Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Cancer / March 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Assisted-suicide patient "dies", wakes up, then dies for good

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
uhoh - 05 Mar 2005 00:41 GMT
Man survives doctor-assisted suicide attempt

PORTLAND, Oregon (AP) -- A terminally ill cancer patient who tried to
end his life with drugs prescribed under Oregon's assisted-suicide law
awoke three days later, alert and talkative, his wife said.

David Prueitt, who had lung cancer, took what was believed to be a
fatal dose of a barbiturate prescribed by his doctor in January. He
fell into a coma within minutes, but woke up three days later, said
his wife Lynda Romig Prueitt.

Prueitt's wife told The Oregonian newspaper that he asked, "Why am I
not dead?"

Prueitt, 42, lived for two more weeks before dying of natural causes
at his Estacada home, about 35 miles southeast of Portland.

The state Department of Human Services will turn the case over to the
Board of Medical Examiners or state Board of Pharmacy to determine if
the procedure or drugs were faulty, said Dr. Katrina Hedberg,
assistant state epidemiologist.

Complications with doctor-assisted suicides are rare. In 2001, a
patient took 37 hours to die after ingesting a lethal dose, and in
2003, a patient took 48 hours to die. Neither regained consciousness.

Since the law took effect in 1997, more than 170 people in Oregon have
used it to end their lives. The law is meant for only extremely sick
people -- those with incurable diseases who two doctors agree have six
months or less to live and are of sound mind.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1997 that states have the right to
decide whether to allow doctor-assisted suicides, but it announced
last month it will review the law again following an appeal by the
Bush administration.
The Man from Smegma - 05 Mar 2005 07:45 GMT
>Man survives doctor-assisted suicide attempt
>
[quoted text clipped - 31 lines]
>last month it will review the law again following an appeal by the
>Bush administration.

This is why we should have open, reliable standards for lethal doses.
J - 05 Mar 2005 07:54 GMT
> Man survives doctor-assisted suicide attempt
>
[quoted text clipped - 31 lines]
> last month it will review the law again following an appeal by the
> Bush administration.

obviously a troll. Look at the email address and the groups crossposted
to.
If you're going to reply, remove the other groups.
If you see a reply you don't like, think twice before replying and watch
what newsgroups your reply is going to.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/health/2002197134_webwake04.html
After going through the process of requesting a doctor-assisted suicide,
Prueitt received a prescription for 100 capsules of Seconal, a type of
barbiturate.

On Jan. 30, Prueitt swallowed the drug overdose, which had been mixed with
applesauce and water. Also in the home were his wife, her mother, a friend
and two volunteers from Compassion in Dying of Oregon.

Prueitt, weakened by the disease, could barely raise the mug to his lips,
his wife said. Within six minutes of swallowing the drug, he fell into a
coma, she said.

After waking up three days later, he remained alert and talkative,
occasionally asking for water and cigarettes, she said. <end quote>
That subject's not in the FAQ

But suicide is.
http://www.cancersupporters.com/asc/part2.html

Do cancer patients ever get suicidal thoughts?

The statistics on suicide show that the suicide rate for white men
increases with age, and that white men over 65 are about 4 or 5 times more
likely to commit suicide than older white women. Illness, loss of wife or
other life partner, family and financial difficulties, alcoholism, and
comparable difficulties intensify a man's urges toward wanting out.

An article Suicide and Cancer in Late Life (Vol. 41, No 12, December 1990)
published in the journal Hospital and Community Psychiatry concerned
suicide among older men who were, or suspected that they were, in advanced
stages of cancer. The article's authors are Yeates Conwell, M.D., Eric D.
Caine, M.D., and Kurt Olsen, Ph.D. Drs. Conwell and Caine hold
professorships and Dr. Olsen holds an assistant professorship at
prestigious academic or health care institutions. The article's Abstract,
in full, states: In a controlled psychological autopsy study of suicide in
late life, eight cases in which the victim's belief that he had cancer
played a major role in the decision to end his life, were examined. All
victims were men. The majority had major affective disorders, but none had
been seen in mental health care settings. Other common characteristics
were an active relationship with a primary physician, numerous losses,
prior experience with cancer or debilitating disease, and a rigid,
self-sufficient personality. The cases illustrate the complex determinants
of suicidal behavior in the elderly and suggest preventive strategies.

