Euthanasia...

[Eggsnham]

A couple days ago, my cat, whom I loved dearly, fell very sick, very fast. The emergency animal clinic we took her to deduced that it was either a Gastro-intestinal lymphoma, or a blood infection which had been misdiagnosed by the vets we took her to about a month earlier. They told us that they could do some tests to find exactly what it was, but that there was no guarantee that they would be able to treat it, and that she was already terminally ill.

So, my mom and I reluctantly decided to put her to sleep, she was only four.

Her absence has been hugely difficult for me to cope with, but it's made me think about euthanasia, and whether it's as humane as many people make it out to be.

There's no doubt that she was suffering, and that it would have been selfish of me to try and keep her alive when she was so close to a much more painful death, but at the same time, who are we to say that she wanted to die?

We don't do that to other humans, even when they do request it.

What makes it different for other species? Why do we assume that a cat or dog with a terminal illness would be happier to die sooner, but that a human with a terminal illness, would be happier to die later?

 

[DANEgerous]

Speaking for humans I have no idea why it is illegal for things like assisted suicide i have always found that rather absurd and even more absurd is the fact that suicide is technically illegal in many places it just does not have a punishable party as they are now dead.

Animals are hard to say, who know if they wan to to tough it out through the pain to be honest i find it near impossible to say in that I had to live a painful life or lost most mental function I would rather just be killed and i just feel as if most animals naturally would think the same.

 

[Chanel Tompkins]

With humans...well, I have my religious convictions for that, god decides when human life ends,blahblahblahhabhab. Even though I certainly feel sympathetic toward those who wish they could end it faster, and try to comfort them as well as I can.
As for animals...they don't have the ability to commit suicide, except in the very most slow and painful ways possible. Yeah, call me a bit hypocritical if you wish, but I think it's alright to help them along if they're clearly suffering and there's not even the slightest hope for them to get better.

 

[Twilight_guy]

Because Animals lack high brain functions. They don't think or feel in the same way we do (mostly). An animal doesn't have an opinion on "I want to die" it has instincts to tell it not to jump into a predator's mouth and it feels pain but it does not have the capacity to really say what suicide is. (At least for dogs and cats, dolphins keep trying to screw up the logic). You have the right to make that decision because you are smarter. If you don't think that justifies humanity deciding on putting animals down then go join the ASPCA or a similar animal's rights group.

 

[Eggsnham]

Because Animals lack high brain functions. They don't think or feel in the same way we do (mostly). An animal doesn't have an opinion on "I want to die" it has instincts to tell it not to jump into a predator's mouth and it feels pain but it does not have the capacity to really say what suicide is. (At least for dogs and cats, dolphins keep trying to screw up the logic). You have the right to make that decision because you are smarter. If you don't think that justifies humanity deciding on putting animals down then go join the ASPCA or a similar animal's rights group.

So basically, what you're trying to say is:

"Hi, random species of non-human animal, I'm more intelligent than you. This is why I'm going to end your life regardless of whether or not you want your life to end. By the way, if you're human and don't agree with this logic, then you're stupid!"

I'm sorry, but I find that a bit arrogant. No offense, of course, but seriously...

 

[him over there]

Probably because animals don't have the capacity to appreciate life.

Then again I know plenty of humans who don't either.

 

[Heronblade]

What makes it different for other species? Why do we assume that a cat or dog with a terminal illness would be happier to die sooner, but that a human with a terminal illness, would be happier to die later?

People don't want to be responsible for death, they especially don't want to feel like they are responsible for the death of a person they care for. While understandable, the sentiment is ultimately selfish. That, on top of the age old religion based taboos on suicide that even the atheists among us are influenced by...

Frankly, there shouldn't be a difference. If death is inevitable, and the end will be torturous, a clean death is among the best actions to take if the patient either gives consent or will be incapable of denying it for the rest of their life, whether that patient is human or not. Frankly, denying such release under such circumstances is in my opinion cruel and inhumane.

 

[backinthepresentfuture]

needs to be mandatory in humans...

 

[Eggsnham]

Because Animals lack high brain functions. They don't think or feel in the same way we do (mostly). An animal doesn't have an opinion on "I want to die" it has instincts to tell it not to jump into a predator's mouth and it feels pain but it does not have the capacity to really say what suicide is. (At least for dogs and cats, dolphins keep trying to screw up the logic). You have the right to make that decision because you are smarter. If you don't think that justifies humanity deciding on putting animals down then go join the ASPCA or a similar animal's rights group.

So basically, what you're trying to say is:

"Hi, random species of non-human animal, I'm more intelligent than you. This is why I'm going to end your life regardless of whether or not you want your life to end. By the way, if you're human and don't agree with this logic, then you're stupid!"

I'm sorry, but I find that a bit arrogant. No offense, of course, but seriously...

you know what is even more arrogant... you taking showers and using anti-bacterial cleaners... I mean just because bacteria and virus aren't as smart as you you're going to end their life regardless of whether or not they want their life to end... it's horrible

You might have a point if you weren't talking about single celled organisms...

Hell, you would have made a decent point if you'd used small insects as an example instead.

All I'm saying is that it's bad logic to believe that being a notch higher on the evolutionary scale means that you have the right to go decide how other species should live.

It's one thing to use evolutionary advantages to get ahead, but it's another thing completely when you try to dictate how and when another living thing should die, and use your species' status as justification.

 

[him over there]

Because Animals lack high brain functions. They don't think or feel in the same way we do (mostly). An animal doesn't have an opinion on "I want to die" it has instincts to tell it not to jump into a predator's mouth and it feels pain but it does not have the capacity to really say what suicide is. (At least for dogs and cats, dolphins keep trying to screw up the logic). You have the right to make that decision because you are smarter. If you don't think that justifies humanity deciding on putting animals down then go join the ASPCA or a similar animal's rights group.

So basically, what you're trying to say is:

"Hi, random species of non-human animal, I'm more intelligent than you. This is why I'm going to end your life regardless of whether or not you want your life to end. By the way, if you're human and don't agree with this logic, then you're stupid!"

I'm sorry, but I find that a bit arrogant. No offense, of course, but seriously...

you know what is even more arrogant... you taking showers and using anti-bacterial cleaners... I mean just because bacteria and virus aren't as smart as you you're going to end their life regardless of whether or not they want their life to end... it's horrible

You might have a point if you weren't talking about single celled organisms...

Hell, you would have made a decent point if you'd used small insects as an example instead.

All I'm saying is that it's bad logic to believe that being a notch higher on the evolutionary scale means that you have the right to go decide how other species should live.

It's one thing to use evolutionary advantages to get ahead, but it's another thing completely when you try to dictate how and when another living thing should die, and use your species' status as justification.

Oh course it is sort of a big deal when that one notch higher is what crosses the line from organism dictated by instincts that does not even know what life is, essentially making its own life meaningless to sapient creature with the capacity to question and explore the profound nature of life and everything it entails so it appreciates, thinks and feels.

 

[Eggsnham]

Because Animals lack high brain functions. They don't think or feel in the same way we do (mostly). An animal doesn't have an opinion on "I want to die" it has instincts to tell it not to jump into a predator's mouth and it feels pain but it does not have the capacity to really say what suicide is. (At least for dogs and cats, dolphins keep trying to screw up the logic). You have the right to make that decision because you are smarter. If you don't think that justifies humanity deciding on putting animals down then go join the ASPCA or a similar animal's rights group.

So basically, what you're trying to say is:

"Hi, random species of non-human animal, I'm more intelligent than you. This is why I'm going to end your life regardless of whether or not you want your life to end. By the way, if you're human and don't agree with this logic, then you're stupid!"

I'm sorry, but I find that a bit arrogant. No offense, of course, but seriously...

you know what is even more arrogant... you taking showers and using anti-bacterial cleaners... I mean just because bacteria and virus aren't as smart as you you're going to end their life regardless of whether or not they want their life to end... it's horrible

You might have a point if you weren't talking about single celled organisms...

Hell, you would have made a decent point if you'd used small insects as an example instead.

