Jump to content
RemedySpot.com
Sign in to follow this  
Guest guest

Re: Autism Boards

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

> --- " Stan's Computer " wrote:

>

> > But that only demonstrates the point, that there are humans who

> > can enjoy life in circumstances where I suspect a dog wouldn't.

> > But the considerations are the same (Would the person wish to

> > live?).

>

> A person can't know whether they'd wish to live until they do live it. ...

>

> With regard to circumstances where a dog wouldn't, I notice that most

> dogs don't get too depressed if they lose a leg or two.

sign on the public bulletin board in Idaho City:

LOST DOG

Three Legs

Blind in One Eye

Missing One Ear

Recently Castrated

Answers to Lucky

Signs notwithstanding, one can see what you're describing in

dogs. A dog with three legs is likely to remain happy; just

less efficient at hunting. One can also see when a dog is in

distress, or " when it's not fun anymore " .

I hope that " when it's not fun anymore " for me, someone will

pull the plug or find enough sedatives to give me the human

equivalent of Lethal Blue. To me that person playing God will

be a god.

As is the case with dogs, that issue is not the same as equating

disability with whether life is worth living. You very

eloquently expressed that difference a number of times.

>

> ... including some who'd been mistakenly diagnosed

> " vegetative "

That suggests a problem with diagnosis. As to whether a

particular person wishes to die, one must make a determination

based on that person's expressed wishes. In the absence of

expressed wishes, one should follow that person's prior

expressed wishes.

The problem is when one does not really know what that person's

wishes were -- whether it's " Keep me alive at all costs " or

" Please take me out and shoot me " .

- s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

> That suggests a problem with diagnosis. As to whether a

> particular person wishes to die, one must make a determination

> based on that person's expressed wishes. In the absence of

> expressed wishes, one should follow that person's prior

> expressed wishes.

The trouble with that, although it's currently how things are done, is

that it's both unscientific and out of touch with the reality of how

things happen. Most people, prior to reaching a certain level of

impairment, swear they " don't want to live like that " . Most people,

after reaching that level of impairment, discover that they're really

the same person and don't mind as much as they thought they would

(certainly not enough to become suicidal). A fair bit of research has

backed this up.

So this results in situations where people's advance decisions are not

what they really want. Including some truly horrific situations where

a person is prevented from access to water or food while they

physically fight people for it, because after the brain injury or

stroke or whatever they've decided they really do want to live after

all but are now declared incompetent to make that decision for

themselves (and their desire to live is shown as evidence of their

incompetence).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

> The trouble with that ... Most people,

> after reaching that level of impairment, discover that they're really

> the same person and don't mind as much as they thought they would

> (certainly not enough to become suicidal). A fair bit of research has

> backed this up.

I wuld still want the right to make that decision. I've also

seen instances where someone expressed such wishes and the

family refused to go along with the wish, with similar untoward

results.

If my wish was a mistake, then I can live with that. Er, I can

die with that. No problem.

> So this results in situations where people's advance decisions are not

> what they really want.

There are 2 or 3 issues here (more if the state adds religion to

the mix)..

1. Whether the " advance decision " is valid

2. Whether the person has a right to make an " advance decision "

3. Whether we want the state to use its power and supposedly

superior knowledge to overrule the individual's " advance

decision " , based on secular reasoning

4. Whether we want the state to use its power and supposedly

superior knowledge to overrule the individual's " advance

decision " , based on the holding of a church body

5a. Whether to terminate life in a painless manner as assisted

suicide

5. Whether to terminate life in a painless manner as assisted

suicide when the person is terminal.

It seems that it isn't possible to determine what people really

want in some circumstances. Therefore, the prior decision

should be honoured.

There is also the situation where people are deprived of food

and water to die on their own. That seems far more inhumane

than a shot of Lethal Blue. If one isn't willing to " pull the

trigger " (in a manner of speaking), then why not provide

sufficient sedatives that the person dies feeling no pain?

- s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

It was 23 Aug 2006, when Stan's Computer commented:

>

>

> >

> > > it's like an animal if hit by a car and it is suffering ...

