I wasnt too sure, but has this topic been discussed before?

You wrote:

No idea, but I chose no opinion from the options - even though I am against euthanasia.

May I ask why you are against Euthanasia?
Whats wrong with it?
Have you got a religious outlook on it?

You wrote:

However artificially increasing "life" past the point where the body can sustain it, the brain is not functioning etc may not be life.

Actually, there was a topic about when they carried out euthanasia of an American woman who had been brain dead for like 10 years (though some people thought that there was some brain activity...)

What was most disturbing was the method used for euthanasia. Since her body was able to sort of support life, turning off the machines was not gonna kill her. They stopped feeding her and ten or so days later she died of starvation/dehydration.

Whos permission did they have to do that?
isnt euthanasia about the person themselves deciding that they want to die when they are suffering?

You wrote:

Another question, what if its a very young baby instead of an adult/old person?

Then the parents are in control. I think that the baby should be helped as long as possible until there is an absolute decision that nothing more can be done.

You wrote:

It normally is, but what if someone is on life support with no hope of resuscitation? As for that particular case, I think it was decided in court as the family were divided.

What? Doesnt that go under the heading of something else?

The most commonly understood meaning of euthanasia today is more than the old dictionary definition of dying well -- a good and easy death. It refers, for example, to the situation when a doctor induces the death with a lethal injection, of a patient who is suffering unrelievably and has persistently requested the doctor to do so.

How does that definion correspond with what your saying?

You wrote:

Euthanasia is not a simple thing and often involves cruelty to end the life - it is not just turning off a switch. The body will fight for hours if not days to survive before losing the fight.

In most cases the person will no longer be in a position to let others know of any change in mind/preference - if a choice was given at all.

a cruelty to end the life.
Why cruelty?

i think we are moving off the topic.

When someone is intensely suffering from pain (from a disease) and struggling through every day basic life, and they want to die, wouldn't it be cruel to refuse that option?

What the?

The person is suffering but not due to terminal illness. So they get doctors to assist them to die? I dont think the authorities in whichever country they go to will allow that.

I thought the person had to be suffering physically.

When i meant suffering, i was referring to terminal illness.

Is the definition of Euthanasia getting a bit confused here?

You wrote:

yes. I keep jumping around. sorry again.

No worries.

Ya'qub wrote:

How come nobody seems to focus on the youth in Africa or South America?

Erm, is it related to euthanasia?

Ya'qub wrote:

s.b.f wrote:

Ya'qub wrote:

How come nobody seems to focus on the youth in Africa or South America?

Erm, is it related to euthanasia?

I mean that people focus on the youth in Asia but not other parts of the world.

Ya'qub!

ThE pOwEr Of SiLeNcE wrote:

sbf wrote:

"Youth in Asia" = euthanasia

yes. yes. yes.

Euthanasia or Mercy Killing is the act or practice of ending the life of an individual suffering from a terminal illness or an incurable condition, through lethal injection or the suspension of extraordinary medical treatment.

This act is Islamically forbidden for it encompasses a positive role on the part of the physician to end the life of the patient and hasten his death via lethal injection, electric shock, a sharp weapon or any other way. This is an act of killing, and, killing is a major sin and thus forbidden in Islam, the religion of pure mercy.

As for the suspension of medical treatment via preventing the patient from his due medication which is, from a medical perspective, thought to be useless, this is permissible and sometimes it is even recommended. Thus, the physician can do this for the sake of the patient’s comfort and the relief of his family. Nothing is wrong in this, Insha’ Allah (Allah willing).

It is highly stressed here that medical treatment is deemed non-obligatory by the majority of Muslim scholars and the founders of the famous schools of Islamic Jurisprudence. Rather, to them, it is permissible. Only a few number of Muslim scholars maintain that it is obligatory, as said by some followers of Imam Ahmad and Ash-Shafi`i. Also, others maintain that applying medical treatment is commendable and preferable.

Moreover, some scholars disputed over which is better for the patient: treatment or showing endurance. Some who maintain that showing endurance is far better base their judgment on the narration of Ibn `Abbas in the two Sahihs that `Ata’ Ibn Abu Rabih said: Ibn `Abbas said to me: “‘May I show you a woman of Paradise?’ I said: ‘Yes.’ He said: ‘Here is this dark-complexioned woman. She came to Allah’s Messenger, peace and blessing be upon him, and said: ‘I am suffering from epilepsy and convulsive seizures make me naked; supplicate Allah for me.” Thereupon, the Prophet, peace and blessing be upon him, said: ‘You can show endurance and win entry to Paradise, but if you like, I’ll pray to Allah for your recovery.’ She said: ‘I am prepared to show endurance but I get naked due to convulsions, so supplicate Allah to spare me getting naked.’ And the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, did pray for her.’” (Al-Bukhari and Muslim)

These are the views of the scholars of the Ummah on treatment and medication; most of them maintain that it is permissible; some maintain that it is recommended; and a few number of them deem it obligatory. I myself agree with those who deem it obligatory in case the pain gets unbearable, and the illness is curable, by Allah’s Grace.

This is also compatible with the guidance of Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, who sought treatment for himself and ordered his honorable Companions to seek treatment as well; this is confirmed by Ibn Al-Qayyim in Zad Al-Ma`ad (Provision of the Hereafter).

But in cases when sickness gets out of hand, and recovery happens to be tied to miracle, in addition to ever-increasing pain, no one can say treatment then is obligatory or even recommended. Thus, the physician’s act of stopping medication, which happens to be of no use, in this case may be justified, as it helps in mitigating some negative effects of medications, and it enhances death. But it’s different from the controversial “Mercy Killing” as it does not imply a positive action on the part of the physician; rather, it is some sort of leaving what is not obligatory or recommended, and thus entails no responsibility.

To conclude, the physician can practice this for the sake of the patient’s comfort and the relief of his family. Nothing is wrong in this, Insha’ Allah.

Switching off the life support:

If a patient is medically presumed dead through what is known as brain death, in the sense that he no longer has any feelings, switching off the life support may be permissible, with due consultation and care, especially when it’s clear that the life support machine becomes of no use for the already-dead patient.

http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?cid=1119503544774&pagename=...