gov135

http://www-hsc.usc.edu/~mbernste/ethics.dutytodie.html

Former Governor of Colorado Richard Lamm had lit a firestorm of controversy when he suggested that old people have a duty to die. This concept has been elaborated by others. The reasoning is that our society, at least in the Western world, have no good financial plans for long-term care for the aged when they become incapacitated because of illness or mental debility. Often these persons become a financial and emotional burden for family members and may require family members to alter their own lives and goals simply to care for their aged relatives. It has been suggested that these burdens are not acceptable and that the aged should find a duty to terminate their lives before they have reached such a dependent state. This means that an elderly person while mentally competent and not terminally ill should arrange to die. The argument is that their life is almost over naturally and they should not interfere with the lives and careers of others who have yet many years of life ahead. Also implied is that society's monetary costs for caring for the elderly infirm could better be spent on children and younger people.


____________________________________________________

There is alot of information available on the Internet on this subject - but most of what I found was highly opinionated, and I wanted this discussion to form on its own. If you are interested, try a trusty google search on "duty to die."

The arguement, as mentioned above, goes alot like this: The elderly sap the resources of their communities and are unable or unwilling to contribute to strengthing them. The elderly are partly responsible for young people not getting good work - retirement age is pushed back as people are staying in the workforce well into their sixties and later. The elderly lean on society for healthcare, which drains our companies, taxpayers, and families of resources which could be used elsewhere - such as schools, training, etc. Many firms cannot meet the pension demands of their former employees - let alone health care costs. Imagine where else this money could be used?

Research has been done by New York University that shows most Americans feel the elderly contribute little. Respondents cited road safety to financial concerns.

The "duty to die" camp believes that the elderly have a duty to stop becoming a resource drain.

I don't have an opinion on this issue either way. As people continue to live longer, and society's 'obligation' to the elderly is becoming increasing difficult to meet, I feel it is a relevant topic. I
would appreciate if this did not turn into a euthanasia arguement. This is not the intention of this thread. Rather, simply, do the elderly have a duty to die? If so, at what point? If not, why not?

Nisses

you can't really value a human life on whether it's a resource drain or not. If that held true, no children would ever reach maturity either, since they're not economically viable...

Someone on this board has a signature: despite the high cost, living remains highly popular - or something along those lines.

But I agree that something has to be done. The elderly are fast becoming the majority in most industrialised countries, and most economical and financial plans were set up to deal with a very different demographic... Changes will have to occur and in a fair amount of time too. Whether making people work longer before they can retire or whatnot, but otherwise, a young working generation is going to have to pay an unreasonably high part of their pay to support the elderly, only to get peanuts when they themselves retire...

Even so, I think the idea of "duty to die" is ridiculously oversimplified and even childish.

__________________
Moderation should be moderately moderated.

Mael

yes you can. you can easily place a value on human life. hell, if you look hard enough, i'm sure you could find contract killers who definatly put prices on human life. we aren't really "precious" and like anythng else, have a price. lets say we had only enough resources that we could only support a community of 100 people, every time a new person would be born, someone would have to die or else there wouldn't be enough resources and the whole group would suffer. you can't put the individual ahead of the group (in most cases, the pres. and other incredibly important people excluded).

also, children are very economically viable. they may mainly have a futures value, until they mature, but there is definate value and potential. and old person that can not take care of htemselves anymore not only drains resources for themselves, but also requires others to take care of them keeping them from more valuable resource production.

i think i could be for this, but i don't see it being realistic.

rogue49

hmm...has anyone ever hear of "Logan's Run"?

lafemmefatale

It would seem that this duty to die thing is really a westernized concept. We see very typically that parents raise children, children grow up and the parents become old, and because the children want to do their own things and feel the obligation to take care of their parents, so they just dump them in an old folks home. Only those parents who are incredibally rich or planned ahead by A LOT have enough money to be out of their children's way and lead their own lives.