>

> > It is awfully patronizing of you to equate our lives with that

> > of an animal hit by a car. And sick too.

>

> I disagree, since to a certain extent the same considerations

> apply.

Yeahbut...

> One of the considerations for an animal or human is whether life

> is meaningful. In many instances, humans can enjoy life in a

> manner which would be unsuitable, for example, in the case of a

> dog. pointed that out:

>

> " I take a bunch of medications to keep two different severe

> chronic pain conditions under control, only one of which is

> really under that much control. (I've had a migraine for years

> ...

> However.

> I'm happier than a lot of non-disabled people I know. Genuinely

> happier. Not forced. "

>

> But that only demonstrates the point, that there are humans who

> can enjoy life in circumstances where I suspect a dog wouldn't.

> But the considerations are the same (Would the person wish to

> live?).

>

> There are of course other considerations. If one runs over a

> tree rat, one is not inclined to pay for the squirrel's

> treatment. So in that respect there is a substantial

> difference. But the basic concept of life having value to the

> being is the same and can be equated.

Well, yeahbut...

It ain't about life's " value to the being, " not in my church, anyway.

Since we're in that neighborhood through no fault of mine own, lemme throw

my religious beliefs in to the mix.

I believe in God, and I believe in heaven and hell, and I believe that

heaven and hell are, or can be, one and the same. After we die, we return

to our inherent spirit, and we are clearly aware of every aspect of the

lives we've just lived, good or bad. We know what we did and didn't do,

and we know what we should and shouldn't have done, and we know who we

helped and who we hurt, and we know what we could have done, if we hadn't

screwed up -- or if we hadn't given up.

Don't need a hell, as in burning-in-hell, particularly. Anyone up for an

eternity regretting all your screwups, with no opportunity to forget?

And then there comes a time when we have an opportunity to return to earth

to try another life. Unlike the Budhists, I don't believe we're stuck in

a particular life because we did poorly in a previous life. I believe we

are made fully aware of all the lives we could live, and we -choose- a

life: " Hey, I could do -that- one, I saw where a guy did one of those and

I could do it better... " We are fully aware of what's key in a life, and

what we'll face, and we say, " yeah, I could live -that- life. "

That means a lot of different things. No suicide allowed: when you were

exactly aware of all you're really capable of, you said " Yeah, this one I

can do -- hard, but I can do it. " Note there's no assumption that all the

" important " lives are easy ones, or Save The World or something. And not

all important lives are long. If it's there for somebody to choose to

live, it's important -- like there's been some child who lived for five

minutes out of the womb, or died before birth, who -didn't- impact folks

rather strongly? All lives are important, and some spirit chose to live

that life because it needed to be lived. Why? Beats the crap out of me,

" through the glass, darkly. "

So, where does that leave us? Some spirit, who's already been through X

lives, who doesn't see life " through a glass, darkly, " who fully

understands the price, the pains, and the joys involved, chose to live

that particular life, potentially autistic -- and they'd be fully willing

to go through the rest of that life autistic, because they know they can

handle that -- knowing that you or I or somebody else might decide it's

too much trouble to go through a whole lifetime supporting somebody with

alla the troubles that go with Autism and ASDs. They're fine with

staying, and a bit peeved that, given they're okay with doing the Whole

Life thing, -you- aren't up for it, even if it ain't you actually living

that Life, so you're keeping them from finishing what they started, and it

really ain't any of your goddamn business, is it?

So, lessee, you were talking about drowning puppies for their own good, or

what was that you were saying, I kinda lost track...

--

Pegasus Mail is free software, committed to the notion that

communication is as basic a right as free speech, since free speech

without a medium by which it may be heard is as loud as silence.

-- , author, Pegasus Mail <http://www.pmail.com>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

> So this results in situations where people's advance decisions are not

> what they really want.

My direct answer:

If someone says, " Keep me alive at all costs " , I would take

steps to keep her alive. I would disagree, but follow her

wishes.