Physical illness is a commonly cited risk factor for suicide, especially
in late life. Of the physical illnesses associated with suicidal behavior,
cancer stands out. It has been estimated that malignant neoplasm was
present 20 times more often in suicide victims than expected in the
general population, and studying suicide and accident victims over age 50,
found cancer was significantly more common among those who took their own
lives.

In addition, large-scale epidemiological studies have found cancer
patients to be at significantly higher risk for suicide than the general
population. Cancer has a special psychological significance in our
culture, where it is associated with pain, suffering, and death.

Suicide has crossed my mind, what should I do?

You're experiencing a tremendous amount of stress and pain, and may have
never learned to manage the emotions associated with both. Suicide may
seem like your only escape from mounting pressure, although it's not.
Doing (or attempting) suicide, however, doesn't really address the
underlying causes of your pain, whatever they may be.

That's often the case with people who attempt suicide or engage in
self-injurious behavior. But there are other options available, and I
recommend you seek them out as soon as possible.

The most important thing is to start seeing a therapist, if you haven't
already, and be completely honest with him or her about what's going on
with you. If you can find a therapist experienced in treating people with
cancer, all the better.

If money is a problem, you can seek out a community mental health center
or other agency offering reduced-fee services.
J.
Nom dePlume - 05 Mar 2005 08:03 GMT
If an assisted suicide fails, can the patient sue for malpractice?

Signature

Nom dePlume, Ph.D

Why, yes, in fact, I am a rocket scientist.

Guide to Medications for Mental Illness:
http://www.geocities.com/nomdeplume1000
=====

> Man survives doctor-assisted suicide attempt
>
> PORTLAND, Oregon (AP) -- A terminally ill cancer patient who tried to
> end his life with drugs prescribed under Oregon's assisted-suicide law
> awoke three days later, alert and talkative, his wife said.
CyberDroog - 05 Mar 2005 10:26 GMT
>If an assisted suicide fails, can the patient sue for malpractice?

And will doctors who have too high a rate of patient survival lose their
licenses?

Signature

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

 - Benjamin Franklin

Taedium Vitae - 05 Mar 2005 12:08 GMT
This was just the example that pro-lifers needed! (Pro-lifers are now
using this example as an argument against assisted suicide. Nah, they
cannot infer that barbiturates OD should be substituted by guillotine).

PRo-choicers say the man did not swallow all the pills.

Still, there are some things that i don't udnerstand. What the story
suggests, is that the sleeping pills reached his brain and probably the
man breathed very slowly and his heartbeat was very slow when the
Seconal's influence was at the climax. (Don't forget that barbiturates
affect the WHOLE brain). Then the barbiturates gradually left the blood
and reached the urine. Still, the man might have died from renal
failure (he did not get pissed for three days). And still he did not
die...Strange

> Man
springrain - 05 Mar 2005 14:47 GMT
"it will review the law again following an appeal by the
Bush administration. "

Bush strikes again. For a free country we seemed to be less and less
free.
CyberDroog - 05 Mar 2005 14:59 GMT
>"it will review the law again following an appeal by the
>Bush administration. "
>
>Bush strikes again. For a free country we seemed to be less and less
>free.

Oh yeah... you can always gauge fascist governments by their unwillingness
to legalize suicide.

Signature

PREHISTORIC, adj. Belonging to an early period and a museum. Antedating
the art and practice of perpetuating falsehood.

