NATION

PASSWORD

[AT VOTE] Access to Life-Ending Services

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Wallenburg
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 21833
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Wallenburg » Sun Aug 29, 2021 2:14 pm

"No euthanization process is 'completely painless'."
I want to improve.
grestin went through the MKULTRA program and he has more of a free will than wallenburg does - Imperial Idaho
Kiu Ghesik wrote:harris' interpretation of bidenism and subsequent establishment of a bidenist vanguard party to root out malarkey and revisionist elements in society was revisionist in and of itself and should never have been implemented.

King of Snark, Minister of World Assembly Affairs, Arbiter for The East Pacific

User avatar
Justosia
Attaché
 
Posts: 94
Founded: Sep 06, 2018
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Justosia » Sun Aug 29, 2021 5:25 pm

"This is all so depressing."

Imperial Ambassador Alejandro Suarez had just received a secure text. Another nation in their region has left the World Assembly. He worried if he had just said that out loud. He hadn't thankfully.

Personally, he was all for the useless offing themselves. Less taxpayer Justos wasted on keeping them alive. The church would never approve tho.

"Tedious, dramatic leftists......can I get wine here?"
The Continental Empire of Justosia
Emperatriz Annabella Sofia Francisco I
"God. Emperatriz. Empire."

User avatar
The Python
Diplomat
 
Posts: 987
Founded: Jul 24, 2020
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby The Python » Sun Aug 29, 2021 5:28 pm

Wallenburg wrote:"No euthanization process is 'completely painless'."

the operation is fast and free from extreme pain and/or agony, and the method of death is chosen by the patient,

How's that instead?
See more information here.

User avatar
Daarwyrth
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1920
Founded: Jul 05, 2016
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Daarwyrth » Mon Aug 30, 2021 1:54 am

Dame Maria vyn Nysen, WA Representative of Daarwyrth: "When I read some of the objections to this resolution here I can't help but think of my dear aunt. A terrible case of cancer that had taken away any comfort of life. I say 'comfort', yet I actually should say 'dignity'. She had to be fed via a feeding tube which constantly leaked and caused inflammations, and many other complications. Whenever I went to visit her, it was heartbreaking to see how she was wasting away because of her disease and the treatments that she was getting. And every single time she told us how badly she wanted to die, to be free of the pain, to be free of the indignity of life that she was experiencing as a result of it all.

There is no god or deity in existence that can justify such suffering. And any divine being that allows such suffering without intervening, without helping that person, is a cruel and evil deity that deserves no praise or following. I reject the implication that there are religious grounds to oppose euthanasia. My aunt was able to end her life on her terms, through a valid procedure of euthanasia. I wasn't able to be at her bedside when it happened, yet the family members that were around her said they had never seen her more at peace. Euthanasia is not evil, it is a procedure that allows someone to be at peace, to end their life on their terms without having to suffer needlessly.

Daarwyrth fully supports a free and responsible access to euthanasia. We will not contribute to the suffering of patients that no longer experience any dignity or comfort of life. Religion cannot supercede basic empathy and understanding."

OOC: This is fully based on real life, and my aunt whose bravery I will praise until my last breath for going through the process of euthanasia.
The Royal State of Daarwyrth

Current year: 2021 CE | Monarch: Queen Demi Maria I | Prime Minister: Dame Maria vyn Nysen | Capital: Daarsted | Government type: Unitary parliamentary semi-constitutional monarchy | Technology level: Post-modern tech
List of Authored Writings | Factbook on Daarwyrth | Factbook on Queen Demi Maria I | Royal House of Zylkoven | Political Parties | Daarwyrth's WA Mission | Diplomatic Programme | Major Businesses
Played nations
  • Daarwyrth
  • Great Robertia
  • Kazgorovia
Who am I?
  • 26 years old male
  • Dutch with Polish roots
  • English literature major
  • Ex-religious gay leftist

User avatar
The Order of Makai
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 18
Founded: Mar 15, 2021
Corrupt Dictatorship

[LIBTARDS WILL OPPOSE THIS]

Postby The Order of Makai » Mon Aug 30, 2021 2:04 am

"RIGHTWINGERS WILL OPPOSE THIS"
Well this is off to a good start. :roll:
Imagine being so unmanly (or unwomanly perhaps?) that you want to force the state to pay for your suicide. No, be a man and simply be stoned off your ass on opiods while awaiting the end instead.