If someone says, " Please take me out and shoot me " , I would

take steps to either end her life as requested. If she said " I

don't want to be kept alive " under terminal circumstances, I'd

do what is necessary to end life support, and do what is

necessary to provide as pain free death as possible. (Both

wishes have been expressed to me by people close to me.)

- s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

> So, lessee, you were talking about drowning puppies for their own good, or

> what was that you were saying, I kinda lost track...

Nothing of the sort. End of life issues for self and those we

care for.

- s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

wrote:

> I believe in God, and I believe in heaven and hell, and I believe

> that heaven and hell are, or can be, one and the same. After we

> die, we return to our inherent spirit, and we are clearly aware of

> every aspect of the lives we've just lived, good or bad. We know

> what we did and didn't do, and we know what we should and shouldn't

> have done, and we know who we helped and who we hurt, and we know

> what we could have done, if we hadn't screwed up -- or if we hadn't

> given up.

" When the sky is rent asunder, when the stars scatter and the oceans

roll together, when the graves are hurled about, each soul shall know

what it has done and what it has failed to do...The righteous shall

surely dwell in bliss. But the wicked shall burn in hell-fire...

Whoever has done an atom's weight of good shall see it, and whoever

has done an atom's weight of evil shall see it also. "

From the Qur'An.

> And then there comes a time when we have an opportunity to return

> to earth to try another life. Unlike the Budhists, I don't believe

> we're stuck in a particular life because we did poorly in a previous

> life. I believe we are made fully aware of all the lives we could

> live, and we -choose- a life: " Hey, I could do -that- one, I saw

> where a guy did one of those and I could do it better... " We are

> fully aware of what's key in a life, and what we'll face, and we

> say, " yeah, I could live -that- life. "

" Perhaps many of us do not like it where we are in the universe now,

but we can all be certain that we got where we are by our own

decisions to expand in love or withdraw from it.

The kind of brain and body you have, the family and society, the time

in history you were born into, all these and more were determined by

you yourself, by your degree of expansion, by your willingness to

love. No one did anything to you. No one forced you. There is

absolute justice in the experience that each of us is having every

second of the day. In one sense we can all relax, because nothing

is secret, nothing is lost, nothing is forgotten, no one is

abandoned. " From " The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment " .

Hi , perhaps you've read these books, and liked them as I do.

I have some reason to believe that we do choose the sort of life we

want to live while we're still in that heavenly creche. But the

memory of making that decision, (and details of any former lives)

are effectively erased upon birth.

> That means a lot of different things. No suicide allowed: when you

> were exactly aware of all you're really capable of, you said " Yeah,

> this one I can do -- hard, but I can do it. "

I suppose I could put up with any number of aches and pains, and I

would never kill myself because I was tired of being autistic, but

like Stan, I reserve the right to make the final decision, because

there's no way in hell or on earth that I would allow myself to be

put in a Nursing Home. I'm far too independent and stubborn to be

told when to eat, what to wear, what I can or can't do every minute

of the day. I think He knows me well enough to understand that. ;-)

Clay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

If Terry Schiavo had wanted her husband to do what was eventually

done, she would have put it in writing. Neither you nor I know what

her final wishes were. The government of Florida played God and

decided for her.

Jerry Newport

> > > > >

> > > > > > .I usually stay quiet, but I really have to

> > say

> > > > > > this. I think the danger lay

> > > > > > in this...

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Doesn't the real scary thing be that if

> > people

> > > > have

> > > > > > the choice

> > > > > > to say, ''Oh I took that test and found out

> > I am

> > > > > > carrying a baby who will

> > > > > > grow to term

> > > > > > and be autistic? Horrid! Then I will abort

> > the

> > > > baby.

> > > > > > Its my choice.''