 - Ambrose Bierce

Ready - 05 Mar 2005 16:00 GMT
Stories like this make me nervous.  At least it worked for 170 people.
That's a less than 1% failure rate so the odds are with you that the
lethal dose will kill you.  Plus, like some are saying, maybe he didn't
take enough.  Odd story, but hopefully my overdose will go better than
this poor guy's.
rmk@toad.rmkhome.com - 07 Mar 2005 06:21 GMT
In talk.bizarre Ready <worldsux2003@yahoo.com> wrote:
:Stories like this make me nervous.  At least it worked for 170 people.
:That's a less than 1% failure rate so the odds are with you that the
:lethal dose will kill you.  Plus, like some are saying, maybe he didn't
:take enough.  Odd story, but hopefully my overdose will go better than
:this poor guy's.

Plus they should have been prepared for just such an eventuality. Thet should
have all been primed to convince him that he was indeed dead.
Signature

Rick Kelly    rmk@rmkhome.com
        <http://www.rmkhome.com/>
        <http://rkba.rmkhome.com/>

springrain - 07 Mar 2005 14:02 GMT
"Thet should
have all been primed to convince him that he was indeed dead. "

I can see where it could be a real problem if everyone knows someone is
dead but the person himself.  I reminds me of some of the Laruall
Hamilton books, anyone else read her?

Of course the reverse is just as bad, how many of us feel like we are
the ones who are dead and no one else notices? Or cares?
washer of kegs - 06 Mar 2005 09:50 GMT
> Man survives doctor-assisted suicide attempt
>
> PORTLAND, Oregon (AP) -- A terminally ill cancer patient who tried to
> end his life with drugs prescribed under Oregon's assisted-suicide law
> awoke three days later, alert and talkative, his wife said.

What I do not understand is just where was he for three days?  Most places
stick you in the cold room until they can slice and dice to verify you were
terminally ill.  If he was still kicking, it sounds like no doctor had
declared him dead as I assume your average first responder would be able to
tell he still had some life in him.  did she plan to keep him around till
he started to stink or something.  This whole story smells.
Alan B. Mac Farlane - 07 Mar 2005 14:58 GMT
all this guy had to do - was be sent to Abu Garab Drill Team and he would
have died very quickly - and with lots of pain however ... but it would be a
sure thing ... well attended and lots of witnesses ...

on the other hand - go kill someone and get caught - the kill krazy
kristians will hang, shoot, poison or electrocute him ...

hey - if home capital punishment death dont work sometimes - then in prison
it also misses the mark sometimes ... a convict gets to be killed at least
twice with electricity - shooting, hanging, drugs ...

we need more liberal hate crimes - so that liberal haters who kill liberals
will really be scared and not kill them anymore ... a death penalty with
teeth in it ... so that people will know they will get killed when they say
so ..

Is this a great country or what ...

sumbuddie on da watchtower

:)

> Man survives doctor-assisted suicide attempt
>
[quoted text clipped - 31 lines]
> last month it will review the law again following an appeal by the
> Bush administration.
springrain - 07 Mar 2005 15:11 GMT
"Is this a great country or what ... "

And how about the number of people who oppose abortion but support the
death penalty?  Isn't that just kind of retoractive abortion? They are
just as dead but have hurt who knows how many people first.
CyberDroog - 07 Mar 2005 15:44 GMT
>And how about the number of people who oppose abortion but support the
>death penalty?  Isn't that just kind of retoractive abortion? They are
>just as dead but have hurt who knows how many people first.

That view makes some sense.  Most people don't feel that a baby is the womb
is guilty of capital crimes.  Hell, they were probably never even suspects.

It is the people who support abortion and oppose the death penalty who have
some real issues.

Signature

Move tax day to the day before election day. And for good measure, abolish
withholding. Imagine if people trudged to the polls the day after sending
fat checks to the IRS. That might bring the incumbents down a notch.

 - Sheldon Richman, Future of Freedom Foundation

Rhiannon - 08 Mar 2005 19:11 GMT
> >And how about the number of people who oppose abortion but support the
> >death penalty?  Isn't that just kind of retoractive abortion? They are
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> It is the people who support abortion and oppose the death penalty who have
> some real issues.

