At one point in my life I was opposed to doctor assisted suicide. But, like medical marijuana, my views have changed to see benefits on this topic.

Will the state of Oklahoma ever been in favor of Dr assisted suicide? I think it's possible.

I'd like to see it approved, but I don't recall ever seeing any polls reflecting Oklahomans' views on it. Most people I associate with have been for it in my conversations with them.

You also have to look at it from the other side. There may not be that many doctors willing to assist in this procedure. So many who wish to be doctors do so from a desire to help people and save lives, not help them die.

You also have to look at it from the other side. There may not be that many doctors willing to assist in this procedure. So many who wish to be doctors do so from a desire to help people and save lives, not help them die.
Which is fine. But those who are willing to help, should be allowed to. Merely extending someone's life is not equivalent to saving it, if that makes sense (IMO of course).

I would be in favor of a law allowing medically assisted suicide. When I was told I was terminal (cancer had spread to my heart and lungs) I told my family I would not allow myself to simply wither away and at some point I’d take my own life. The worst part about that was realizing I’d have to do it all on my own or suffer greatly. Fortunately that diagnosis turned out to be wrong. Regardless it opened my eyes to the subject.

I would be in favor of a law allowing medically assisted suicide. When I was told I was terminal (cancer had spread to my heart and lungs) I told my family I would not allow myself to simply wither away and at some point I’d take my own life. The worst part about that was realizing I’d have to do it all on my own or suffer greatly. Fortunately that diagnosis turned out to be wrong. Regardless it opened my eyes to the subject.

The only issue is that death is permanent. You can't come back from it. Only one person has. If you had decided to have assisted suicide due to your diagnosis, you would be dead. Even though you eventually found out it was wrong. That is my issue with it. I am not necessarily against it, though. Just that it should be approached with caution.

The only issue is that death is permanent. You can't come back from it. Only one person has. If you had decided to have assisted suicide due to your diagnosis, you would be dead. Even though you eventually found out it was wrong. That is my issue with it. I am not necessarily against it, though. Just that it should be approached with caution.

Is there anyone on this forum who is under the impression that death is anything less than permanent?

Your "only issue" with assisted suicide is that the result is permanent? Wouldn't that be like saying "my only issue with the death penalty is that it results in death"? I don't think it's possible to debate a topic with someone who rejects the entire premise of the action.

The entire point of suicide would be the permanency of it. The "assisted" part simply ensures it's humane.

Assisted suicide has a placed in our society and its time society was more willing to discuss it openly and give it true consideration.

I would be in favor of a law allowing medically assisted suicide. When I was told I was terminal (cancer had spread to my heart and lungs) I told my family I would not allow myself to simply wither away and at some point I’d take my own life. The worst part about that was realizing I’d have to do it all on my own or suffer greatly. Fortunately that diagnosis turned out to be wrong. Regardless it opened my eyes to the subject.

Wow! l can't imgine the rollercoaster of emotions and thoughts you and your family went through. I'm so sorry you had to go through that.

You are, of course, correct. I never gave it much thought until l watched my Brother wither away with agonizing stomach cancer in the past year. The only alternative was to be fed more and more pain killers. He stated time and time again how he wished he could just get his death over with on his own terms instead of having to just waste away to a point where he would lose his dignity and endure never-ending pain.

l think maybe the proper process might be to not only allow willing doctors to assist, but also have Registered and medically trained person's allowed - with Doctors approval, of course.

It's certainly not a topic to be taken lightly. But, after my own personal experience and meeting so many people at the cancer center who were indeed terminal - I think it's a legitimate option for those who have no other alternative than to endure unimaginable pain and create a heart wrenching burden upon others emotionally, physically and financially.

We are okay with euthanizing pets to end their suffering but when it comes to ending the suffering of a human it is taboo. We don’t even have the permission of our pet, we just assume when they are ready. Yet a human in pain can say “I am ready for this pain to end and no longer want to live in it” and we say “too bad, you have to live until your body gives in”.

The only things that will really need to be looked at is insurance and inheritance. Many don’t allow benefits in the event of suicice; so a separate definition should be created that protects those who would lose out their insurance benefits and inheritance (some pension/retirement plans forfeit funds if suicide is executed).

...The only things that will really need to be looked at is insurance and inheritance. Many don’t allow benefits in the event of suicice; ...

Can't speak for anything other than life insurance, but it's pretty standard to (by contract) payout in the event of suicide as long as you've had the policy for a certain period of time (something like 2-3 years in most cases).

The only issue is that death is permanent. You can't come back from it. Only one person has. If you had decided to have assisted suicide due to your diagnosis, you would be dead. Even though you eventually found out it was wrong. That is my issue with it. I am not necessarily against it, though. Just that it should be approached with caution.

I would assume that Brian would have waited until evidence (tests, etc.) confirmed the cancer had spread and he was truly terminal, according to multiple opinions of medical professionals, before he opted for assisted suicide. I don't believe there's anybody that would go straight to the option of assisted suicide soon after a diagnosis of terminality, that's not how it works....

