Mercy or Murder?

[OceanWhysper]

Mother helps disabled son to die
Friday, September 26, 2003 Posted: 12:11 PM EDT (1611 GMT)


BERCK-SUR-MER, France (AP) -- A severely disabled young man who has long made known his wish to end his life died on Friday, a day after his mother's attempt to carry out a mercy killing put him in a coma.

Vincent Humbert, 22, a quadriplegic who was unable to speak or see, died at the hospital where he was being treated, his father, Francis Humbert, said.

Medical authorities at the Heliomarin Center in this Normandy town refused to immediately confirm the death.

Doctors had tried to revive Humbert after his mother, Marie Humbert, apparently put an unidentified product to end his life into his feeding equipment. Humbert fell into a coma.

Humbert's case has recently been at the center of a media blitz, programmed by the young man and his mother. They made no secret that a plan for a mercy killing was in place, and Humbert published a book arguing in favor of his right to die.

Humbert, at one point, had written to President Jacques Chirac beseeching him for the "right to die."


Marie Humbert
His mother's attempt to end Humbert's life came on the third anniversary of a car accident that left him incapacitated. The mother's actions reopened the debate in France over whether there should be a law making euthanasia legal.

Social Affairs Minister Francois Fillon said Thursday that the question needs to be addressed.

Former Health Minister Bernard Kouchner said Friday on Europe-1 radio that he doubts there will ever be unanimity on the subject. However, he said that a law on the books concerning the rights of the sick already allows medical teams "not to act" without the consent of the person in question.

He called Marie Humbert an "admirable mother."

She was questioned by police on Thursday but has not been placed under investigation.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Ok so what are the varied view points on this topic.

I personally am for the right to terminate life, once quality of life is unable to be had. I would hope that if I were unable to do so myself, a family member would help me, to cross over into the next life.

We find people cruel and inhumane that allow an animal to suffer and not put it out of its suffering. Yet we as a society allow fellow humans to suffer unspeakable conditions, and call ourselves humane

[EvilBob]

I agree to the right to end life, but there has to be a reason. I am for those who are teminaly ill and those who are lifesupport who dont want to keep on living. My grandfather was in great pain while on life support, but he looked at peace when he finally died, and he did die after a year on life support. But i am not for those who stand behind religous reasoning like a case here in the states about a young girl who had a ruptured apendix, but the parents wouldn't have her treated due to there religous practices. They where aressted but, the trial was fought ot the supreme court and the justices in a split court, overturned the conviction stating that religion was one of the reasons our founding fathers fought the revolution, and I ofund myself disagree with them. Human sacrifices have been outlawed why not soemthing like this.

[Hussar]

Again, does the public have the right to ask? If someone says that say, their mother, does not wish to be resucitated (sp), can we ask him or her how they know? How far can we go in asking? At what point is suffering "intollerable"?

While I agree with you 100% about the family allowing their child to die of a ruptured appendix is horrible, do we as a society have the right to enforce our morality on an individual or small group of individuals? At what point does acting in the public interests become the tyranny of the majority?

[agamoto]

I shall attemp a sound and logical reply, however bieng as my vocabulary,though vast, is less than perfect I may not express my thoughts as clearly as I would hope, so please bear with me.

If an individual wishes to prematurly terminate there own existance they should have the right to do so, if they can clearly convey this wish to others but are unable to act for themselves they have a right to assisstance.

In the case of the girl with the ruptured appendix, that is a rather sticky topic. If the family has tried to obtain spiritual assisstance and the powers that be chose not to help, then perhaps it was ment to be. It could be argued that if we enforce our will on them then perhaps we should also force the Amish to use electricity and other modern marvles, I don't know just how far is far enough and how far is to far.

It is all a matter of faith, do we have the right to impose our faiths(or lack therof) on to others? Did the family have a clear and concise directive stating that medical assisstance was forbiden, or were they interpiting it wrong?