User avatar
Daarwyrth
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1920
Founded: Jul 05, 2016
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Daarwyrth » Mon Aug 30, 2021 2:28 am

The Order of Makai wrote:"RIGHTWINGERS WILL OPPOSE THIS"
Well this is off to a good start. :roll:
Imagine being so unmanly (or unwomanly perhaps?) that you want to force the state to pay for your suicide. No, be a man and simply be stoned off your ass on opiods while awaiting the end instead.

Vyn Nysen: "Behold, the manliest commentary on this proposal. Behold, the masculinity oozing off of this like thick, reeking poison, ready to ravage any healthy system into a twisted, toxic wasteland. Behold, and be in awe of this display of masculinity, Ambassadors, and take in its rotten, mouldy core, filled with worms and vermin eating away at what is left of it."
Last edited by Daarwyrth on Mon Aug 30, 2021 2:30 am, edited 2 times in total.
The Royal State of Daarwyrth

Current year: 2021 CE | Monarch: Queen Demi Maria I | Prime Minister: Dame Maria vyn Nysen | Capital: Daarsted | Government type: Unitary parliamentary semi-constitutional monarchy | Technology level: Post-modern tech
List of Authored Writings | Factbook on Daarwyrth | Factbook on Queen Demi Maria I | Royal House of Zylkoven | Political Parties | Daarwyrth's WA Mission | Diplomatic Programme | Major Businesses
Played nations
  • Daarwyrth
  • Great Robertia
  • Kazgorovia
Who am I?
  • 26 years old male
  • Dutch with Polish roots
  • English literature major
  • Ex-religious gay leftist

User avatar
Tinhampton
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9626
Founded: Oct 05, 2016
Anarchy

Postby Tinhampton » Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:42 am

Smith: Daarwyrth can legalise assisted dying procedures right now, without Regulatory Superstate interference.
The Self-Administrative City of TINHAMPTON (pop. 319,372): Saffron Howard, Mayor (UCP); Alexander Smith, WA Delegate-Ambassador

Authorships & co-authorships: SC#250, SC#251, Issue #1115, SC#267, GA#484, GA#491, GA#533, GA#540, GA#549, SC#356, GA#559, GA#562, GA#567, GA#578, SC#374, GA#582, SC#375, GA#589, GA#590, SC#382
Other achievements: Cup of Harmony 73 champions; Philosopher-Queen of Sophia; possibly very controversial; "Tinhampton? the man's literally god"
Who am I, really? 46yo Tory woman w/Asperger's; Cambridge graduate; currently reading nothing much

User avatar
Daarwyrth
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1920
Founded: Jul 05, 2016
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Daarwyrth » Mon Aug 30, 2021 5:53 am

Tinhampton wrote:Smith: Daarwyrth can legalise assisted dying procedures right now, without Regulatory Superstate interference.

Vyn Nysen: "That would be only one state. It would be kinder and more humane to ensure that people across the World Assembly would have access to it, without having to travel to different countries where the procedure is legal, if that is even possible in their medical state. We banned honor-based violence and ritual sacrifices, and we passed legislation legalising abortion across the World Assembly. Why would this be any different? If we accepted, I quote, "superstate interference" then, why would it be any different now?"
Last edited by Daarwyrth on Mon Aug 30, 2021 5:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
The Royal State of Daarwyrth

Current year: 2021 CE | Monarch: Queen Demi Maria I | Prime Minister: Dame Maria vyn Nysen | Capital: Daarsted | Government type: Unitary parliamentary semi-constitutional monarchy | Technology level: Post-modern tech
List of Authored Writings | Factbook on Daarwyrth | Factbook on Queen Demi Maria I | Royal House of Zylkoven | Political Parties | Daarwyrth's WA Mission | Diplomatic Programme | Major Businesses
Played nations
  • Daarwyrth
  • Great Robertia
  • Kazgorovia
Who am I?
  • 26 years old male
  • Dutch with Polish roots
  • English literature major
  • Ex-religious gay leftist

User avatar
Araraukar
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15841
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Mon Aug 30, 2021 6:20 am

OOC: Flamebait title does not help your agenda.