Funny, in my mind anyone who supports killing anyone else has some real
issues.

rhianon@sympatico.ca
CyberDroog - 08 Mar 2005 19:09 GMT
>> >And how about the number of people who oppose abortion but support the
>> >death penalty?  Isn't that just kind of retoractive abortion? They are
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>Funny, in my mind anyone who supports killing anyone else has some real
>issues.

Being opposed to killing for any reason is logically consistent also.

Signature

He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from
oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that
will reach to himself.

 - Thomas Paine

KK - 08 Mar 2005 20:41 GMT
> Being opposed to killing for any reason is logically consistent also.

Even to stop one person from killing many others?
CyberDroog - 08 Mar 2005 21:28 GMT
>> Being opposed to killing for any reason is logically consistent also.
>
>Even to stop one person from killing many others?

The reason doesn't matter.  Being opposed to killing, period, is logically
consistent.  That doesn't necessarily mean it is correct.

Signature

If there is something to gain and nothing to lose by asking, by all means
ask!

 - W. Clement Stone

Rhiannon - 08 Mar 2005 22:13 GMT
> > Being opposed to killing for any reason is logically consistent also.
>
> Even to stop one person from killing many others?

Two words - Life sentence.

--
rhianon@sympatico.ca
Alan Harding - 09 Mar 2005 20:24 GMT
>> > Being opposed to killing for any reason is logically consistent also.
>>
>> Even to stop one person from killing many others?
>
>Two words - Life sentence.

First you have to stop them.

Signature

The opinions given above may be mine. They might also
   just be what I feel like saying right now, okay?

Rhiannon - 10 Mar 2005 01:42 GMT
> >> > Being opposed to killing for any reason is logically consistent also.
> >>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> First you have to stop them.

Unless KK meant literally tackling some guy on the street with a gun and
wrestling him to the ground before shooting him with his own weapon - and
the fact that we were discussing the death penalty - I had to assume that
the *one person* in question had in fact been stopped, apprehended, and
convicted prior to receiving the death penalty.

--
rhianon@sympatico.ca
A_Lizard - 10 Mar 2005 04:10 GMT
[snip]

The sole virtue of the death penalty is that there is no scientific
evidence of repeat offenders among people who have received it.

A.Lizard

Signature

"Are you so dependent on alcohol that when you have a sore

throat, you shove it up your a.s instead?" -- Miz Daisy Cutter

Rhiannon - 10 Mar 2005 05:37 GMT
> The sole virtue of the death penalty is that there is no scientific
> evidence of repeat offenders among people who have received it.
>
> A.Lizard

*virtue of the death penalty* is an oxymoron.

rhianon@sympatico.ca
CyberDroog - 10 Mar 2005 13:56 GMT
>The sole virtue of the death penalty is that there is no scientific
>evidence of repeat offenders among people who have received it.

The downside is that there is evidence of innocent people having received
it. Theoretically I'm all for the death penalty - that is the actual
perpetrator of a capital crime being put to death.  But if you make a
mistake and convict an innocent person, then *you* are the murderer.

Signature

CONVENT, n. A place of retirement for woman who wish for leisure to
meditate upon the vice of idleness.

 - Ambrose Bierce

Alan Harding - 11 Mar 2005 07:31 GMT
>>The sole virtue of the death penalty is that there is no scientific
>>evidence of repeat offenders among people who have received it.
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>perpetrator of a capital crime being put to death.  But if you make a
>mistake and convict an innocent person, then *you* are the murderer.

But there are always some cases of people being wrongly convicted of
murder. When they're still alive, it's not so bad, but there's not much
you can do for someone you find is innocent when you've killed them.

The last man hanged in England was in police custody when the murder
took place. It was correct law, but he was probably only charged because
the shooter was too young to hang. The outcry got capital punishment
temporarily banned. It was only later permanently banned.

Signature

The opinions given above may be mine. They might also
   just be what I feel like saying right now, okay?

CyberDroog - 11 Mar 2005 19:38 GMT
>>>The sole virtue of the death penalty is that there is no scientific
>>>evidence of repeat offenders among people who have received it.
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>murder. When they're still alive, it's not so bad, but there's not much
>you can do for someone you find is innocent when you've killed them.