While in other cultures, asia for an example, the elderly are extremely respected and often considered to be wise rather than incapable or senile. That would be the major difference between the two cultures where one finds elderly as feeble and weak, while the other respect elders as star wars fans to yoda...

Both cultures are spending effort to sustain the elderly, however the asian cultures don't mind so it's not a problem to them.

So a change of attitude may help this problem, another is to look at it this way...

children are seen at potential contributors to society but they must be educated or else they'll end up being delinquents and parents are thsoe who do that. So while the children are helpless it's the parents who take care of them and by the time hte parents are helpless the children should take care of the parents. see, even trade.

__________________
-poor is the man whose pleasure depends on the permission of another-

yatzr

some of this "duty to die" stuff makes it sound like there's never been elderly people before. In the old days, the kids stuck around and took care of their parents...so is our generation so selfish that we'd rather have them die? Or when you're old and "economically worthless", would you want your kids to just forget about you?

__________________
Mechanical Engineers build weapons. Civil Engineers build targets.

gibber71

I believe in the pre-planning of funeral expenses,wills,power of attorney etc.

As far as caring for the elderly or ill go- I moved my mother into my house when she was dying of cancer and took care of her. I lost job opportunities and lived off my savings.Three years later I'm just getting back to the point I was 3 years ago in terms of earning.

Did it hurt my career? I think more than I would ever choose to admit. Was it a struggle? For those who have ever dealt with people with cancer,very much so. Did I get the best lesson in life to live your days to the fullest? You bet I did. Would I do it again? In less than a heartbeat.

krwlz

I have! I don't know what I feel. I would support it fully, if I felt I waas being a drain on society, but it is just not my place to tell other people that they have to do it.

MEAD

I'm okay with old people. I can respect them as long as they should be respected. Some old people are just out of it and worthless, these are the people that annoy me- aswell as anyother person who is incomptent and ignorant.

Nisses

yatzr: not by a longshot, the difference with today though, is that in earlier times, a couple might have had 4 parents, of which if you were lucky, 2 would still live when they were 60.

That couple would have had several brothers and sisters, who in some way would have helped support the parents as well.


These days, in western countries, there are few families with more than 2-3 children anymore, and yet the elderly (of which a much bigger number survives today) can easily live 20 years longer. It's no longer uncommon for greatgrandparents to see their greatgrandchildren start elementary school. The elderly just live longer, it's a proven fact. Just check for some demographics for western industrialised countries. Compare the chart from today with those from 50 years ago. You'll see that a smaller and smaller group (active working part) is having to support more and more people.


Mael: As for everyone having a price... Sure, in the eyes of contract killers, people can have a price. Because they don't bother to know their targets, helps them keep sane in a small way I guess.
But it seems to me you are just generalising the entire group of elderly in the category of "vegetables". I do agree that people who do not react anymore to their surroundings, that have to be kept alive with machines etc are a drain, but those conditions can just as well happen with all kinds of diseases or accidents.
You speak of future value of children...
Well the elderly also have value... Which you can use RIGHT NOW. Innit great?

Cited arguments here were financial concerns and roadsafety according to the original post. Hell, enlist some more driving instructors, call in all people every 10 years to take a test and you'll see the road-safety increase by alot more than the percentage that old people are responsible for. Also provide some more decent public transportation. You'll get alot of unemployed people off the streets with those two extra joblines, and you'll solve the "problem with the elderly driving" already. Hah, I'll balance the whole US budget, just gimme a few months

As for financial concerns: like I said, a decent solution has to be found for this. Maybe retirement should be pushed back a few years, I dunno. The idea of the pension is that people can maintain their lifestandard after they retire. So you can't really go cutting it in half. The money has to come from some other place... No idea where though. I'm not an economist.

And finally: a person is worth alot more than just his economical value.

__________________
Moderation should be moderately moderated.

MikeyChalupa

Rogue you beat me to it.

Of course, I think 30 is a bit young to make the carrousel cutoff, as I'd be there in just over a year...