IC: "If euthanasia is to be a health service WA-wide, then it need only be defined as that, at most a mention of it to be "affordable" would do, as that would put it in line with all other health services currently. You don't need to go down the ridiculous road of making it an extra special service, if you make it affordable. Someone who can only afford to pay one rauk, will get it for one rauk, but someone who can afford to pay the full price of the medications used for it, the time the professional staff use on their case, the location, and whatever happens to their body right after, should pay for all of that. It is only fair."

OOC: "Rauk" is Araraukar's currency unit because it amused me way back when and still does. Also because aras are intelligent birds and I don't want them as currency unit.
- Linda Äyrämäki, acting ambassador in the absence of miss Leveret
Araraukar's RP reality is Modern Tech solarpunk. In IC in the WA.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
This video should be seen by all COVID-time Essential Workers out there. And others too, really.
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.

User avatar
Oinopa Ponton
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 2
Founded: Aug 25, 2021
Ex-Nation

Postby Oinopa Ponton » Mon Aug 30, 2021 8:01 am

COMMUNIQUÉ of the ÉMINENCES GRISES of the SUPREME SOVIET
of the SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF OINOPA PONTOI
Ανακοιθωμέν της Αποθρόνοι της Υπέρτατης Σοβιέτ
της Σοβιετικής Σοσιαλιστικής Δημοκρατίας του Οινόπα Ποντών


ΥΣΑ-I: While we are in support of the proposal in theory, an excerpt of the current proposal seems questionable in practice:

The Python wrote:A medical professional that expresses a bona fide moral objection against euthanasia may not be forced to perform euthanasia, as long as said professional directs patients to easily and readily accessible euthanasia services.


The Hippocratic Oath forbids a medical professional from killing their patient: I will not give a lethal drug to anyone if I am asked. This is lamentable, and we understand the authors of the resolution prepared for this primary contingency by noting the ability for an okros-complying physician to "express a bona fide moral objection". However, the physician in question is still led to "direct patients to [...] euthanasia services". This is also forbidden by the oath, which proceeds: I will not give a lethal drug to anyone if I am asked, nor will I advise such a plan. Should it truly be mandatory for a physician to betray their oath in such a way?

User avatar
Goobergunchia
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 2023
Founded: Antiquity
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Goobergunchia » Mon Aug 30, 2021 11:14 am

The Order of Makai, *** warned for flaming ***.

I've been mulling this over for a bit but, especially given the tenor of this thread generally, I am going to rule that the thread title is trolly given that it doesn't really serve a purpose other than to anger those who disagree with either the proposal or the premise, and have edited the title accordingly. It's too mild to be generally actionable but as the thread title it's a distraction and an invitation to threadjack.


Goobergunchia
Forum Moderator
(+5175 posts from mostly pre-Jolt)
Making NationStates a different place since 17 May 2003.
ADN Advisor (Ret.)
Nasicournian Officer
Citizen of the Rejected Realms
Discord: Goobergunch#2417
Ideological Bulwark #16
Sponsor, HR#22, SC#4
Rules: GA SC
NS Game Moderator
For your forum moderation needs: The Moderation Forum
For your in-game moderation needs: The Getting Help Page
What are the rules? See the OSRS.
Who are the mods, anyway?

User avatar
Araraukar
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15841
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Mon Aug 30, 2021 11:17 am

Oinopa Ponton wrote:The Hippocratic Oath forbids a medical professional from killing their patient

"What is the hypocritical oath? And how do they treat any illness if they can't use normal medication? Most medications are lethal with wrong dosage. If they meant lethal dosage, they should've said so."
- Linda Äyrämäki, acting ambassador in the absence of miss Leveret
Araraukar's RP reality is Modern Tech solarpunk. In IC in the WA.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
This video should be seen by all COVID-time Essential Workers out there. And others too, really.
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.

