crime

Doctors charged in euthanasia case suspected in another death

31 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© KYODO

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

31 Comments
Login to comment

Euthanasia is a moral dilemma. Alas, I think there is no perfect simple solution.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

Yes there is, give people the right to choose end their lives on their own terms.

9 ( +11 / -2 )

Euthanasia is a moral dilemma

I don't see it that way at all. I am thankful my native country allows assisted death (subject of course to some safeguards).

If you have a terminal disease, you don't want to suffer in agony waiting for death. We treat dogs and cats better than that.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

How sad, the father never knew what was coming, must heartbreaking to watch your own son PUT YOU TO DEATH while thinking he is about to help you .

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Euthanasia is a moral dilemma

Is it though? We afford the mercy to our pets, but not to ourselves? Despite the fact that we are actually even more able to consent to such a procedure. An adult should have every right to die on their own terms.

The only dilemma I could see is in the fundamentalist religious types who would see it as a sin, but those people should not really get a say in how the law is regulated. Or possibly for a minor, which does run into some weird legal issues.

Good on these doctors for easing suffering where they can. Yes sure they are taking money for it and aren't entirely selfless, but they are risking their lives and livelihoods to do it too.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

I hope these doctor's get off.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Euthanasia happens silently in many countries where it is considered criminal. I know of 2 cases (not in JP, in EU). Both times the doctor suggested (never clearly stated) the suffering could end sooner than later, the family chose sooner, you can guess the rest

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Euthanasia? Hmm. It's really difficult to judge and it depends on lots of various factors. One of the problems (IMO) is that the medical technology has gotten so good that life can be preserved even when the patient is in critical condition and will only get worse over time. At the same time, we euthanize our pets when they are suffering and getting too old and we tell (and in a way teach) our children that it is all for the best and it's the humane thing to do.

Anyway, it's a grey and fuzzy area which requires a lot of careful thought between the patients, their families and the doctors involved. There are no easy choices in such delicate and sad situations.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Our life, our choice. I'd rather have medically assisted than the messier ways that someone else must clean up.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Little joey

Yes there is, give people the right to choose end their lives on their own terms.

That sounds great, but do you want that right with no restrictions? What about the mental state of people? What about other parties interest in someone dying? What about incentives for easy solutions? I could go on.

It is similar to the abortion debate. You should not just dogmatically declare that one extreme is good, the other bad; you have to find a balance.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Nippori Nick

I don't see it that way at all. I am thankful my native country allows assisted death (subject of course to some safeguards).

Safeguards, there you go. If it was so clean and simple, why would you need safeguards? And who defines these safeguards, and can they be abused or not. Certainly if euthanasia is an easily available and promoted option, you yourself would feel a bit obliged to use it, would you not?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

stormcrow

Euthanasia? Hmm. It's really difficult to judge and it depends on lots of various factors. 

Exactly. I feel dismayed that some activists insist that it is clear and simple.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Why do you think adults shouldn't have autonomy over their own lives, Zaphod?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Guidelines need to be thoroughly and openly discussed, not black market hits by doctors for hire.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Before her death, the woman had transferred money to Naoki Yamamoto's bank account.

This is where it gets very dangerous. Killing for profit. IF it must be legalised then only if there is no profit involved.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Express sister

Why do you think adults shouldn't have autonomy over their own lives, Zaphod?

I did not say that. I only said it is not as clear-cut as some make it out to be.

For example, do you also think that an Obaasan withdrawing her life-savings from her bank account in cash should not be asked why she does that? She certainly has autonomy over her money.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

I did not say that. I only said it is not as clear-cut as some make it out to be.

If you are against voluntary suicide, what should the punishment be for those who attempt it?

For example, do you also think that an Obaasan withdrawing her life-savings from her bank account in cash should not be asked why she does that? She certainly has autonomy over her money.

I don't think ATMs are capable of asking questions.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Never thought I would find myself agreeing with Zaphod on anything, but there you go.

Adults should of course have autonomy over their own lives, no one should be forced to suffer a long, painful death devoid of dignity.

I get all that.

But it's surely a slippery slope.

What about when Granny, who suffers from dementia and is no longer able to make decisions for herself but is still perfectly happy in her own little world, has kids or grandkids in charge of her affairs, who decide 'for her own sake' she shouldn't be allowed to 'suffer' any more?

Or when Granps feels he has become such a burden to his family that ending it all seems the final act of love, regardless of his physical state?

No one should be forced to suffer. By the same token, no one should be made to feel that ending it all is an obligation.

I don't think ATMs are capable of asking questions

You know that in Japan today, people over the age of 70 are restricted with respect to how much money they can withdraw from their account via ATM? Key in too high an amount and the ATM will tell them to go and talk to the teller.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Euthanasia should be legal but handled correctly.

