Belgian senate approves euthanasia for children [CWN]

[Laurent_LUG]

And children dont really want to die,

Have you ever ask this question to a child (in such situation) ??

its adults convincing children into thinking that’s what they want.

In what way ??

legalizing pedophilia.

Agree , this is a sick pervert adult decision !!

It just logically.follows.

Really ?? How ??

 

[Laurent_LUG]

You do know that these days sex is promoted even to those who don’t want it?

Internet , TV , magazines , …

You do know that many people criticize abstinence as a safer sex practice? And that if someone actually admits that they practice abstinence then it’s you know a shameful thing…an outdated thing… something which is actually harmful?

I’m not experimenting in/with sex !!

And some people will come out and say… “what’s wrong with children experimenting” and “surely it’s not the actual act of “love” but the societal scorn which harms the child” or when “it’s done wrong”. Go around the internet and you’ll see many people advocating for younger and younger ages of consent, argument being “it’s natural” or “they’re gonna do it anyway” or “it’s due to Christian influence” and so on…

The problem is , everyone is different !!

I am very sure that sex with animals and sex with minors will become more and more prominent in the future. As for the argument for sex with animals… ever have a dog try to do it with your leg?

Sure , but i take the dog off right away !!

 

[Thorns]

Have you ever ask this question to a child (in such situation) ??

In what way ??

Agree , this is a sick pervert adult decision !!

Really ?? How ??

You do realize that all your questions can be applied to support pedophilia too?

Children dont really want to have sex with an older creepy person, and your response is “How do you know? Have you ever asked them?”

A child doesnt know what they want. Their development and lack of life experience keeps them from making a well informed, rational decision, not to mention that children are impressionable and easily pressured.

 

[Laurent_LUG]

You do realize that all your questions can be applied to support pedophilia too?

Do you realize all questions can be implied for everything what’s bad ??

Children dont really want to have sex with an older creepy person, and your response is “How do you know? Have you ever asked them?”

And also , of course which kid would have fun with pedophilia sex ??
Remind: Adults tell kids what is bad or good !!

A child doesnt know what they want. Their development and lack of life experience keeps them from making a well informed, rational decision, not to mention that children are impressionable and easily pressured.

Although you’re right , but some kids do know what they want
and can make it (most of the time with the help from adults) !!

 

[Rau]

Rau, to put this differently, the condition (and other aspects thereof) influence the decision making processes. So the decision is not free, not as free as someone who lists pros/cons of getting a loan or a particular degree, but rather as someone who has to make a split second choice because his child is sick and he needs $$$ to pay - he’ll make a free choice to go to a loan shark.

I’m not sure any decision is truly “free”. A well person, free of all extraneous ill effects, who made a choice to die is probably not well, in fact. (A wholly well person always chooses life.)

The suicidal young person - most cases - suffers a treatable condition such as depression or something worse. We treat that condition recognising it is treatable, and freed from it, suicide will no longer be sought.

The terminally ill patient suffering in some way that fails to be mitigated by treatment, or for whom palliative care is not effective (and with objective evidence that there is no prospect of improvement) may make a decision to die and there does not seem to be a logical basis to reject the decision as tainted or invalid. The only basis seems to be a moral conviction about sanctity of life.

 

[josie_L]

By the way, scientifically speaking, the brain stops developing when we reach 25 years of age, i.e., the last part of the brain to develop is the frontal cortex that deals with problem solving, reasoning. . . . etc.

The frontal cortex of your brain is the highly developed area that allows for problem solving. This is where sophisticated levels of thought processing occur and where information is processed so that you can understand it. Knowing why you do what you do and having an appreciation for the potential consequences of your actions can help shape your behavior.

Human beings are highly intellectual and creative creatures. Your brain is well designed for problem solving. Keep this in mind, and use it to your advantage when you run into challenges with healthful living.

sharecare.com/health/functions-of-the-brain/what-frontal-cortex-brain-do

The fact that people believe a child could make such a choice are quite frankly bonkers or possibly missing a frontal cortex!!!

 

[Tenofovir]

I’m not sure any decision is truly “free”. A well person, free of all extraneous ill effects, who made a choice to die is probably not well, in fact. (A wholly well person always chooses life.)

Sure. Free will is a controversial subject. But I’m talking pragmatically here and comparing to as free a choice as we can make it. Even the most free choice may be predetermined. That’s a given. Of course if we say that free will is an illusion this whole discussion is moot as is a ton of other stuff - patient informed consent process, criminal law, etc.

The suicidal young person - most cases - suffers a treatable condition such as depression or something worse. We treat that condition recognising it is treatable, and freed from it, suicide will no longer be sought.

In most cases the the dying patient can be treated in a similar way. We recognise that the underlying condition is terminal and untreatable but its effects on the psyche need not be. And even if its effects cannot be removed, the choice is still not free. The patient is coerced into the death wish, through conscious and subconscious factors.

The terminally ill patient suffering in some way that fails to be mitigated by treatment, or for whom palliative care is not effective (and with objective evidence that there is no prospect of improvement) may make a decision to die and there does not seem to be a logical basis to reject the decision as tainted or invalid. The only basis seems to be a moral conviction about sanctity of life.

There is of course a logical basis. The decision making processes and things which influence how the decision is made are tainted by the condition itself. It’s corrupted so to say. Which is my whole point. When it comes to such an important decision, we should surely want as much certainty as possible. What if the patient didn’t really want to die? What if the indignity or bouts of pain were in fact tolerable?

It’s similar to the philosophical question of whether we’re a brain in a vat or whether solipsism is true. One can assert we’re not because we see other people and experience the world. But we do so through our mind. If our mind is corrupted and deluded to think we’re typing stuff on a forum while we’re really a brain in a vat, so is everything and nothing is reliable. Are our senses reliable? Well we can’t know because we can’t get outside our senses. In the same way if the thing which is doing the deciding whether the pain is worth bearing or not is corrupted it can’t make a free choice.

So OK you can also say well that’s tough and just accept that the choice will not really be free, but a coerced choice. I’m fine with that, but then drop the talk of a free choice or of patient autonomy. This patient is no more autonomous than a depressed suicidal person or an anorexia nervosa patient is when deciding whether to diet/die or not. I think people either don’t think about these issues or just brush them off. Depending on one’s value system and attention to detail, one may or may not find this persuasive. After all, “the person is suffering!!!1” and so we should do all we can. If it makes us feel happier and we can present a pseudo-free choice for this patient thus absolving ourselves of responsibility - we do. Although we wouldn’t consider letting a manic bipoplar person gamble with his last bit of money.

 

[Tenofovir]

Internet , TV , magazines , …

I meant in sex education and safer sex counseling and so on. I meant more directly.

The problem is , everyone is different !!

Sure. So some children will enjoy sex and will find it enriching and others won’t. Why not let the children decide themselves? (Note that this is not my opinion, I’m playing the devil’s advocate here.) I’ve met a British progressive sex ed counselor who believes that teenage boys should be gently encouraged to try anal sex with other boys, because they may find that they like it.

Sure , but i take the dog off right away !!

My point was a counterpoint against the idea that animals cannot tell us if they want to have sex with us or not.

 

[Laurent_LUG]

I meant in sex education and safer sex counseling and so on. I meant more directly.

School , parents , friends ??

Sure. So some children will enjoy sex and will find it enriching and others won’t. Why not let the children decide themselves? (Note that this is not my opinion, I’m playing the devil’s advocate here.) I’ve met a British progressive sex ed counselor who believes that teenage boys should be gently encouraged to try anal sex with other boys, because they may find that they like it.

When we were young we sometimes played a game , doctor & his/her patient ,
but having sex was not involved !!

My point was a counterpoint against the idea that animals cannot tell us if they want to have sex with us or not.

True , but you can teach them not to do it !!

 

[Rau]

The decision making processes and things which influence how the decision is made are tainted by the condition itself. It’s corrupted so to say. Which is my whole point. When it comes to such an important decision, we should surely want as much certainty as possible. What if the patient didn’t really want to die? What if the indignity or bouts of pain were in fact tolerable?

Recall we are debating one’s own decision for self, not an imposed decision by another. Your argument that a sick person cannot make a valid decision potentially leads to the conclusion that no valid decision can be made due to factors that taint it. Eg. Decisions to marry must always be seriously compromised because (and if) one is in fact in love. (Perhaps we should allow only arranged marriages!). This is not to say that all marriage decisions are good ones.

I am not arguing the pro-euthanasia case, only that basing your “anti” case on the idea that the sick person cannot make a “rational” decision based on facts and prognosis is not sound. [The decision may offend our morality or we may see it as egregious, but it may be rational.]

 

[Rau]

Ok, but I think the discussion has broadened beyond the child element. I guess what I’m exploring is that there is dichotomy of issues here. There are secular arguments against euthanasia, given the potential for mistakes (affecting either ‘willing’ patients or others) as well as moral arguments. Suicide faces pretty much only moral arguments. And assisted suicide is a bridge,

But if we accept that an atheist has a right to suicide (put aside questions of his logic, etc) and hence potentially to assisted suicide, should we Catholics oppose laws which enable that on moral grounds?

I think it’s a topic for another thread.

Following new thread seeks to explore the question posed above:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=862448

 

[Tenofovir]

Recall we are debating one’s own decision for self, not an imposed decision by another. Your argument that a sick person cannot make a valid decision potentially leads to the conclusion that no valid decision can be made due to factors that taint it. Eg. Decisions to marry must always be seriously compromised because (and if) one is in fact in love. (Perhaps we should allow only arranged marriages!). This is not to say that all marriage decisions are good ones.

No. Not at all. It’s actually a problem particular to this. The problem is that organic illness, psychiatric illness, social stressors impact the psyche in such a way that people tend to have a more negative outlook, are not able to tolerate pain, indignity, stress and so on. When you’re depressed your pain threshold actually goes down. You’re able to bear less when you have these problems through factors which are part of the illness, disability, social perception of such, etc.

Secondly the decision to kill yourself is a pretty major and permanent decision. Elsewhere we’re moving away from this sort of thing, as in capital punishment. Here and in abortion we’re moving toward it. The justification here is that it’s a free, self imposed choice. Well it less so.

I am not arguing the pro-euthanasia case, only that basing your “anti” case on the idea that the sick person cannot make a “rational” decision based on facts and prognosis is not sound. [The decision may offend our morality or we may see it as egregious, but it may be rational.]

My faulty explanations do not make it unsound. As said, people kill themselves because they can’t bear to continue they way they are. And that’s subjective. Some people don’t mind as much the loss of dignity, chronic pain meds which cause side effects and so on as others. Not every person who is in pain or permanently disabled has such a death wish. But your pain threshold, outlook for the future and so on is bound to be lower because of these conditions. You’re less likely to bear them and more likely to then choose something of a permanent solution. These are not pure rational decisions in the form of logical syllogisms. These are decisions based on how one feels, and how one’s pain threshold and so on is. And these conditions corrupt that. It’s not a free choice, at least can’t be assumed to be such. If things are going bad for you, your levels of optimism are probably going to be lower. If someone asked you then to make a decision about something longer term, you may then choose differently to how you’d choose if you were more happy, less stressed, more comfortable, more at ease and felt more in control.

Think about this yourself. When you’re sad or anxious your outlook is worse than when it’s not. When you’re happy say in love with your sweetheart, you could be served a stale meal in a restaurant but looking at hear eyes and hearing hear voice just makes everything feel so good. On the other hand if the girl dumps you, the best tasting meal is going to suck, ne?