User avatar
The Python
Diplomat
 
Posts: 987
Founded: Jul 24, 2020
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby The Python » Mon Aug 30, 2021 12:20 pm

Oinopa Ponton wrote:
COMMUNIQUÉ of the ÉMINENCES GRISES of the SUPREME SOVIET
of the SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF OINOPA PONTOI
Ανακοιθωμέν της Αποθρόνοι της Υπέρτατης Σοβιέτ
της Σοβιετικής Σοσιαλιστικής Δημοκρατίας του Οινόπα Ποντών


ΥΣΑ-I: While we are in support of the proposal in theory, an excerpt of the current proposal seems questionable in practice:

The Python wrote:A medical professional that expresses a bona fide moral objection against euthanasia may not be forced to perform euthanasia, as long as said professional directs patients to easily and readily accessible euthanasia services.


The Hippocratic Oath forbids a medical professional from killing their patient: I will not give a lethal drug to anyone if I am asked. This is lamentable, and we understand the authors of the resolution prepared for this primary contingency by noting the ability for an okros-complying physician to "express a bona fide moral objection". However, the physician in question is still led to "direct patients to [...] euthanasia services". This is also forbidden by the oath, which proceeds: I will not give a lethal drug to anyone if I am asked, nor will I advise such a plan. Should it truly be mandatory for a physician to betray their oath in such a way?

According to the version found here, it actually says:
But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty.

Unless the version I'm looking at is wrong.
See more information here.

User avatar
Wallenburg
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 21833
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Wallenburg » Mon Aug 30, 2021 1:03 pm

The Order of Makai wrote:"RIGHTWINGERS WILL OPPOSE THIS"
Well this is off to a good start. :roll:
Imagine being so unmanly (or unwomanly perhaps?) that you want to force the state to pay for your suicide. No, be a man and simply be stoned off your ass on opiods while awaiting the end instead.

"Imagine dying in such a reduced state of consciousness. How humiliating. Far better to die with all your mental faculties intact. At least then it was you who died, and not some already-half-dead creature inhabiting your body."
The Python wrote:According to the version found here, it actually says:
But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty.

Unless the version I'm looking at is wrong.

OOC: They are drawing from the same ancient version that forbids surgery and abortion. The modern one is, well, modern, and thus has developed a good bit of sense having been adopted since the dawn of germ theory and modern medicine. Of course, none of this actually has anything to do with the morality or lack thereof of assisted suicide. It's just an appeal to authority.
Last edited by Wallenburg on Mon Aug 30, 2021 1:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I want to improve.
grestin went through the MKULTRA program and he has more of a free will than wallenburg does - Imperial Idaho
Kiu Ghesik wrote:harris' interpretation of bidenism and subsequent establishment of a bidenist vanguard party to root out malarkey and revisionist elements in society was revisionist in and of itself and should never have been implemented.

King of Snark, Minister of World Assembly Affairs, Arbiter for The East Pacific

User avatar
Comfed
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1402
Founded: Apr 09, 2020
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Comfed » Mon Aug 30, 2021 3:09 pm

The General Assembly,

Resolving that individuals should have the legal right to end their lives if they are in agony from an incurable illness,

Believing that any possible dangers resulting from a "slippery slope" in legalising euthanasia do not outweigh the right to end one's life on one's own terms,

Noting that it is thus necessary to establish pro-euthanasia measures in the General Assembly, enacts as follows:

  1. In this resolution, “euthanasia” is the killing of a patient, when:
    1. the patient has provided verifiable informed consent to the operation,
    2. the operation is fast and free from extreme pain and/or agony, and the method of death is chosen by the patient, So, if I wanted to be shot into space and then be sent into a volcano, the state would have to give it to me? Scrap the choice of death part.
    3. the patient has a terminal illness or an incurable illness that results in extreme pain and/or agony, and A better word might be "unbearable" and also maybe state that this is determined by the patient. Also, you may want to add something about their death being in the foreseeable future.
    4. a medical professional assists in the operation.
  2. Member nations must provide free euthanasia services to patients, at government expense "at government expense" is redundant. In areas where euthanasia services are not locally accessible, member nations must arrange and pay for patients seeking euthanasia residing in those areas, to travel to a clinic that provides euthanasia services.
  3. No member nations may discriminate against euthanasia recipients, the families thereof, or medical professionals aiding in euthanasia, including but not limited to discrimination in tax. This clause needs a lot of work.
  4. No person, or member nation, may coerce a patient to seek euthanasia.
  5. A medical professional that expresses a bona fide moral objection against euthanasia may not be forced to perform euthanasia, as long as said professional directs patients to easily and readily accessible euthanasia services.

