Euthanasia: A right may become a responsibility
I started with good intentions of starting something tonight, you know how it goes, “This time I’ll do the one that sets the blogsphere alight.” Then I started looking for some stuff, and found some other stuff, got interested in it and everything went out the window.
But all is not lost, I found something interesting and thought provoking enough to bring it to your attention. I congratulate the people at Astrolobe for this article, the last part of which is ‘borrowed’ and published here.
Advocates of euthanasia frequently talk of a right to die. They frame their arguments along the lines that someone has the right to choose whether or not they should live and that only the individual has the right to make such a decision. Dying with dignity, is another term.
One concern with this — aside from the religious arguments — is that there are very powerful incentives for young people to want the elderly to die. For example, there is that most basic human impulse of greed and a selfish dislike of curtailing one’s own ambitions to care for the old and decrepit. One can see something of this impulse in the phenomena of ‘granny dumping’ where adult children, fed up with caring for an adult relative, decide to dump them at a hospital, shopping centre or other public place.
So even though euthanasia will begin as procedure for only the most extreme of circumstances, human nature may lead assisted suicide down the same path as abortion and caesarian births before it. Just as abortion is now seen by some as a form of contraceptive, and women can make use of caesarians as a means of meeting cutoff dates for exclusive schools or qualifying for government handouts, it is not inconceivable that, given human nature, the bar for euthanasia may be substantially lowered from where we imagine it to be today.
The right to die might then become a responsibility. Is it not possible that were euthanasia legalised, that elderly parents would find themselves under pressure from their children to be “responsible” and “die with dignity” rather than continue to squander their inheritance on the medical and other expenses that often accompany one’s twilight years. Such parents could be seen as selfish and irresponsible in their obstinate refusal to make way for the succeeding generation.
One concern with this — aside from the religious arguments — is that there are very powerful incentives for young people to want the elderly to die. For example, there is that most basic human impulse of greed and a selfish dislike of curtailing one’s own ambitions to care for the old and decrepit. One can see something of this impulse in the phenomena of ‘granny dumping’ where adult children, fed up with caring for an adult relative, decide to dump them at a hospital, shopping centre or other public place.
So even though euthanasia will begin as procedure for only the most extreme of circumstances, human nature may lead assisted suicide down the same path as abortion and caesarian births before it. Just as abortion is now seen by some as a form of contraceptive, and women can make use of caesarians as a means of meeting cutoff dates for exclusive schools or qualifying for government handouts, it is not inconceivable that, given human nature, the bar for euthanasia may be substantially lowered from where we imagine it to be today.
The right to die might then become a responsibility. Is it not possible that were euthanasia legalised, that elderly parents would find themselves under pressure from their children to be “responsible” and “die with dignity” rather than continue to squander their inheritance on the medical and other expenses that often accompany one’s twilight years. Such parents could be seen as selfish and irresponsible in their obstinate refusal to make way for the succeeding generation.
Is it not possible that were euthanasia legalised, that elderly parents would find themselves under pressure from their children to be “responsible” and “die with dignity” rather than continue to squander their inheritance on the medical and other expenses that often accompany one’s twilight years.
ReplyDeleteThis is collectivist rubbish. Yes, I'm sure this might happen, just like I'm sure someone will kill their parents for money at some stage throughout 2008. But so what? I know if I ever felt any pressure from my adult children to do this the first thing I'd do is get them out of the will and then I'd never speak to the little shits again.
Collectivist thinking works along the delusional lines of thought like 'my kids want me to die to collect my assets and so they don't feel obligated to look after me. The thought that my children are treating me this way is too much for me to bear, so I need to do everything in my power to ensure that I'm not confronted by the fact that my kids are little turds who don't care for me.'
Having children is fraught with the danger they may not turn out to be people you respect. That's just a simple fact that all parents face. The rewards of parenthood are great and the risks are not exactly negligible. The key every parent needs to remember is that come somewhere around 18 to 21 years, the child is their own person and needs to be judged accordingly. You can't destroy yourself by throwing all your values out the window just because they are your children. I am my own person and I own my own life, including the right to end when and how I choose. I also own all the assets I've earned, and they will got to whom I leave them. My children will know by the time they are adults that when that time comes they will be judged on their own merits. There is nothing more I want than to love them all my life and make their own adventure into life more enjoyable and easier. My love is as close to unconditional as a rational person can be. But if they fail to be good human beings than this deal is off. (BTW, I can assure you that I won't be a burden on my family, but at the same time, if I manage to get my sons to good schools, get them through uni, help them set up their lives, and they choose to maintain a relationship with me then it's a two way street! If I need a bit of assistance then there is some expectation to help me out. That's not to say at 18 they can't cut their ties if they feel that's best. It'd hurt, but I'd respect their decision as they are their own person).
As an aside, I had an interesting conversation a few years back with an American fellow I was working with. He said he liked a system of minimal welfare, because if you treated your kids well then you could expect them to look after you in your old age. At the same time if you didn't do your parental duty you could expect to not have that care. I argued this wasn't always the case, and he agreed, but said he thought it was a good rule of thumb. I pretty much agreed with that.