I have a question and I hope someone has a better answer
than I have.
I want to know why, if your pet is terminally ill, you have
the option to bring them to the Veterinarian and have your pet euthanized to
end their suffering, but when you have a terminally ill human family member you
are not allowed to, and they are not allowed to, ask that they be euthanized to
end their suffering.
My last wife was diagnosed with breast cancer in April 2005.
She suffered horribly, and painfully, until July 17, 2009, when they finally
passed away.
She wanted to put an end to her suffering and I did also.
But the law prevented us from doing so. However after she passed away my dog,
Lucky, was no longer able to eat or stand or walk and could barely breathe, and
I was able to take him to the Veterinarian and have him euthanized to end his
suffering.
Do you, the reader, have any logical reason why animals are
allowed to be put out of their suffering but humans, in most States, are not
able to do the same thing when their suffering is unbearable?
Here is what I think is going on. The Medical industry is
one of the most lucrative, meaning money-making, industries in the world. If a
person is terminally ill and suffering horribly and they give them an injection
and in a few moments they are no longer alive they make only a little bit of
money.
But what if they keep you on a machine that breathes for
you, circulates your blood for you, and filters your blood since your kidneys
are no longer working? They make thousands of dollars per day keeping you alive
you think? So if they can give you an injection to let you pass away they might
make one thousand dollars. If they force you to stay alive for as long as they
can they can make hundreds of thousands of dollars.
That is what I believe is going on. What do you think?
No comments:
Post a Comment