Co-authored by [nation=long]Imperium Anglorum[/nation]
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, everybody dies.
Lord Dominator wrote:
10000 Islands Foreign Affairs wrote:~The population of 10000 Islands suffered a huge increase
I mean, if it’s that terrible I’m sure someone else will take them…
Frenchy: grub would be so proud knowing his descendants are the best raiders of their time and they’re queer
Greater Cesnica wrote:To the entity that is running a downvote campaign on The North Pacific's IFV Dispatch; too bad you can't upvote this Resolution so it passes.

User avatar
Araraukar
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15841
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Tue Aug 31, 2021 3:57 am

Comfed wrote:
The General Assembly,

Resolving that individuals should have the legal right to end their lives if they are in agony from an incurable illness,

Believing that any possible dangers resulting from a "slippery slope" in legalising euthanasia do not outweigh the right to end one's life on one's own terms,

Noting that it is thus necessary to establish pro-euthanasia measures in the General Assembly, enacts as follows:

  1. In this resolution, “euthanasia” is the killing of a patient, when:
    1. the patient has provided verifiable informed consent to the operation,
    2. the operation is fast and free from extreme pain and/or agony, and the method of death is chosen by the patient, So, if I wanted to be shot into space and then be sent into a volcano, the state would have to give it to me? Scrap the choice of death part.
    3. the patient has a terminal illness or an incurable illness that results in extreme pain and/or agony, and A better word might be "unbearable" and also maybe state that this is determined by the patient. Also, you may want to add something about their death being in the foreseeable future.
    4. a medical professional assists in the operation.
  2. Member nations must provide free euthanasia services to patients, at government expense "at government expense" is redundant. In areas where euthanasia services are not locally accessible, member nations must arrange and pay for patients seeking euthanasia residing in those areas, to travel to a clinic that provides euthanasia services.
  3. No member nations may discriminate against euthanasia recipients, the families thereof, or medical professionals aiding in euthanasia, including but not limited to discrimination in tax. This clause needs a lot of work.
  4. No person, or member nation, may coerce a patient to seek euthanasia.
  5. A medical professional that expresses a bona fide moral objection against euthanasia may not be forced to perform euthanasia, as long as said professional directs patients to easily and readily accessible euthanasia services.

Co-authored by [nation=long]Imperium Anglorum[/nation]

OOC: *goes to alter his treatment will to include "throw me into a volcano if I ever end up braindead**
- Linda Äyrämäki, acting ambassador in the absence of miss Leveret
Araraukar's RP reality is Modern Tech solarpunk. In IC in the WA.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
This video should be seen by all COVID-time Essential Workers out there. And others too, really.
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.

User avatar
The Python
Diplomat
 
Posts: 987
Founded: Jul 24, 2020
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby The Python » Wed Sep 01, 2021 8:59 pm

Comfed wrote:the method of death is chosen by the patient, So, if I wanted to be shot into space and then be sent into a volcano, the state would have to give it to me? Scrap the choice of death part.

Fixed xD
Comfed wrote:the patient has a terminal illness or an incurable illness that results in extreme pain and/or agony, and A better word might be "unbearable" and also maybe state that this is determined by the patient. Also, you may want to add something about their death being in the foreseeable future.

I've changed the wording to say "unbearable", but I don't think the "death being in the foreseeable future" should be included. For example, what there was a dysthanasia-esque situation where the patient has their life artificially extended without regard for quality of life, so their death is not necessarily in the "foreseeable future"?
Comfed wrote:Member nations must provide free euthanasia services to patients, at government expense "at government expense" is redundant.