-Mikey

WhoaitsZ

if you're worried about costs i say let the old and sick kill the young and healthy. you won't notice such a burden if you're dead.

the whole theory is nothing short of disgusting and it sounds like nazi talk.


sounds like the poor bastards should have aborted their kids.

THEY RAISED AND GAVE BIRTH TO US.
jesus christ

uncle phil

gotta go with whoa here...i mean, really, people?

__________________
"We were wrong, terribly wrong. (We) should not have tried to fight a guerrilla war with conventional military tactics against a foe willing to absorb enormous casualties...in a country lacking the fundamental political stability necessary to conduct effective military and pacification operations. It could not be done and it was not done."
- Robert S. McNamara
-----------------------------------------
"We will take our napalm and flame throwers out of the land that scarcely knows the use of matches...
We will leave you your small joys and smaller troubles."
- Eugene McCarthy in "Vietnam Message"
-----------------------------------------
never wrestle with a pig.
you both get dirty;
the pig likes it.

gibber71

Couldn't have said it better.

rogue49

ok, just because I mentioned the movie, doesn't mean I support the initial premise.

The moral of the movie, is that there is more to life than just support and efficiency to society.
Society is also supposed to support us in turn.
Even during our moments of vulnerablity.
Especially during those times.

The older population has as much to give as the younger.
If not through actual action, but through experience and their viewpoints.
BTW, I think much of the older generations use their times and efforts more efficiently, through their experience.

Besides, I don't think I would support the Logan's Run idea,
because I'd be already dead.
I'm 35

zenon

To talk about the economical burden as an argument to euthanasia is horrible.

But as a Doc a could tell you many people wuold have liked to have the right to chose their moment of the definitive rest.
We in the western society don´t know how to deal with the dark side o existence.

Death is very natural.
But should not be an economical issue.

Zenon

gov135

I don't support this concept. It's not even really an idea - because ideas should be workable. As pointed out, this one is not.

I really enjoyed the comments made so far.
yatzr: Don't forget, along with nisses comments, that women work in greater numbers, and that medicine allows people to live to points where they would not have years ago. Where they cannot function independently.

Mael: You can place a value on someone by their community contribution, as well. Does this person volunteer? Help others? Use the knowledge they gained from their long lives in other ways?

lafemmefatale: I was waiting for someone to bring up this point. Other cultures value the elderly much more than we do. Thank you.



In the United States, we have more people nearing and entering retirement age than ever before. At some point soon, many of our families could have more members above 50 than below. Health care costs are out-of-control. Women are in the workplace, and their families need them there. Insurance is being slashed - as well as pensions. Social Security and Medicare are not economically viable at this rate.

Something will need to happen to address the above. I'm sure this is not it, but I did want to see what reaction this thread would get.

Memalvada

I think that people here are forgetting that even though the elderly can be liabilities, thay can also be great assests. The problem is that many fail to realise this.

These are people who have lived far more than many of us, and have encountered themselves in infinite number of situations, and whose experience and wisdom can help us.

__________________
"The weak are food for the strong, so die and let me feast!" - Makoto Shishio (RK)

rockogre

Possibly we should be making arangements and funding to care for the elderly instead of spending it all on Spotted Owls and Whales.

I like Spotted Owls and Whales but you can get all kinds of folks to support this kind of thing. I have seen very few if any crazed tree huggers worrying about humans.

Duty to die my ass, you better come armed!

__________________
Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you,
Jesus Christ and the American G. I.
One died for your soul, the other for your freedom

Sparhawk

We've asked enough of "The Greatest Generation". Now we want to ask them to die for us? Ridiculous. If you're in the states or western europe, you owe your lifes and lifelihood to these folks, the least you can do is say "Thanks".

__________________
"In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. It's - and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work. We're making progress. It is hard work."

denim

It's gonna hurt me to say this, but

That has to be one of the most self-centered, Boomer-attitude, down right STUPID things I've ever heard anyone say.

I hope his kids remember he said this, later.

Old people die because there's no alternative. If we had a way to preserve a decent quality of life, there'd be no reason for them to do it other than the physical limits. I think Mr. Lamm should immediately kill himself to increase the net intelligence of the world.

If old people lived longer and healthier, they couldn't spend the whole time retired, that's true. They'd have to start a new career, perhaps doing something other than what they used to, but they'd have to become productive again. Maybe every 60 years you can take 10 or 15 years off, then you go back to work.

So far, it hasn't been an option, but then my great-grandparents died by their 60s (at best). My grandparents died in their 80s and 90s. I've no idea how long my parents will live.

XenuHubbard

So, what's next? People with hearing impairments?

Dying is not a duty. Living is a human right.

__________________
The above was written by a true prophet. Trust me.

"What doesn't kill you, makes you bitter and paranoid". - SB2000

denim

I don't know I'd go that far. Tell the flash flood you're caught in that you have a right to life.

Troublebot

Xenu got to it before I did: Where do you draw the line?

If you think the old are a "drain on society," check out the disabled. Expensive surgeries, adaptive equipment, constant assistance in their homes and community, the tab runs up pretty quick.

And if you go from the elderly to the disabled, where do you stop? People with only one disability? "Oh, you're only blind, so you get to live." WTF?

I mean, something seperates us from the animals, right?

__________________
Howard Moon: The wind is my only friend.
Wind: [whistling] I hate you.

raeanna74

Elderly have a DUTY to die? What about all the investment that they put into raising us or our parents? They have earned the right to live until they themselves are ready to die. I do believe they should do everything in their ability to save and invest for their retirement and health care in their later years but for us to say that they OWE it to the rest of us is so disrespectful. They (granted there are the few lazy shitbags out there that have lived off everyone their whole life but I'm talking in general) have earned to priviledge to be cared for in their older years. My grandparents invested and worked their asses off their whole productive adult life. My grandmother required a couple years of special care before she passed away but she earned that care and wasn't in pain when she passed. She left a legacy and had last words for everyone. My grandfather who is still alive is nearing 90 and still enjoying life. He still has financial rescources such that he is nothing of a finacial burden to anyone but has rather been an assistence to his children and grandchildren. He still enjoys golfing and travel and visits those of his peers in homes and assist them. You can not ask someone to plan to die before they are ready. That is such a selfish thought it makes me want to irk. Now if the person is totally incompacitated (unconscious) and in pain I would consider debate on that subject. I would not want to be trapped in a completely helpless painfilled body when there was no hope for me to regain any control over my body.
The elderly can teach us so many things. There is no true economical value that can be placed on that education source and pool of experience that they offer. It's up to us to take advantage of it.

__________________
"Always learn the rules so that you can break them properly." Dalai Lama
My Karma just ran over your Dogma.

rogue49

If anything I would prefer to say the ASSHOLES have a duty to die.

The problem with that is there would be no one left,
since everyone is an asshole sooner or later.

Zotz

Do the elderly have a duty to die?

No

I like Rogue's proposal though....

Kaos

This reminds me of one of my favourite movies of all time: Soylent Green.

But old people don[t have a duty to die, people have a duty to save their money and be able to retire faster to give other people a chance at jobs.

hotzot

" I saw a movie where they turned old people into crackers...and you know something?, it made sense." Fish

__________________
The Bully Boys are here!

zenon

Death should not be a Duty, it should be a desired choice. The problem with us westeners is that we wanna live for ever. Medical treatment of elder could easily drain a whole economy and there has to be certain limits. ¿But who put these limits? Maybe the elder themself. And that might be a duty. But first let us accept death.

Fire

It should be noted that wein the U.S.A. live in a Republic in which the elderly are the single largest voting block- and as they are mostly retired , they have the time to notice little things like their own impending doom- so in short, it will never happen- also, i have observed that everyone, at least everyone I know without some horrible illness , wants to live- see how you feel about this subject at 60 or 70- those who dont want life at that point, by all means shuffle on off this mortal coil.