Isn't that what I said?  Maybe it's just me, but it seems like I am on a
different wavelength than you Brits lately...

As I see it, the death penalty is too flawed for practical use.  None of us
have perfect knowledge so mistakes can be made, and of course they are
permanent - leaving the judge and jury guilty of murder.

It is also too expensive.  Our natural inclination is to reduce errors as
much as possible by providing every route of appeal, even mandatory
appeals.  The expense of all of that extra legal wrangling far outweighs
the cost of incarcerating a person for life.  Especially since death row is
a more expensive form of incarceration in the first place.

Signature

The government consists of a gang of men exactly like you and me. They
have, taking one with another, no special talent for the business of
government; they have only a talent for getting and holding office. Their
principal device to that end is to search out groups who pant and pine for
something they can't get and to promise to give it to them. Nine times out
of ten that promise is worth nothing. The tenth time is made good by
looting A to satisfy B. In other words, government is a broker in pillage,
and every election is sort of an advance auction sale of stolen goods.

 - H.L. Mencken

Alan Harding - 11 Mar 2005 22:43 GMT
>>>>The sole virtue of the death penalty is that there is no scientific
>>>>evidence of repeat offenders among people who have received it.
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>
>Isn't that what I said?

No.

Signature

The opinions given above may be mine. They might also
   just be what I feel like saying right now, okay?

CyberDroog - 12 Mar 2005 16:54 GMT
>>>>>The sole virtue of the death penalty is that there is no scientific
>>>>>evidence of repeat offenders among people who have received it.
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>
>No.

You might want to read it again.

Signature

FAITH, n. Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks
without knowledge, of things without parallel.

 - Ambrose Bierce

Alan Harding - 12 Mar 2005 19:40 GMT
>>>>>>The sole virtue of the death penalty is that there is no scientific
>>>>>>evidence of repeat offenders among people who have received it.
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>
>You might want to read it again.

You still didn't say it.

Signature

The opinions given above may be mine. They might also
   just be what I feel like saying right now, okay?

CyberDroog - 13 Mar 2005 18:46 GMT
>>>>>>The downside is that there is evidence of innocent people having received
>>>>>>it. Theoretically I'm all for the death penalty - that is the actual
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
>You still didn't say it.

Ah, I didn't specifically say that you can't bring someone back?  Now who
is being too literal? :)

Signature

Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that
you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail
away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails.  Explore.
Dream. Discover.

 - Mark Twain

Alan Harding - 10 Mar 2005 08:00 GMT
>> >> > Being opposed to killing for any reason is logically consistent also.
>> >>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>the *one person* in question had in fact been stopped, apprehended, and
>convicted prior to receiving the death penalty.

I assumed he was at the top of a tower, with a sniper rifle and
ammunition.

Signature

The opinions given above may be mine. They might also
   just be what I feel like saying right now, okay?

Alan Harding - 09 Mar 2005 07:57 GMT
>> >And how about the number of people who oppose abortion but support the
>> >death penalty?  Isn't that just kind of retoractive abortion? They are
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>Funny, in my mind anyone who supports killing anyone else has some real
>issues.

The armed services, the police and public executioners included?

Signature

The opinions given above may be mine. They might also
   just be what I feel like saying right now, okay?

Rhiannon - 10 Mar 2005 06:00 GMT
> In message <ZXlXd.12717$fW4.422606@news20.bellglobal.com>, Rhiannon

> >Funny, in my mind anyone who supports killing anyone else has some real
> >issues.
>
> The armed services, the police and public executioners included?

Armed services - mixed feelings.  Some wars are necessary.  Some wars are
WRONG.  Police - no.  Public executioners?  As in the guy who pulls the
switch or administers the lethal injection?  Yes.  I don't support the death
penalty.  But who knows the mind of God?  In the end perhaps all three will
be answerable offences.