Okay
Comfed wrote:No member nations may discriminate against euthanasia recipients, the families thereof, or medical professionals aiding in euthanasia, including but not limited to discrimination in tax. This clause needs a lot of work.

Hmm, any specific suggestions? (I'll check with the co-author about this)
Last edited by The Python on Wed Sep 01, 2021 8:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
See more information here.

User avatar
The Python
Diplomat
 
Posts: 987
Founded: Jul 24, 2020
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby The Python » Thu Sep 02, 2021 4:05 pm

After discussing with Comfed and IA (thank you to both) Clause 3 now reads like this:
No member nations may discriminate against anyone who receives or assists in euthanasia in ways including but not limited to:
  1. imposing higher taxes on those who receive or assist in euthanasia,
  2. prosecuting persons who receive or assist in euthanasia,
  3. fail to provide equal protection before the law to said persons,
  4. implement policies which restrict access to euthanasia.
See more information here.

User avatar
The Python
Diplomat
 
Posts: 987
Founded: Jul 24, 2020
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby The Python » Mon Sep 06, 2021 4:22 pm

bump
See more information here.

User avatar
The Python
Diplomat
 
Posts: 987
Founded: Jul 24, 2020
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby The Python » Sun Sep 12, 2021 3:07 pm

bumpity bump
See more information here.

User avatar
Barfleur
Diplomat
 
Posts: 592
Founded: Mar 04, 2019
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Barfleur » Tue Sep 14, 2021 3:42 pm

"I support this proposal, as I believe every person ought to have the right to end one's own life as one sees fit. I am also happy to see protections in place for medical practitioners with a bona fide objection to performing euthanasia."
Barfleur: Unus pro omnibus et omnes pro uno
Citizen of The East Pacific
“Sweatpants are a sign of defeat. You lost control of your life so you bought some sweatpants.”
― Karl Lagerfeld
Ambassador: Roger MacGeorge
Military Attaché: Colonel Lyndon Q. Ralston
Co-author, GA#534.
The Barfleurian World Assembly Mission can be found at Room 1903, Floor 19, WAHQ.

User avatar
Nyxonia
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 14
Founded: Mar 06, 2020
Ex-Nation

Postby Nyxonia » Wed Sep 15, 2021 8:10 pm

I think that agony from an incurable illness is too narrow. There are other conditions where euthanasia should be valid. For example, if the person was in a crippling condition that has severely compromised their quality of life. They may not be in pain but maybe they are a quadrapalegic . Or what about someone who has an inoperable brain tumor (or something like ALS) where they provide prior informed-consent?
So maybe under 1. iii. you add those caveats.
For example; I have a standing order that if I am to suffer a condition that makes me incapable of mental functioning and conscious awareness (the things that make me, me) I do not want my life extended.
As a mental turnip I might not be in pain, but that is no existence

User avatar
Qvait
Envoy
 
Posts: 268
Founded: Mar 08, 2012
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Qvait » Wed Sep 15, 2021 8:35 pm

Ambassador Sunna Jóhannsdóttir: The Valkyrian Republic supports a resolution mandating access to euthanasia. However, we have a few issues with the proposal at hand.

The Python wrote:3 . No member nations may discriminate against anyone who receives or assists in euthanasia in ways including but not limited to:

"First, we believe there to be a grammatical error in the above provision, which should state 'No member nation...' instead of the plural form."

The Python wrote:5. A medical professional that expresses a bona fide moral objection against euthanasia may not be forced to perform euthanasia, as long as said professional directs patients to easily and readily accessible euthanasia services.

"Second, we oppose the inclusion of the above provision, which only serves to delay providing euthanasia services to qualifying patients. Furthermore, licensed medical professionals should not be imposing their preconceived opinions on patients and should do the job that they signed up for, which is to provide medical care and services to their patients."
A blue jay from the South Pacific

3× Cabinet minister /// 1× OWL director /// CRS member /// SPSF


My History

User avatar
Bears Armed
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 20594
Founded: Jun 01, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bears Armed » Thu Sep 16, 2021 1:51 am

Qvait wrote:Ambassador Sunna Jóhannsdóttir: The Valkyrian Republic supports a resolution mandating access to euthanasia. However, we have a few issues with the proposal at hand.

