.

Bumper sticker philosophy??? Where did that come from??? I'm glad that research and medicine doesn't subscribe to YOUR philosophy or the entire human race really would be sitting in the stone ages today. If this is how you feel, what are you waiting for???

Very well put...

Well, I think he's right about the 'if there is life there is hope' being bumper sticker philosophy. It sounds nice but is not realistic, sometimes there truly is no hope for a normal life.

On the other hand I agree that a fatalistic attitude is not condusive to progress.

Truth is in the middle >>><<<

I've worked in hospitals for many years and most of it in the ICU's. It is impossible to fathom the amount of people walking around that "should be dead" that are not only living but have returned to productive, normal lives. My husband being one of them. Let us not be in a hurry to pull the plug or to "allow nature to take it's course". The latest cure for some horrible life altering disease could be just around the corner. The leaps and bounds in the last 20 years - let alone the last 50 - in medicine are mind boggling.

I appreciate what you are saying Shuklack but I will stand by my original post. Please note my respect for Dr. Kevorkian's work in that post, as well.

You have to be a little bit honest, it was partly about ole 'Dr. Jack' too. Else why all the grandstanding and posing with tubes and vials of "liquid" for the TV and media cameras. If it was really all about the suffering souls, then he would have been well served to ply his trade in anonymity and maybe have eased a lot more lives into the hereafter. Just sayin.

onefortheroad, If he had assisted behind closed doors he would have been labeled just another mass murderer like Bundy or Dahmer not as a caring DR. As for posing with his contraption it showed the world the final step was being taken out of his hands and put it the hands of the suffering.

You make is sound like he was just smarter than Bundy and Dahmer, not necessarily more merciful. He was so clever he devised his own defense as he was taking the lives.

Well put.

And our religious do gooders have to live with putting him in jail for 8 years. I wouldn't want that burden.

"Terrible religious do-gooders." All they ever did was build hospitals, hospices, orphanages, schools, colleges, and homeless shelters. I'm disappointed by people who fail to realize that between Catholics and Protestants, nearly all of these institutions were created and yet we do-gooders somehow manage to be labeled compassionless. Please remember that the majority of us religious do-gooders live out our compassion through financial donations and volunteerism. For my family, 15% of our income is devoted to the suffering and the poor. I know many other religious do-gooders who do the same.

There are many religious people who understand the compassion Jack had towards suffering patients. We applaud his compassion though some (who must be heard) believe his application of suicide is unnecessary for many (if not most) people. BUT there is great need for grace and compassion until you're in the shoes of one who suffers, and Jack understood that. For that I applaud him.

Until a person goes through the suffering, fear and pain of a medical condition (as I have with a disabling degenerative condition), you won't understand why some see death as a blessing to suffering. I'm fortunate to have chosen to patiently endure many surgeries so that I'm now able to be the adoptive father to 4 children. It wasn't easy to keep on going and I understand why some people simply aren't able to keep on going—it can be terrifying to persevere. But please don't blame Jack's arrest on religious do-gooders. It's not a fair and accurate label.