The below tragic suicide report was sent to NewsLanc by one of our contributors.
In the state of Oregon and elsewhere in the world, there are provisions for the chronically ill and elderly to terminate their lives without jumping out of hospital windows.
Why do we treat those with good and valid reasons for passing from life in a peaceful manner, possibly surrounded by love ones, as though they are little children who must be protected from running across the street?
“At about 4:30 pm, Wednesday, August 5th, Officers of the Lancaster City Bureau of Police were dispatched to Lancaster General Hospital for the report of an individual who had fallen from an 8th floor window. Officers and Detectives responded to the scene, spoke to hospital personnel, as well as other witnesses and it was determined that a patient, a 70 year old Lancaster County man, had apparently jumped through the 8th floor window of his room and fell approximately four floors to a roof below.
“The patient was in the presence of medical personnel at the time this took place and the patient was immediately rushed into the Trauma Unit for emergency medical treatment. However, unfortunately attempts at resuscitation were not successful and the patient was pronounced deceased a short time later.
“Out of respect for the patient’s family and loved ones, the identity of the patient is not being released and no further information is available at this time.”
Although the state of Oregon allows for assisted suicide, such is not in the public’s best interest. The family and friends of the person who is conically ill needs to learn from the person that is suffering what grace he or she has in enduring with in dying. It is easy to just throw in the towel, but all we learn from that is that they were a quitter, and that life is meaningless. It desensitizes us to value in existing. Pets on the other hand can teach us nothing through suffering as they can’t discuss where they hurt or why.
I don’t understand the previous commenter’s angle. You’re insisting that someone in perhaps excruciating pain from a terminal illness be kept alive, either artificially or by deprivation of the means of freeing themselves from their pain, so that YOU might learn something from their suffering? I find it tremendously insensitive and immature to call such persons “quitters.” To be sure, there ARE legitimate concerns. We need to be absolutely certain that it’s what the person wants and that the decision is made with some soundness of mind. But then we can get into a debate about whether someone is in their right mind when they decide that they don’t want to live anymore. But who are you to say that they’re not? There has to be some respect for individual autonomy here. It’s your life. Shouldn’t you have control over whether you would like to end it or not? On what basis does the state deny patients and their doctors this option? Just as putting down a pet is sometimes the “humane” thing to do, so it is with the end of life and terminal illness. It’s true that we have to be sure that it’s what the person wants or would have wanted. We don’t want to create the easily imaginable circumstance in which people try to “off” their parents or grandparents, or put pressure on them to make the decision themselves, for financial reasons. But I do think that it’s ultimately up to the individual. No one is obligated to stay alive and suffer for your spiritual enlightenment. It’s their life. It’s their pain.
I don’t know that it’s clear that the man in this case intended to commit suicide. Probably. But it’s just as possible for a medical patient to become delirious.