[Merkuri]

I believe that a human being has the right to end his own life (or to ask for assistance to end his life), but that many human beings would abuse this right if it were made completely legal. Many people today commit suicide for very dumb reasons, especially teenagers going through tough times. These people who feel like they are close to the edge after losing a lover or failing to ace a final shouldn't be allowed to simply give up without a fight. If suicide is made legal there should be some stipulations, even one as simple as a waiting period. If these misguided souls know that suicide is a legal option perhaps they would be more likely to share their decision with loved ones, people who could help them be sure they are making the right decision before they take that final, ireversable step.

[Gnome]

"I disapprove of suicide more than anything." Vash the Stampede

Simple quote, but it works for me.

[Draxy]

Wow, sensitive topic.

It all boils down to, who has what rights? Do YOU have the right to end your own life? Do YOU have the right to ontain assistence if you are no longer physicly capable of the action but can still communicate your desires?

Or

Does society have the right to dictate whether or not YOU have this right? Society obviously has the power to enforce it's views, but does it have the right?

The debate in France right now is nothing new. It is endemic in Western Society. It arises from the idea that society knows better than the individual what will benefit both itself and the individual because the society is made up of a large and diverse groupment with more experience as a whole in all fields than can be held by any individual.

Personally, I think that this thesis is insane and simply perpetuates control for those who hunger for it, but that is a personal view point and I will not myself try to enforce it on others in any other way than by communicating it.

I person can be said, in such circumsances, to have diminished capacity to make such decisions that arises from their circumstances. It is argued that death is final and that there can be no change of mind after it's carried out, and thus that society has to be the one, through it's elected or appointed representatives, to make the decision.

Personally, I still would leave the decision to the individual. This is one of the reasons that I had a "Living Will" prepared that details the fact that if I am in a ppearantly irretrevable medical condition that I want NO artificial life support means employed. In the situation that the young man in France is in, I would very probably also have asked to be terminated.


Draxy

[Cora Goldstar]

I belive in the right to end life if the person is in alot of pain and isnt expected to get any better and if the person says they want it that way

[CharleHu$$tle]

I wouldn't help. I would want to, I mean sorry but I would rather die at the hands of someone I knew and trusted rather then live life in Torment.

But Still I wouldn't help or ask for help. Cause It's Murder by the law. And Hence the realization.

[Challenger]

I'd like to think that given the option I'd fight on to the bitter end but then I do tend to be a stubbon bastard at the best of times.

This is a hard subject and one I tend to view on a person to person view. I don't like suiside and can think of very few (Next to none and most extremely unlikely) situations where I would agree with it. However if a person truely wants to end it all thats their choice and its up to their family to talk them out of it.

Challenger

[Loki3]

I think there is no simple way of responding to this.

In my opinion,

I have had the misfortune of seeing 3 family members die of long drawn out illness or injury. 2 from Cancer.

I watched my grandfather, who all his life led a verile, strong, hardworking existence.......... turn into a bed ridden tube up, and in every hole, in a diaper moaning in pain not knowing his family shadow of his formal man. With a feeding tube and eventaully a ventellator being the only thing keepin him alive.

He lye there for 16 weeks before dying (Thank God)...

When it was over my Grandma had 347,000.00 in Hospital bills, No husband, and had the Hospital sue her for the money and lost her home.............

The doctors told my Grandmother there was NO CHANCE of recovery but would not remove the feeding tube, or the ventalator. GEE was this an attempt to save his life.

NO it was not.

Another one for ya.

I watched my 22 year old cousin who was in an auto accident lie in a bed for 9 weeks in a coma, on a ventalator. She had her skull crushed in an auto accident. The doctors told her NO CHANCE of recovery. Yet would not remove the Feeding tube and ventalator............................She finally died.


My Grandmother had Kydney failure along with some other organ failures. She was rushed to a Hspital in a Coma. She lay there for over a year. Tube in every hold, Breathing by a machine. Feeding tube.

Doctors saying there was less than a 1 percent chance she would ever wake up. Not receover WAKE UP. Eventually her body just couldnt take it and she died.