I see no reason why the issue is in the hands of government. This should be between people and their doctors and their families. If someone doesn't agree then they don't have to do it, but if someone wants to then why should my beliefs hinder their freedom?

I see no reason why the issue is in the hands of government. This should be between people and their doctors and their families. If someone doesn't agree then they don't have to do it, but if someone wants to then why should my beliefs hinder their freedom?

Suicide isn't against the law in Oklahoma, so somebody needs to invent suicide kits, assuming the government wouldn't step in and ban sales of them.

As for assisted suicide laws, the Oklahoma Christian Right are very much against it. Oklahoma State Representative Steve Kouplen (D-Beggs) introduced on January 18, 2018 a bill (HB 2585) that would order a referendum on the Oklahoma Death with Dignity Act. The bill got nowhere. So if Oklahomans want such a law they will have to go through the petition process to get it on the ballot.

I argued this case years ago for Moot Court. The opposing view (not necessarily mine) is that the elderly and infirmed need the governments protection against family members that may be more interested in the inheritance or are tired of providing care versus what is really in the best interest of the sufferer

I argued this case years ago for Moot Court. The opposing view (not necessarily mine) is that the elderly and infirmed need the governments protection against family members that may be more interested in the inheritance or are tired of providing care versus what is really in the best interest of the sufferer

What is the legal difference in assisted suicide versus deciding to remove life support?

What is the legal difference in assisted suicide versus deciding to remove life support?

Passive versus active? Removing life support doesn't actively kill them...it just lets the body do what it was going to do where assisted suicide is forcing the body to die. That is a really good question Catch and that is my best legal "guess",

After going through the last 6 months while my Dad was getting eaten up by Dementia with Lewy Bodies, I am for this. It was a 2 stage death. I lost the Man I knew, slowly followed by the Body that use to be him. His last month was pure hell. He was starving , always scared and slipped into a coma his last few days. This was a Man who, like a of young men of that generation, lied about his age to fight against the enemies of this Nation. WWII, Korean War and Viet Nam. Then he was OKCPD for 23 years. I am still upset about how he had to die. We can end the suffering of our Pets, but have to let Family suffer.

Sorry for your loss, Mel. Just now dealing with the declining health of my own parents and while I still hope they both manage another 20 years, that’s a bit fantastical on my part. I’m lucky enough to have them both approaching 80. These days I can much more easily imagine myself in a situation like you describe, and can only hope that when the time comes it is merciful.

Thank you Urbanized. Apologies for blurting out like that. It's still too fresh and hit a nerve.

I argued this case years ago for Moot Court. The opposing view (not necessarily mine) is that the elderly and infirmed need the governments protection against family members that may be more interested in the inheritance or are tired of providing care versus what is really in the best interest of the sufferer

You do end up with a pretty serious line drawing problem. I think most of us are probably on-board with allowing it for individuals with terminal diagnoses, provided that the individual in each case has provided clear consent in making that choice..

But should we make it available for people who are simply depressed? Or people who are disappointed with the results of a cosmetic medical procedure? Those seem like much more difficult questions, and they must be answered if we would ask doctors to perform a procedure that runs directly counter to their oath.

You do end up with a pretty serious line drawing problem. I think most of us are probably on-board with allowing it for individuals with terminal diagnoses, provided that the individual in each case has provided clear consent in making that choice..

But should we make it available for people who are simply depressed? Or people who are disappointed with the results of a cosmetic medical procedure? Those seem like much more difficult questions, and they must be answered if we would ask doctors to perform a procedure that runs directly counter to their oath.
Don't be offended by me asking this as I do not mean it confrontationally at all, but why must the questions be answered? If a person doesn't want to go on living, what business is it of anyone else to tell them otherwise? Again, I'm just trying to better understand your thoughts.

I hate to be light hearted given the subject but every time I see this thread title I think it’s the name of a punk metal band.

I hate to be light hearted given the subject but every time I see this thread title I think it’s the name of a punk metal band.

There was an '80s punk band called Youth in Asia

Perhaps they could make oath that covers ending suffering and handling end of life situations better. Nobody should be starved and live in pain because they can not communicate. Not everyone is lucid when close to death. My Dad was allowed to die at home. After being doped up and starved at a Hospital that was supposed to have good senior care. He had severe Sundowner Syndrome and they would keep him doped up. My Mom has a broken arm and it was hard for her to do much of anything. The in-home caretakers they sent were nit much help. Do a few things and then spend the rest of the time playing on their phones.


I went over there when I could, my Wife is the only Childcare for my Grandsons that my DIL trusts. We have one car. My Brother lives in Shawnee and works in OKC. He was able to get over there a bit more. There needs to be better choices for people on the Terminal Highway. I'm going to try and shut up after this post. I'm putting his Obit link on here. you might have known him when he was OCPD. He did not deserve to die like he did. Off my soapbox and putting it away.

http://obits.dignitymemorial.com/dignity-memorial/obituary.aspx?n=Melvin-Martin&lc=4986&pid=189979366&mid=7965062