At Vote: Repeal "Individual Self-Determination"

Repeal "Individual Self-Determination"
A proposal to repeal a previously passed resolution

Category: Repeal
Resolution: #164
Proposed by: The Sacred Orb

Description: UN Resolution #164:
Individual Self-Determination (Category: Human Rights; Strength: Strong) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Ipod

Argument:

The United Nations,

AGREEING with the original intent of the resolution, primarily noting that the government should not obstruct the ability of a person to decide their own fate;

CONCERNED with both the infringement on sovereign governments that this resolution entails, and more notably, the open opportunities for abuse that this resolution does not address.

NOTING a substantial ideological shortcoming of the resolution, that the resolution infringes on the rights of religiously-driven governments (with open borders to prevent religious persecution) by forcing them to allow a controversial procedure that may contradict their doctrine;

AND NOTING the following practical shortcomings of the resolution:

-that clause 5, in allowing parents/guardians to make decisions on behalf of those 'uncapable' to decide themselves, allows parents and medical staff to take the life of someone under their care regardless of the reason;

-that clause 5, in considering patients that are "mentally incapable" of making such decisions, does not enumerate what "mentally incapable" shall be, allowing nations to potentially interpret such incapability as simply being below a certain age, allowing parents to legally take their child's life (through the medical system) if they are under a certain age;

-that 'encouraging' nations to require the request to go through a court system (as clause 5 requests) is not strong enough to prevent the above abuses, and that the above abuses are far too severe to be permitted by the UN in any way;

-that clause 7 only states one example of a death-inducing method that should not be permitted; and that "humane, painless and fast-acting" is too vague to serve as adequate criteria for evaluating methods (a gunshot to the head, for example, is painless and fast-acting, and its 'humanity' is impossible to evaluate objectively);

-that clause 3, in citing "severe chronic disease" instead of simply "terminal disease", allows the Right to Die to be invoked on diseases that will not result in death, including notably severe depression and other psychological diseases; essentially, the resolution fails to prevent those with psychological disorders that increase a patient's desire for death from invoking the Right to Die as a form of legal suicide;

-that the entire resolution, by permitting hospitals to start allowing patients to invoke the Right to Die, introduces bizarre and morbid market implications into a mortal situation; the resolution will have the unintented side effect of forcing hospitals, in an attempt to restrict costs and stay in business, to advise their patients based on their abilitity to pay their medical bills; uninsured patients are sure to be more likely to be advised to invoke the Right to Die than patients able to pay their bills.

AND NOTING that the above problems do not simply amount to loopholes that can be exploited, but are full problems that absolutely will have an unintended negative effect.

REPEALS UN Resolution 164, "Individual Self Determination"

ADVOCATES a new resolution reaffirming the right of people to determine their own fate, provided that resolution addresses the above practical concerns and avoids overt infringment on nations' sovereignty.

Co-authored by Cristia Agape

Votes For: 1,513 Votes Against: 855

Click to expand...

UNITED NATIONS RESOLUTION #164

Individual Self-Determination
A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.


Category: Human Rights
Strength: Strong
Proposed by: Hirota

Description: Believing every individual has the right to decide their own fate.

Believing no individual should be forced by any person or entity to prolong their own life past the point having any quality of life, if that person is suffering a terminal disease/severe injury and makes a clear, informed decision to end their life.

Mandates:

1: All persons of adult age or over may make the decision to refuse medical treatment for any reason, even if that decision will result in their own death. This includes the signing of DNR (do not resuscitate) orders. The state retains the right to quarantine any person carrying a dangerous communicable disease, and who refuses treatment until that person recovers, accepts treatment, dies naturally, or invokes right to die.

2: All individuals may write a living will stating their wish to invoke right to die in case of future terminal illness or severe accident that may render them incapable of making such wishes known at the time. Living wills may be cancelled or retracted, only by the individual named on them, at any time if the person changes their mind.

3: All persons of adult age or above can at any time invoke a right to die, assisted if necessary, and terminate their own lives if they are suffering a terminal or severe chronic disease or injury that will necessitate the long term use of strong drugs to control pain and/or dependence on others for personal care.

4: Any person who is incapable of making a right to die decision due to their medical condition, but has a living will, must have that will honoured if the conditions in the will match their medical situation. Nations retain the right, and are encouraged to require, that several independent medical assessments by qualified doctors are made of the patient medical state before right to die is carried out.

5: No person may make a right to die decision for another person. Exceptions to this are medical personnel during triage, and parents/guardians of children or adults mentally incapable of making such decisions. In the case of parents/guardians, a nation is strongly encouraged to require that the right to die request go through their legal system to ensure the decision is being made in the best interests of the patient only.

6: No medical professionals may be forced to participate in any form of right to die if it goes against their personal or ethical beliefs. No medical professional may be hindered or prevented from participating in any form of right to die if they agree to be involved.

7: Methods used for right to die must be as humane, painless and fast acting as possible. Starvation, for example, is not permitted.

Votes For: 7,586
Votes Against: 4,647

Implemented: Tue Jul 4 2006

Click to expand...