--
rhianon@sympatico.ca
springrain - 10 Mar 2005 14:41 GMT
"> >Funny, in my mind anyone who supports killing anyone else has some
real
> >issues. "

Funny, I think anyone who can't understand the need in some cases has
lead a sheltered life.

I think life has value, I don't even eat meat. But like rabid dogs,
some people are forever threats to anyone they come in contact with and
too mentally damaged to be of any good to anyone, including themselves.
We would destroy a sick animal like that an call it putting them out of
their misery.
 To have a person who has tortured and killed people for fun, live
long healthy lives watching TV and pretty much screwing round offends
me.  That he is doing it on tax dollars that could be feeding hungry
kids makes it worse.  They get better health care than 30 % of the
honest population.

Plus, what about the other inmates they often kill, and the guards paid
to watch them that are in constant fear for their lives?

You are right, who knows the mind of God? He said "Thou shall not kill'
and advocated stoning for sins, even less severe. My favorite is
disrespecting your parents.
So maybe we are acting on his part.
Rhiannon - 14 Mar 2005 06:30 GMT
Signature

X-No-Archive: Yes

> "> >Funny, in my mind anyone who supports killing anyone else has some
> real
> > >issues. "
>
> Funny, I think anyone who can't understand the need in some cases has
> lead a sheltered life.

Please.  Spare me.  I'm probably older than your underwear.

> I think life has value, I don't even eat meat. But like rabid dogs,
> some people are forever threats to anyone they come in contact with and
> too mentally damaged to be of any good to anyone, including themselves.
> We would destroy a sick animal like that an call it putting them out of
> their misery.

>   To have a person who has tortured and killed people for fun, live
> long healthy lives watching TV and pretty much screwing round offends
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> disrespecting your parents.
> So maybe we are acting on his part.

Right.  Thou shall not kill.  Thanks for making my point for me.

rhianon@sympatico.ca
Alan Harding - 14 Mar 2005 08:02 GMT
>Right.  Thou shall not kill.  Thanks for making my point for me.

Except in socially approved circumstances.

Signature

The opinions given above may be mine. They might also
   just be what I feel like saying right now, okay?

Rhiannon - 14 Mar 2005 16:17 GMT
Signature

rhianon@sympatico.ca

>
> >Right.  Thou shall not kill.  Thanks for making my point for me.
>
> Except in socially approved circumstances.

What?  Like in here? <g>

Signature

rhianon@sympatico.ca

> > The opinions given above may be mine. They might also
>     just be what I feel like saying right now, okay?
Alan Harding - 14 Mar 2005 22:02 GMT
>> >Right.  Thou shall not kill.  Thanks for making my point for me.
>>
>> Except in socially approved circumstances.
>
>What?  Like in here? <g>

I was thinking Real Life [tm]. Such as self-defence, war and law
enforcement. Suicide isn't really approved of in the West, but it's not
illegal either. And that's only humans. 'Thou shalt not kill' is a very
punctured command, more 'You may kill, except where prohibited by local
custom.'

Signature

The opinions given above may be mine. They might also
   just be what I feel like saying right now, okay?

Alan B. Mac Farlane - 10 Mar 2005 17:13 GMT
> And how about the number of people who oppose abortion but support the
> death penalty?

they are kill krazy kristians ...

pass the koolaid ...

its a wonderfull jonestown day in Jesusland ...

swift boat veterans have the best intelligence ...

and know what to do ...

sumbuddie going to hell with the EVIL SANTA for this ...

enjoy the company ...

not like those sick puppies in Heaven ...

:)
Mike Radcliffe - 08 Mar 2005 02:58 GMT
> PORTLAND, Oregon (AP) -- A terminally ill cancer patient who tried to
> end his life with drugs prescribed under Oregon's assisted-suicide law
> awoke three days later, alert and talkative,

Which just goes to show that when the time is right we will all go, not a
minute sooner, not a minute later.
MIKE
CyberDroog - 08 Mar 2005 12:06 GMT
>> PORTLAND, Oregon (AP) -- A terminally ill cancer patient who tried to
>> end his life with drugs prescribed under Oregon's assisted-suicide law
>> awoke three days later, alert and talkative,
>
>Which just goes to show that when the time is right we will all go, not a
>minute sooner, not a minute later.