My Point in these stories.................

It is easy for someone to say, I am pro life, and no one should take there own life by themselves or with the aid of someone else. Or life should be prolonged even if the chances are slim of recovery.

Your Wrong. Sorry you are !!!!!!!!!!

There is a differeance in someone refusing medical treatment for something that has a 98 percent survival rate like the appendix story. That was neglect.

What I am against is if someone is suffering from a malady or a injury or disease where they come to the point that there is none or little chance of recovery, where there is a statistically low chance of survival then yes they or there family should have the right with the aid of a doctor, to terminate that life.

And frankly, a feeding tube, or a ventalator removal isnt murder, or termination of a viable life. It is removing artificial means of keeping someone alive.

And sometimes keeping someone alive is crueler than letting them go.


And regarding................

"I disapprove of suicide more than anything." Vash the Stampede

Simple quote, but it works for me.

Maybe you but not me. I have a made a personal decision regarding suicide. If EVER I am diagnosed with Cancer or some other disease where I know I will die, you can bet I WILL be the ultimate decision maker as to time and place. I WILL and I mean WILL at some point go and at least die with dignity, albiet at my own hands but I will do it my way. I WILL not end up like my grandfather.

Also, I have made private arrangements to have a situation taken care of via a friend in the event that I am ever incapacitated. Once that Doctor tells my family there is no or little chance of my recovery. A certain measure will be taken by him, And I have agreed to do the same.

When life ceases to be productive, or when life ceases to be something the person can get ANYTHING in the tiniest out of. Then it is no longer life.

Anyone can be kept alive if there is enough tubing, and machines involved. The question MUST be...........

Not CAN we keep someone alive. BUT................... SHOULD we keep that person alive,

[Sharess]

Wow, it seems that most of ya would pull the plug in certin cases. But I would like to flip the topic a bit.

What about the mentally handicap were talking mental retardation on the sevier and profoud level here.

I use to work at a place for mentaly retared kids that also were very phsycally messed up. Were talking feeding tubes in wheelchairs can't talk one was so far gone that she would forget to breathe alot .
One of these kids was always misrable, never was happy the whole two years a was there. This kid would always be hitting himself or others. The kid couldn't talk or walk he could bearly hold his own weight when ya when to change his diepre(oh did I memetin that he had no bladder or bowl control) I would end up spending all my time with him trying and failing to keep him from causeing haem to himself and others. Wel long story made short; The kid ends up hitting himself into a comma(not on my shift but it happrned) there was no way for him to come out of it any less damaged.
I go up to see him one day and his parents are there. They ask me what they should do (they only saw their own kid once a year so they really didn't know him)I say that I never seen him happy and if the only thing that was keeping him alive were the machines that I would pull the plug and give him peace. So they tell the doc. to do that and this being a mentally retarded child they don't hesitate to pull that plug. Ok didn't get into any trouble over that but when the place that I worked at found out what I said they canned me because I was crule to the child. Boy was I mad in the long run the company said it was becaue I was late to many times and I got a much better job in the same feild.
So heres the question :

Did I do the wrong thing by stateing my opinon and what i would do?

[Draxy]

It sounds like the company paniced. Since you worked there the parents, whether you are an aide or a janitor or a Doctor is immaterial, can have been seen, by a court, to have accepted your word as an official stance of the facility, an expert opinion and acted upon that expert advice. If they later want to sue, they aren't going after you, who has little they can take, but after the company you were working for, who has the deep pockets. You have to be exquisately careful of what you say in such a situation for legal reasons.

Now, I'm not kicking you. It sounds like you acted out of a genuine desire to do what you felt was the compassionate thing both for the boy and his family, but it might have been actionable in a court and that is probably why the comapny paniced. In the "sue happy" climate of today they have to be paranoid about it or they're going to be out of business post haste.

Well, you've gotten a better job since then, that it sounds like you enjoy more, so everything worked out for the best.

BTW: I would have, in my heart, also wished that the parents would have made the choice you advocated too.

Draxy