The Python wrote:3 . No member nations may discriminate against anyone who receives or assists in euthanasia in ways including but not limited to:

"First, we believe there to be a grammatical error in the above provision, which should state 'No member nation...' instead of the plural form."

The Python wrote:5. A medical professional that expresses a bona fide moral objection against euthanasia may not be forced to perform euthanasia, as long as said professional directs patients to easily and readily accessible euthanasia services.

"Second, we oppose the inclusion of the above provision, which only serves to delay providing euthanasia services to qualifying patients. Furthermore, licensed medical professionals should not be imposing their preconceived opinions on patients and should do the job that they signed up for, which is to provide medical care and services to their patients."

"If they 'signed up' as doctors before performing euthanasia was made a part of the job, with no serious reason to anticipate that this change was going to occur, then they did not 'sign up' for this and their consciences should be respected. Only people who become doctors after this function has been defined as part of the job can reasonably be expected to accept it automatically."

Artorrios O Southwoods,
ChairBear, Bears Armed Mission at the W.A.
Last edited by Bears Armed on Thu Sep 16, 2021 1:53 am, edited 3 times in total.
The Confrederated Clans (and other Confrederated Bodys) of the Free Bears of Bears Armed
(includes The Ursine NorthLands) Demonym = Bear[s]; adjective = ‘Urrsish’.
Population = just under 20 million. Economy = only Thriving. Average Life expectancy = c.60 years. If the nation is classified as 'Anarchy' there still is a [strictly limited] national government... and those aren't "biker gangs", they're traditional cross-Clan 'Warrior Societies', generally respected rather than feared.
Author of some GA Resolutions, via Bears Armed Mission; subject of an SC resolution.
Factbook. We have more than 70 MAPS. Visitors' Guide.
The IDU's WA Drafting Room is open to help you.
Author of issues #429, 712, 729, 934, 1120, 1152, 1474.

User avatar
The Python
Diplomat
 
Posts: 987
Founded: Jul 24, 2020
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby The Python » Thu Sep 16, 2021 12:29 pm

Nyxonia wrote:I think that agony from an incurable illness is too narrow. There are other conditions where euthanasia should be valid. For example, if the person was in a crippling condition that has severely compromised their quality of life. They may not be in pain but maybe they are a quadrapalegic . Or what about someone who has an inoperable brain tumor (or something like ALS) where they provide prior informed-consent?
So maybe under 1. iii. you add those caveats.
For example; I have a standing order that if I am to suffer a condition that makes me incapable of mental functioning and conscious awareness (the things that make me, me) I do not want my life extended.
As a mental turnip I might not be in pain, but that is no existence

Alright, this will be discussed with the co-author :)

Qvait wrote:
The Python wrote:3 . No member nations may discriminate against anyone who receives or assists in euthanasia in ways including but not limited to:

"First, we believe there to be a grammatical error in the above provision, which should state 'No member nation...' instead of the plural form."

Mea culpa, fixed

Qvait wrote:
The Python wrote:5. A medical professional that expresses a bona fide moral objection against euthanasia may not be forced to perform euthanasia, as long as said professional directs patients to easily and readily accessible euthanasia services.

"Second, we oppose the inclusion of the above provision, which only serves to delay providing euthanasia services to qualifying patients. Furthermore, licensed medical professionals should not be imposing their preconceived opinions on patients and should do the job that they signed up for, which is to provide medical care and services to their patients."

Why?

First, forcing objecting doctors to perform euthanasia is unethical in general. Can't literally any other doctor that doesn't object do the euthanasia? Second, forcing objecting doctors to perform euthanasia would likely result in less people willing to become doctors if they will be forced to perform euthanasia even if they object. Third, "as long as said professional directs patients to easily and readily accessible euthanasia services" implies that in the unlikely case that no other euthanasia service is accessible nearby, then they would have to perform the euthanasia in the unlikely event. Fourth, what Bears Armed said.
Last edited by The Python on Thu Sep 16, 2021 12:30 pm, edited 2 times in total.
See more information here.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Divinusland

Advertisement

Remove ads