Ummm, yeah... death just so often happens to coincide with something that
causes it.

Signature

You don't have to buy from anyone. You don't have to work at any
particular job. You don't have to participate in any given relationship.
You can choose.

 - Harry Browne

Mike Radcliffe - 08 Mar 2005 18:03 GMT
>>> PORTLAND, Oregon (AP) -- A terminally ill cancer patient who tried to
>>> end his life with drugs prescribed under Oregon's assisted-suicide law
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> Ummm, yeah... death just so often happens to coincide with something that
> causes it.

But even when we think we can control it something like this happens to
prove us wrong
MIKE
CyberDroog - 08 Mar 2005 19:04 GMT
>>>> PORTLAND, Oregon (AP) -- A terminally ill cancer patient who tried to
>>>> end his life with drugs prescribed under Oregon's assisted-suicide law
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>But even when we think we can control it something like this happens to
>prove us wrong

I don't see what it proves.  It's like saying that a person who shoots
themselves and survives is proof that some aspect of fate has more control,
while overlooking the fact that they used a BB gun.

Signature

EGOTIST, n. A person of low taste, more interested in himself than in me.

 - Ambrose Bierce

Ivan Marsh - 08 Mar 2005 19:21 GMT
>>>>> PORTLAND, Oregon (AP) -- A terminally ill cancer patient who tried to
>>>>> end his life with drugs prescribed under Oregon's assisted-suicide law
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> themselves and survives is proof that some aspect of fate has more control,
> while overlooking the fact that they used a BB gun.

That's not fate, it's physics.

Signature

Life is short, but wide. -KV

CyberDroog - 08 Mar 2005 20:09 GMT
>>>> Ummm, yeah... death just so often happens to coincide with something that
>>>> causes it.
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
>That's not fate, it's physics.

That's what I meant.  Likewise, if the report of the man in question not
having taken all of the barbs given to him is true, then that is the
obviously the cause of the problem.

Botched or half-hearted suicide attempts are in no way proof that the time
of our demise is carved in stone and we can't change it.

Signature

SELF-EVIDENT, adj. Evident to one's self and to nobody else.

 - Ambrose Bierce

Mike Radcliffe - 09 Mar 2005 01:50 GMT
>>> I don't see what it proves.  It's like saying that a person who shoots
>>> themselves and survives is proof that some aspect of fate has more
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> Botched or half-hearted suicide attempts are in no way proof that the time
> of our demise is carved in stone and we can't change it.

It may not be carved in stone but neither is it totally in our control. Life
has no guarantees and neither does the time of death..whatever we may wish.
MIKE
CyberDroog - 09 Mar 2005 12:58 GMT
>> Botched or half-hearted suicide attempts are in no way proof that the time
>> of our demise is carved in stone and we can't change it.
>>
>It may not be carved in stone but neither is it totally in our control. Life
>has no guarantees and neither does the time of death..whatever we may wish.

Nothing is totally in your control.  Every guy that has walked into the
bathroom on one of "those" mornings and pissed into the toilet and
wastebasket simultaneously knows that...  But many things are primarily a
matter of choice.  That is, your choice has an objective effect even though
you still have to deal with blind chance and the choices of others.

The time of death is a variable.  So far it appears that no one will escape
it completely.  But how you behave has a great influence on when it
happens.  If that were not the case you could play the part of a superhero
- jumping off of buildings, running into fires, etc - with the knowledge
that height and heat can't hurt you unless it is your time.

Actually the only reason you are under the impression that when you die
isn't under your control is because it is a special circumstance.  If you
attempt to kill yourself, and get only to a certain point, you won't be
conscious and, therefore, not capable of choosing to finish.
Alternatively, you might be in a straight jacket and, although conscious,
not physically capable of finishing the job.