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Isn't it better then, to choose life, WITH

> > the

> > > > > > struggles, Tom, to choose

> > > > > > acceptance for

> > > > > > oneself, to --- dare I say ---be happy with

> > > > being

> > > > > > autistic, despite the

> > > > > > challenges, even

> > > > > > though it presents a series of hurdles for

> > those

> > > > > > affected?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Because the alternative, the so-called cure,

> > > > (see

> > > > > > paragraph 2,) is alarming.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > K

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been

> > > > > > removed]

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

It was 25 Aug 2006, when Clay commented:

> wrote:

>

> > That means a lot of different things. No suicide allowed: when you

> > were exactly aware of all you're really capable of, you said " Yeah,

> > this one I can do -- hard, but I can do it. "

>

> I suppose I could put up with any number of aches and pains, and I

> would never kill myself because I was tired of being autistic, but

> like Stan, I reserve the right to make the final decision, because

> there's no way in hell or on earth that I would allow myself to be

> put in a Nursing Home. I'm far too independent and stubborn to be

> told when to eat, what to wear, what I can or can't do every minute

> of the day. I think He knows me well enough to understand that. ;-)

I meant " no suicide allowed " not in the sense that one can't make that

choice, but rather, when I look at it, even when I'm miserable and don't

think I can go on, I have to say " Yeah, but when I had complete knowledge

of everything I am and can do, I looked at this life and said I could do

this. So thinking I can't, well, I'm simply mistaken. "

And thinking there's no reason to live, well, I saw this life and felt

there was a reason for living this life, that somebody ought to, even

knowing all the obstacles I'd be facing now, and the ones I'll face later.

So I can't use that excuse, either.

One has to wonder every day, " What the heck was it about this life I was

looking forward to doing? Why was this particular life so important to

me? " Can't wait to find out. I love suprises! <grin>

BTW, today is my 48th birthday. Happy Birthday To Me!

--

Pegasus Mail is free software, committed to the notion that

communication is as basic a right as free speech, since free speech

without a medium by which it may be heard is as loud as silence.

-- , author, Pegasus Mail <http://www.pmail.com>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

wrote:

> BTW, today is my 48th birthday. Happy Birthday To Me!

Yes, and " Happy Birthday " FROM me.

You sound like a nice guy.

Have a good one!

Clay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

> If Terry Schiavo had wanted her husband to do what was eventually

> done, she would have put it in writing.

Perhaps that should be " she *should* have put it in writing. "

Terry Schiavo was 26 years old. Not too many 26 year olds write

up a living will. At that point, we are left with

Schiavo's word as to what she said, and medical evidence as to

her condition.

Incidentally, the " what she would want " has more to do with what

she would want if she were cognizant; not what she was able to

express. The fact that someone is not capable of self-

expression is not a reason for termiation of life.

> Neither you nor I know what her final wishes were. The

> government of Florida played God and decided for her.

.... or rather decided between the two sides of the issue. What

was decided for her was:

1. whether she really did express to Schiavo that she

wouldn't want extraordinary means.

2. that a trocar through the abdomen is an extraordinary means.

(Maybe it isn't extraordinary -- I went to Home Depot and saw

something that looked like it could easily serve the purpose.

This can't be any harder than, say, reprogramming my car's

engine through the car's CAN-BUS connector.)

3. that the medical evidence was that she no longer had

sentience.

AFAIK, " capable of self-expression " was not given as a

criterium. More significantly, there was never a determination

that the state should terminate a person because of a severe

disability.

The issue from a disability standpoint is that " capable of self-

expression " certainly would have resolved the issue. That

doesn't mean that, because it is possible to be disabled and not

capable of self-expression, one shouldn't use other means to

make the determinations.

There is a 4th consideration, which shouldn't have entered into

the case, but seems to have been injected into it anyway. There

was a determination by the Catholic Church that my

tongue-in-cheek analysis of feeding tubes being not an

" extraordinary measure " was essentially correct. The Church

holds that feeding tubes are not " extraordinary measures " . (Too

bad it wasn't as easy to make an engine warmer from a length of

flexible PVC drain hose connected to diesel exhaust.)

http://img.infotropic.com/w/w060306_1.jpg

My take on the Church position is that, I disagree with it, it's

okay. I just don't want to see canon law become state law.

- s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...