My mother and step-father died back in 2017, within a month of each other. Both about 90 years. They had prepared all necessary legal documents to deal with their deaths. They left a legal living will prohibiting resuscitation or life support machines. That is what actually happened in their case. A Euthanasia legal document could also be prepared when the person is mentally able to make that decision and what should happen when they could no longer make that decision.

My mother and stepfather gave that power to a brother.

They planned everything from how they wanted to die, and what funeral would take place, all prepaid and where their ashes would be buried together in a local military cemetery. My stepfather was an ex VET.

They also put their estate into a trust with instructions on what was to happen.

I was so impressed because I knew nothing about any of it until after they died. They left this world in a tidy and orderly way.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What about when Granny, who suffers from dementia and is no longer able to make decisions for herself but is still perfectly happy in her own little world, has kids or grandkids in charge of her affairs, who decide 'for her own sake' she shouldn't be allowed to 'suffer' any more?

This isn't voluntary. Someone incapable of making basic decisions through a degenerative mental disease s clearly incapable of making a decision about their life, or the end of it.

Or when Granps feels he has become such a burden to his family that ending it all seems the final act of love, regardless of his physical state?

No one should be forced to suffer. By the same token, no one should be made to feel that ending it all is an obligation.

Agreed. The state has an obligation to care for everyone within its borders, no matter the country. That such a decision as you have described exists, though no doubt a reality for some families, is an indication that the government has failed its people.

You know that in Japan today, people over the age of 70 are restricted with respect to how much money they can withdraw from their account via ATM? Key in too high an amount and the ATM will tell them to go and talk to the teller.

I did not know that. A cool and (in my view) sensible procedure.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Someone incapable of making basic decisions through a degenerative mental disease s clearly incapable of making a decision about their life, or the end of it.

Yes. So a person with a degenerative mental disease would not be allowed to choose euthanasia if they were suffering from some painful, debilitating illness. I'm sure there are those who would argue - and far be it from me to disagree - that no one should have to suffer, and some capable person should have the responsibility to make the decision.

From there it's not difficult to see a path through to any old person with some infirmity who chooses not to opt for euthanasia being considered clearly incapable of making the right decision.

Not as soon as this kind of law is brought in of course, but over time as euthanasia itself become more acceptable and 'normal'.

I don't disagree with euthanasia as such, if all the necessary safeguards are in place. But slippery slopes definitely need to be fenced off.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The only way is with a legal living will setting out all the conditions.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Though I am generally supportive of allowing assisted death, I would be against it if it were the commenters on this board advocating for it. Euthanasia IS a moral dilemma and there are SO many things that could go wrong with it - often it is better to be safe than sorry.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Safeguards, there you go. If it was so clean and simple, why would you need safeguards? And who defines these safeguards, and can they be abused or not. Certainly if euthanasia is an easily available and promoted option, you yourself would feel a bit obliged to use it, would you not?

You are putting words in my mouth. Everything has safeguards..examples would be cars, elevators, trains.

Who defines them? The government of the country in conjunction with public input.

Would I feel obliged to use it? Obliged is a strange word to use for that, but no I would not feel "obliged". I would however like it as an option.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Again? As if the police didn't now that beforehand. They're just staggering the charges so they can detain him for longer than 23 days.

This system needs to end.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Express sister

If you are against voluntary suicide, what should the punishment be for those who attempt it?

I did not say I am against voluntary suicide. Why do you distort comments?

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

cleo

I don't disagree with euthanasia as such, if all the necessary safeguards are in place. But slippery slopes definitely need to be fenced off.

I did not know I would ever agree with Cleo (who usually takes every wrong position on every political issue), but there you to.

This is exactly the problem. If you just make it OK as a matter of course, you step on the slippery slope. That is why I said it is a moral dilemma with no perfect solution.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

@Zaphod

Almost everything we do has safeguards in place, regardless of how "clean and simple" they are.

I do not feel obligated to use every service available to me, whether it is regulated or not. Would I use euthanasia? Right now, no. If I start developing say...Alzheimer's? You can bet anything I would be making an appointment for the next available treatment slot.

I would take it one step further than some people and say people should be able to use it even if they aren't terminally ill. It is literally your life, you should always have the final say in it, including choosing to end it. Sure, you can offer alternatives like therapy, but in the end the person should have their say. Countries that have done this have not experienced a sudden uncontrollable population loss.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Doctor Death Kervorkian reincarnated. Lock these murderers up.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Addfwyn

Almost everything we do has safeguards in place, regardless of how "clean and simple" they are.

I do not feel obligated to use every service available to me, whether it is regulated or not.

It is not just about you, it also about others. You are taking a very shallow look at this problem without considering all the many aspects involved here.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It is not just about you, it also about others.

Except it literally should just be about the one person, and what they want to do with their life. What impact it would have on their friends and family is something for that person to consider (or not), but not for us to legislate on. In much the same way that we fight for a woman's right to choose because it is her body, we should have the right to choose euthanasia because it is our life.

Outside of religious extremism, it really should be that simple.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites