• Ever thought it'd be cool to have your art, writing, or challenge runs featured on PokéCommunity? Click here for info - we'd love to spotlight your work!
  • Our weekly protagonist poll is now up! Vote for your favorite Trading Card Game 2 protagonist in the poll by clicking here.
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.

Do children have the right to die?

curiousnathan

Starry-eyed
  • 7,751
    Posts
    15
    Years
    Euthanasia and assisted suicide for adults is legal in several countries and states around the world, however the topic of child euthanasia is a controversial one. What's your take on the issue? Should children have the right to take their own life in any circumstances? Only particular ones? Are children even capable of making such a be-all and end-all decision?
     
    Last edited:
    I think no matter what, it's going to be one of those cases where the kids can't make a decision for themselves. It'll come down to an adult to choose assisted suicide. With that in mind, I'm pro-assisted suicide, so I think children do have the right to die. Take for example kids that have to go through multiple seizures a day. What a horrible way to live. The parents can very clearly see they are miserable. If there is nothing to cure the problem, then why force life simply because it's a child. Assisted suicide is still a valid option, though not necessarily the only option.
     
    It would have to come down to the unanimous decision of the child's parents or guardians. Such a final and all-encompassing decision is not something I would wager that most kids, if any at all, can truly understand. Let alone decide their own fate with mental competence and have it legally binding. I would wager the same goes for most teenagers, though there would obviously be outliers there like how there would surely be outlier cases with kids. In any case, the child involved would most likely not be someone who has any quality of life, let alone the mental competence necessary to decide their fate. They'd most likely be children incapable of any regular day to day experiences typical with us healthier people, their lives bound to their illness or affliction. For there to be any serious consideration in a legal point of view, the child involved would probably have to be a permanently vegetative state or disabled/afflicted to a point where it would be considered a kindness to euthanise them, even moreso than the considerations we give to adults in the same situation. Given how desperately people want to see children grow up, and how we shudder at the thought of harm coming to a child, let alone them dying, it would most likely have to be a significantly terrible case to get any legal precedence for future, less severe cases.

    I can't imagine any scenario where the child is given agency over their own death, honestly. It has to come down to what the adults responsible for the child decide what is ultimately best for it. The torture they must be going through should also be considered. They will most likely love their child like you hope most responsible for a child would, but they may come to a point where their love for their child points them in the direction that euthanising them is the best thing to do. I don't think there should be a legal blockade not allowing that to happen. Unfortunately, you're not likely to find many cases like Lorenzo's Oil. The debilitating illness will most likely not have a miracle cure to stave off death and some extent of their suffering. The parents will most likely not have the connections the Odone family had. They're most likely going to be average, traumatised people who just want their child to stop suffering. They want to stop suffering too.

    Ultimately, as with any human being, a child has the right to die. I just hope that it doesn't become legal only for the most extreme cases, that there is more dialogue about what is an acceptable threshold and not have the child's life put in limbo until a decision is reached. I'd hate to think that assisted suicide could only be afforded to those at the absolute highest echelons of suffering. It's an awful discussion but one that needs to be had.
     
    It depends if the child has the capability to make and understand such a decision. I doubt it, so its best left up to the parents. I think a child has the same rights as anyone else, as rights are universal, so the question becomes if they can consent or not. Regardless, the idea that once you turn 18 you can consent and that you can't at 17 and 364 day is ridiculous. However, I dont know if there is a better alternative. I have some ideas, but they aren't exactly great.
     
    Largely I oppose assisted suicides outside of cases of an incurable vegetative state, or incurable states of excruciating pain; often the kind requiring medically induced coma states or sedation.

    But a child in such a state is no different from an adult in this sort of state; definitely in no state that one would ever consider it wise to grant them any agency over their own life.
     
    Whilst I'm pro assisted suicide these days, I think that childhood is probably too soon to be making such a decision. There's just too much time left for things to change and very few children have the emotional maturity and understanding to make an informed decision in regards to death.

    On top of that, I don't trust parents to make the right decision on behalf of their child either when it comes to assisted suicide.
     
    I'm with gimmepie on this one but at the same time, as kind hearted as I am I'd hate to hear of someone commit suicide or even be involved in assisted suicide (I have a friend that committed suicide). There's usually way's around it, and marijuana helps most illensses known to man, it's a natural medicine. If it's incurable or can't be treated then I guess there's really no other way. I also feel they haven't hit that point in maturity to fully understand life and the development of the body. This is really a topic I'd rather not get into that much.
     
    On top of that, I don't trust parents to make the right decision on behalf of their child either when it comes to assisted suicide.

    I initially wouldn't trust the parents either, simply because I wouldn't trust anyone with that decision before the mandatory evaluations and moral counselling and what not. But see, describing any option in this situation as the 'right' decision rubs me the wrong way. While I'm aware it's certainly not your intention, it gives off the idea that there is a 'correct' way to go about things. I don't like the idea of putting such a traumatic and almost alien decision (to us) into a moral dichotomy. Or somehow emphasising that unless the child is directly harmed, there is a 'wrong' way to go about it. Ultimately, I don't think there's really any way to look at the situation other than 'was the child's suffering alleviated to some degree?' If so, then it was the 'right' thing to do. If that path involved assisted suicide, then so be it.
     
    I initially wouldn't trust the parents either, simply because I wouldn't trust anyone with that decision before the mandatory evaluations and moral counselling and what not. But see, describing any option in this situation as the 'right' decision rubs me the wrong way. While I'm aware it's certainly not your intention, it gives off the idea that there is a 'correct' way to go about things. I don't like the idea of putting such a traumatic and almost alien decision (to us) into a moral dichotomy. Or somehow emphasising that unless the child is directly harmed, there is a 'wrong' way to go about it. Ultimately, I don't think there's really any way to look at the situation other than 'was the child's suffering alleviated to some degree?' If so, then it was the 'right' thing to do. If that path involved assisted suicide, then so be it.

    I don't mean to suggest "right and wrong" choices pertain to either the euthanasia or lack thereof. I mean that I don't trust another human being to not make a choice that's simply easier for them when the child isn't suffering that greatly or has the potential to recover.
     
    Whilst I'm pro assisted suicide these days, I think that childhood is probably too soon to be making such a decision. There's just too much time left for things to change and very few children have the emotional maturity and understanding to make an informed decision in regards to death.

    On top of that, I don't trust parents to make the right decision on behalf of their child either when it comes to assisted suicide.

    I feel like there would be "accidents" with parents that dont want kids but have them, and so they "must" resort to assisted suicide. But idk how prevalent that would be to be honest...
     
    Whilst I'm pro assisted suicide these days, I think that childhood is probably too soon to be making such a decision. There's just too much time left for things to change and very few children have the emotional maturity and understanding to make an informed decision in regards to death.

    On top of that, I don't trust parents to make the right decision on behalf of their child either when it comes to assisted suicide.

    Well, I'm assuming the notion of assisted suicide would only be allowed if the kid is terminally ill, beyond all hope.

    Not trusting the parents to make decisions on behalf of their own child, to me, is only an OK argument if the doctor is an untrustworthy hack. The parents aren't the ones making the diagnosis. Again, this is all contingent on the severity of the illness, and well-informed parents should be able to make a decision.
     
    I think kids can generally assert more agency than people generally give them credit for. I don't think there is ever a right or answer in a situation like this one. But whatever happens, you have to cover all the bases. You have to make sure that everybody who will be directly impacted by a decision is as informed as possible.

    For instance, we should never begin with the assertion that a debilitating disability means a life not worth living. Take Stephen Hawking, who had a very debilitating case of ALS. I'm sure we're all knowledgeable about his physical condition which he has lived with for many decades. Even his voice was changed. But even given his disability he created an incredible life and incredible scientific achievement.
     
    Legally, children don't have the rights to make lots of important decisions. It's the parents or guardians who do that and I'm pretty hesitant to give that decision to someone else. It's bad enough that there are parents who won't let their kids access modern medicine because of religious reasons or whatnot. To give someone the authority to end someone else's life... I dunno. I know there would of course be safeguards, waiting periods, and all sorts of hurdles to keep from making a rash decision, but I still worry that the wishes of a child would be overruled and I don't want to see that.
     
    Legally, children don't have the rights to make lots of important decisions. It's the parents or guardians who do that and I'm pretty hesitant to give that decision to someone else. It's bad enough that there are parents who won't let their kids access modern medicine because of religious reasons or whatnot. To give someone the authority to end someone else's life... I dunno. I know there would of course be safeguards, waiting periods, and all sorts of hurdles to keep from making a rash decision, but I still worry that the wishes of a child would be overruled and I don't want to see that.

    Aren't parents able to be overruled if they do not act in the best interests of the child when it comes to protecting their health?
     
    Aren't parents able to be overruled if they do not act in the best interests of the child when it comes to protecting their health?
    Right, but at least from what I've read it seems that, at least in my country, the courts and government and medical institutions are very hesitant to step on someone's parental rights, whether the parents are doing what's "in the best interests" of the child or not.
     
    I just want to say how glad I am this is even being discussed. I did a big research project of Physician Assisted Suicide in college and underage voluntary euthanasia was something I was kind of afraid to bring up.
     
    Should children have the right to take their own lives? Absolutely not. Children are stupid.

    Yup, that's my entire opinion on the matter. A lot of them would kill themselves, never to realise their reason for hating the world was plain dumb.
     
    I think the best way to look at this issue would be the same way as looking at consent ages.

    In the United States the age of consent for sex is between 16 to 18 depending on the state. I think we should approach physician assisted suicide of minors in the same manner; there has to be a minimum age set where this should be considered. Otherwise, anyone under the age of euthanasia consent should not be terminated. Not even by parent's permission, as that has the potential to be horrendously abused. Of course, that would involve physician assisted suicide being legal in the state to begin with. I honestly can't speak for other countries, but where I live (United States) only four states have physician assisted suicide as being legal in clear writing (California, Washington, Vermont, and Oregon) with Montana being a "technical" fifth in that they don't have ANYTHING in writing regarding the subject (in other words, not illegal to begin with).
     
    Interesting how many people assume that the parent would say yes to the euthanasia of their child - isn't it much more likely for the parent to do the opposite? To refuse it to keep their child alive (even if against the best wishes of the child?). I mean, I know my parents would never consent to something like that (if I was <18 etc.etc.). It seems off that so many have the bleak opinion that parents are looking to off their children at the first chance they get.

    I'm all for assisted suicide - in this case though, I think it would be best to have the consent of the child and their guardian/s (or physician).
     
    Yes. Being a nurse I've come in contact with a lot of terminally ill patients. Which in some situations don't have anything left in their life save for the people who care about them. I've had patients who are in constant pain, their muscles locked in fetal position and who lost the ability to speak due do degenerative illnesses while they're still mentally healthy.

    No one deserves to go through that. Not children either. In my country euthanasia isn't only possible, it's the first country where it's also possible for children to get euthanasia under strict conditions of course, which is a good thing.

    Imagine, you're 16. You have cancer and have metas everywhere. You're in constant pain and the chance to heal is zero. The pain gets worse by the day, you lose basic functions like being able to walk, eat, wash yourself etc and are just waiting for death. You want to die but you basically have to wait and suffer for 2 years before you can get euthanasia or just wait for your death in your bed if it comes before that.
     
    Back
    Top