Deaf Belgian twins, 45, helped to die after losing sight

  • Thread starter Thread starter News Feed
  • Start date Start date
N

News Feed

Guest
BRUSSELS (Reuters) - Identical Belgian twin brothers, born deaf, becoming blind and unable to bear not being able to see and hear each other, had their wish to die granted in a case testing the boundaries of legal euthanasia.

hOgFCt3N1VQ


Continue reading...
 
I've glad they lived in a civilized country
 
redrumloa said:
topper...:mad:
Click to expand...
Should we go back to discussing the Libertarian principle that the greatest right is one's ability to self determine? Had the state disallowed their death their will would be subjectated to he State. Likely they'd need to be jailed with all objects kept away from them so they couldn't assert their individual will. So their personage as a whole would be less than the state. You've kinda been really bad at being the big "Libertarian' you claimed to be.

I take pride in no one's death. IMO the last expression of self any of us has is the right to self determine what, where, when, and how we slip out of this mortal coil. Sorry they left. But, glad they did it on their own terms.
 
Yeah, it is sooo ethical to kill off people who are suicidal:rolleyes: Let's staff suicide hotlines with people trained to ENCOURAGE suicidal people to kill themselves:rolleyes:
 
If one's a true Libertarian that believes the right to self determination is the utmost good, then yes enabling suicide would fall under that.

Now that doesn't mean we couldn't have a suicide hotline. Those that call the Hotline are doing so in a cry for help. They are determining I want to live , but things are so bad I don't know if I can. If you are calling hotline you know it's there to dissuade you from suicide. So it should serve it's purpose to help the ones that determined it's in their best interest to not do it.

The problem here is the State deciding you don't have a right to kill yourself in the manner you see most fit. Disabling the right to self determine this, or to use your example forcing you to call a hotline, is a negative as it just raised the will of the State above the will of the individual. A very anti-libertarian stance.

With some of these comments I question if you've actually understand what's at the core of Libertarian principles.
 
I don't oppose euthanasia in principle, but I can understand why this case may get some extra attention. From what I can tell, the brothers were for the most part healthy but psychologically distraught. Usually when I think of euthanasia I think of cancer patients who are beyond all treatment and are facing a drawn out and painful death. These brothers may have been depressed, but from what I could tell, still had a long life ahead of them. I'm not sure depression alone can justify euthanasia. Of course, there's probably more to the story, for example, why are they both deaf and blind? Are they likely to lose more functionality? Perhaps they're destined to die young anyway? Those could perhaps help justify it.
 
Glaucus said:
I don't oppose euthanasia in principle, but I can understand why this case may get some extra attention. From what I can tell, the brothers were for the most part healthy but psychologically distraught. Usually when I think of euthanasia I think of cancer patients who are beyond all treatment and are facing a drawn out and painful death. These brothers may have been depressed, but from what I could tell, still had a long life ahead of them. I'm not sure depression alone can justify euthanasia. Of course, there's probably more to the story, for example, why are they both deaf and blind? Are they likely to lose more functionality? Perhaps they're destined to die young anyway? Those could perhaps help justify it.
Click to expand...
we are told that twins have some sort of "special" relationship.
not being a twin I can't say exactly what that means

however, if they are no longer able to properly communicate with each other I can appreciate how this would be like a living death

If they felt this was torture who am I to judge or stand in their way?

It's not how long one lives, but how well.
 
The first terminally ill guy on death row who asks for this is going to confuse a few people....
 
Glaucus said:
I don't oppose euthanasia in principle, but I can understand why this case may get some extra attention. From what I can tell, the brothers were for the most part healthy but psychologically distraught. Usually when I think of euthanasia I think of cancer patients who are beyond all treatment and are facing a drawn out and painful death. These brothers may have been depressed, but from what I could tell, still had a long life ahead of them. I'm not sure depression alone can justify euthanasia. Of course, there's probably more to the story, for example, why are they both deaf and blind? Are they likely to lose more functionality? Perhaps they're destined to die young anyway? Those could perhaps help justify it.
Click to expand...

Be careful Mike, you may not be a "true" Canadian or some nonsense.
 
Glaucus said:
I'm not sure depression alone can justify euthanasia. Of course, there's probably more to the story, for example, why are they both deaf and blind? Are they likely to lose more functionality?
Click to expand...

This seems to indicate that they were, although there isn't much in the way of detail:
Suffering from an incurable illness, the pair shared a room in their parental home before studying shoe repair and moving in together in a small apartment.​
But when Marc and Eddy learned they were slowly going blind in addition to already being deaf, the twins feared losing all possible means of communicating with one another. "The thought of only being able to feel each other was unbearable," ​
"Physically, their conditions were strongly deteriorating," ​
Click to expand...
​
Their older brother is also quoted as saying:​
"Many will wonder why my brothers have opted for euthanasia because there are plenty of deaf and blind that have a 'normal' life," he said. "But my brothers trudged from one disease to another. They were really worn out."
Click to expand...
​
Also, they were apparently refused by the first hospital they approached, with unnamed doctors there quoted as saying:​
"There is a law, but that is clearly open to various interpretations. If any blind or deaf are allowed to euthanize, we are far from home. I do not think this was what the legislation meant by 'unbearable suffering',"
Click to expand...
​
More here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/14/marc-eddy-verbessem-belgium-euthanasia_n_2472320.html
 
redrumloa said:
I wonder how a deaf and blind person commnicates that they want to die. I guess a gov rubber stamp is enough.
Click to expand...
I am surprised nobody else pointed this out but people who know sign language can still express themselves perfectly well even if you blindfold them. (Two-way communication is a different story, of course, but not strictly necessary if somebody keeps expressing a desire to die.)
 
Glaucus said:
Usually when I think of euthanasia I think of cancer patients who are beyond all treatment and are facing a drawn out and painful death. These brothers may have been depressed, but from what I could tell, still had a long life ahead of them. I'm not sure depression alone can justify euthanasia.
Click to expand...
Based on the information provided in other articles, they were obviously not merely depressed.

That said, depression appears to be a very serious illness which is perhaps underestimated by most people. People suffering from depression often describe extreme pain that is perceived to be worse than any physical kind. In the case of the twins, we are talking about people who are or will be deaf and blind which makes therapy next to impossible so one could consider them to be "beyond all treatment".

Anyway, euthanasia is obviously a highly complicated topic.
 
redrumloa said:
Yeah, it is sooo ethical to kill off people who are suicidal:rolleyes: Let's staff suicide hotlines with people trained to ENCOURAGE suicidal people to kill themselves:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Each situation is unique. Many suicidal people are going through temporary problems that could be sorted out and have potential for many productive years ahead. On the other hand there are people who are suffering with no prospect for a productive future and it is harder to argue that they should be forced to stay alive.

I have known two people who committed suicide. Neither left any detailed accounting of why they made their decision and the unanswered questions adds to the loss. In the case of these twins it looks as though it has been long discussed with family and friends and doctors. The twins have gone through a process and made an informed choice and presented arguments to others that have obviously been sufficiently convincing to allow them to go ahead with their plan. That is significantly different from ordinary suicides.
 
JoBBo said:
Anyway, euthanasia is obviously a highly complicated topic.
Click to expand...
Depends on what you're talking about. We have a certain group of people in the USA that claim that individual rights are the utmost in importance. They claim the government is always wrong and should be nearly abolished. However, when it comes to the government convicting murders the government can do no wrong. Hence the convicted criminals should be forced to have all individual rights, including the right to life, taken away from them and be euthanasiaed. Often the same group claims to be "pro-life".

:madashell:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top