Signature

There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

 - Robert Heinlein

Alan Harding - 10 Mar 2005 08:06 GMT
>>>>> PORTLAND, Oregon (AP) -- A terminally ill cancer patient who tried to
>>>>> end his life with drugs prescribed under Oregon's assisted-suicide law
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>themselves and survives is proof that some aspect of fate has more control,
>while overlooking the fact that they used a BB gun.

Back in the mists of time, we had someone on asd who'd shot himself in
the head with a rifle - not BB. No, he hadn't missed. Sometimes the
Fates are against you.

Signature

The opinions given above may be mine. They might also
   just be what I feel like saying right now, okay?

CyberDroog - 10 Mar 2005 19:16 GMT
>>I don't see what it proves.  It's like saying that a person who shoots
>>themselves and survives is proof that some aspect of fate has more control,
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>the head with a rifle - not BB. No, he hadn't missed. Sometimes the
>Fates are against you.

It isn't the fates.  At least not in any literal sense.  It's just blind
chance.  Shooting yourself in the head isn't as straightforward as it
seems.  It seems common to underestimate just how much damage most of the
brain can take.  The classic example of such an attempt is placing a
handgun at the temple, which actually presents the best chance of survival
- even if it is in a vegetative state.

The best target would be the brain stem, without which no other part of the
brain really matters.  The best route seems to be through the mouth.  But
there is a perspective problem.  It's not all that easy to gauge the path
of the bullet with the muzzle of the gun in your mouth.  A rifle presents
the added problem of having to reach down to the trigger (assuming the
barrel is of a legal length.)  The final problem is the hesitation twitch -
the tendency of people to jerk the gun away at the moment they pull the
trigger.

Let's face it - killing yourself is not an easy task.  The number of people
who really want to die is relatively low. Most just want to escape, and
they see death as the best way, but they are still fundamentally opposed to
dying.  What they wish most is that they didn't feel the need to.

It's all prone to error.  Sometime back someone here mentioned a man who
shot himself in the head with a 12 gauge and survived after blowing his
face off.  That is an obvious aiming problem.  Either the muzzle was
pointed too far upwards, or he jerked the gun away as he pulled the
trigger.

Lastly, there is the problem of noise.  Guns going off are prone to
attracting attention.  Medical technology being what it is, many people can
survive horrific head injuries if they are promptly transported to a
hospital.  My grandfather survived a rifle bullet through the head during
the second battle of the Marne in WWI (it entered under his jaw on the
right and exited the top left portion of his head. Straight through the
brain.)  Just ponder how much trauma medicine has advanced since then.

Doing something for the first time and getting it wrong is not fate.

Signature

ACCUSE, v.t. To affirm another's guilt or unworth; most commonly as a
justification of ourselves for having wronged him.

 - Ambrose Bierce

Alan Harding - 11 Mar 2005 23:02 GMT
>>>I don't see what it proves.  It's like saying that a person who shoots
>>>themselves and survives is proof that some aspect of fate has more control,
[quoted text clipped - 40 lines]
>
>Doing something for the first time and getting it wrong is not fate.

Have you ever considered that not everyone is so narrow-mindedly literal
as you are?

Signature

The opinions given above may be mine. They might also
   just be what I feel like saying right now, okay?

CyberDroog - 12 Mar 2005 16:55 GMT
>>Doing something for the first time and getting it wrong is not fate.
>
>Have you ever considered that not everyone is so narrow-mindedly literal
>as you are?

No.  But I have considered how ignorantly superstitious many people are. ;)

Signature

There are indeed a great many more things in life than money; and it is
money that gives us access to most of them.

 - Terry Eagleton

Alan Harding - 12 Mar 2005 19:41 GMT
>>>Doing something for the first time and getting it wrong is not fate.
>>
>>Have you ever considered that not everyone is so narrow-mindedly literal
>>as you are?
>
>No.  But I have considered how ignorantly superstitious many people are. ;)

One of your redeeming features. And the cats.

Signature

The opinions given above may be mine. They might also
   just be what I feel like saying right now, okay?

 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.