All I'm saying is that it's bad logic to believe that being a notch higher on the evolutionary scale means that you have the right to go decide how other species should live.

It's one thing to use evolutionary advantages to get ahead, but it's another thing completely when you try to dictate how and when another living thing should die, and use your species' status as justification.

Oh course it is sort of a big deal when that one notch higher is what crosses the line from organism dictated by instincts that does not even know what life is, essentially making its own life meaningless to sapient creature with the capacity to question and explore the profound nature of life and everything it entails so it appreciates, thinks and feels.

You're right, humans have a deeper understanding of things than most other animals, this gives us every right to do what we please with them

Because Animals lack high brain functions. They don't think or feel in the same way we do (mostly). An animal doesn't have an opinion on "I want to die" it has instincts to tell it not to jump into a predator's mouth and it feels pain but it does not have the capacity to really say what suicide is. (At least for dogs and cats, dolphins keep trying to screw up the logic). You have the right to make that decision because you are smarter. If you don't think that justifies humanity deciding on putting animals down then go join the ASPCA or a similar animal's rights group.

So basically, what you're trying to say is:

"Hi, random species of non-human animal, I'm more intelligent than you. This is why I'm going to end your life regardless of whether or not you want your life to end. By the way, if you're human and don't agree with this logic, then you're stupid!"

I'm sorry, but I find that a bit arrogant. No offense, of course, but seriously...

you know what is even more arrogant... you taking showers and using anti-bacterial cleaners... I mean just because bacteria and virus aren't as smart as you you're going to end their life regardless of whether or not they want their life to end... it's horrible

You might have a point if you weren't talking about single celled organisms...

Hell, you would have made a decent point if you'd used small insects as an example instead.

All I'm saying is that it's bad logic to believe that being a notch higher on the evolutionary scale means that you have the right to go decide how other species should live.

It's one thing to use evolutionary advantages to get ahead, but it's another thing completely when you try to dictate how and when another living thing should die, and use your species' status as justification.

umm deciding how other species should live or die IS how we got an evolutionary notch higher than them and pretty much how we built our entire civilization...

but hey whatever weird illogical morals and reasoning makes you think it's not ok to kill lesser non-sapient species doesn't matter to me... if you don't want to do it then just don't... but it's bad logic to claim a difference between killing small insects and bacteria then turn around and claim that is different than between multi-celled sapients and non-sapients... it's all relative on the scale

I, personally, have no problem with using my evolutionary status to justify choosing what I feel is best for lesser species... same as I have no problem as an intelligent adult choosing what is best for a small child... hell I have no problem using the fact i'm more powerful or smarter than another full adult human as an excuse to force them to do what I feel is best... hell it's how humans have ALWAYS done it

Alright, you're probably right.

I'm letting my judgement become clouded by my grief over my cat.

I don't necessarily agree with euthanasia, but I've been acting like a bit of an idiot in this thread. Sorry.

I'm going to bed now.

 

[Twilight_guy]

Because Animals lack high brain functions. They don't think or feel in the same way we do (mostly). An animal doesn't have an opinion on "I want to die" it has instincts to tell it not to jump into a predator's mouth and it feels pain but it does not have the capacity to really say what suicide is. (At least for dogs and cats, dolphins keep trying to screw up the logic). You have the right to make that decision because you are smarter. If you don't think that justifies humanity deciding on putting animals down then go join the ASPCA or a similar animal's rights group.

So basically, what you're trying to say is:

"Hi, random species of non-human animal, I'm more intelligent than you. This is why I'm going to end your life regardless of whether or not you want your life to end. By the way, if you're human and don't agree with this logic, then you're stupid!"

I'm sorry, but I find that a bit arrogant. No offense, of course, but seriously...

You wanted the logic, I gave you the logic. Animals don't understand such intricate concepts and we are simply personifying complex ideas onto them. Dogs are simple, simpler then people. That gives us some measure of rights to make these decisions. Whether or not you want to follow that logic is your own business, I personally have a negotiated view of the whole thing, but that's the logic behind euthanasia. Obviously not everyone thinks animals should be put down so not everyone agrees with the logic here.