__________________
Thought the harder, Heart the bolder,
Mood the more as our might lessens

SlackrJon

This is what we call "BioEthics" its just a bunch of doctors that think that we should have the old taken out so that the younger and everyone else can go on without having time money or valuable resources used on what seems to be a "done" life. Also (taken from a book; Culture of Death, Wesley Smith)
*Minimum Intelligence
*Self Awareness
*Self Control
*Sense of a Future
*Memory
*Concern for Others
*Communication
*Neocortical Function (if the brain isnt running your an object)
If you were missing any of those that you were deemed a unvalued life and should be taken out

Overlord

Everyone has a duty to die, eternal life is not a possibilty for us today given our circumstances. The facts are that we do not have enough resources to support everyone, even today, an era where living forever is not an option, we still having millions of people starving everyday. If you consider that we have millions of starving people now, could you imagine how many people would be starving if people didn't die from old age?

The strain on our Earth would become un-barable, in our current system the elders must die to provide others with a chance of survival.

guthmund

See, now there is a forward thinker. I think we should kill all the elderly and make them food to feed fat, pedestal sitting, holier than thou, meglomaniacal, can't be bothered if it's a distraction, can you hear me now, self-centered asses.

Yeah, that's the ticket. Then we can terminate the mentally retarded. Let's face it, they're a burden and nobody really likes them anyway, right?

Obviously, we can't get rid of the stupid. It seems they're running things.

I hear they've just recruited a former Governor of Colorado......


I'll close by saying, my parents earned they're right to live after raising my sister and I.

__________________
No signature. None. Seriously.

viejo gringo

Well man, I am 69 and the only duty I have to preform
is finish makeing those new kitchen cabinets for my
wife tomorrow, take care of my group of teen agers on
wednesday, usher at church on Sunday-and go to Mexico
tomorrow and get a couple of bottles of scotch because we
have a hurricane coming this way-------damn life is good..

asquint

It is implied that we are responsible for the care of the elderly, it is also implied that the elderly are responsible for planning and saving so that we, their children don't have to compromise our children's futures in order to care for our elderly parents

I will scrimp and save and do without for either, but i refuse to see my children deprived

__________________
Hi-Tech Redneck

Schwan

I'd like to see if this guy will talk same shit when he's old.

My generation has a lot of problems comunicating with our elderly (it's a regional thing, think Europe) becouse of the fact that they were raised in a very conservative country, unlike us. However, justyfing the killing of people with economical issue was exactly what happened during the meeting of the German top officials in 1940, I think, when they decided to exterminate all jews. It's that very same way of thinking and it could only lead to bad things. A society that's not learning from it's elderly is doomed to fail.

LutherMac

I've decided long ago that I'm not going to live very long after my 60th birthday (still more than 30 years away). I just don't want to be one of those old people who drive way too slow and think they own the world and all of its contents. So I'm planning to have myself either euthenized, or I'm going to become a bit of a daredevil and start climbing mountains, jumping off of bridges, etc... hopefully something could go wrong, and then it wouldn't be considered suicide!

__________________
Always remember that you are unique... just like everyone else!

Stiltzkin

There's no "one size fits all" solution, so it's not right for anyone here to be taking that sort of approach. Someone mentioned the problem about companies being unable to keep up with pension plans. That sounds like a load of crap to me. We'll just keep racking up the nation debt; it's not like we're ever going to pay it off anyways, so who cares anymore? National debt my ass. It's just a fantasy. Companies can pull all the money they want out of their asses to pay pension plans, they just make it seem like they're suffering because big-shot CEO won't be able to own several billion-dollar homes anymore... maybe just one or two. Oh boo hoo. Let the old people live. They're no more useful/useless than the next chap.

__________________
The most important thing in this world is love.

macmanmike6100

I suppose that this should be an option for the eldery to choose, because we are experiencing a longevity never before seen (and in this respect, I think that this generation is far different than past generations). However, I don't think that you can call it a "duty," much like you cannot call somebody getting a job his or her inherent "duty." (As much as I would want employment to be a duty, however...)

Interesting thread.