Home | Notifications | New Note | Local | Federated | Search | Logout

Note Detail

Reply to @moth_ball@shitposter.world
バツ子（台風に倒されない@ageha@tomo.airen-no-jikken.icu (2026-10-20 18:49:19)
@moth_ball @Merc @lebronjames75 @sun 
(went out for a moment, sorry

"fine" and "legal" are not the same. i think that's getting closer to iffy territory, but one doctor and patient should discuss together, not one to be legally regulated, as legal interventions will jeopardise patient health, which should take precedent
---Reply---
Blurry Moon@sun@shitposter.world (2026-10-20 18:53:08)
@ageha @Merc @lebronjames75 @moth_ball does patient health include completely unverifiable mental health claims

---Replies---

バツ子（台風に倒されない@ageha@tomo.airen-no-jikken.icu (2026-10-20 18:57:18)
@sun @Merc @lebronjames75 @moth_ball 
it's the same kind of iffy as "brain-dead life support". realistically you don't have a person any more, but it's still probably better to avoid a culture of thoughtlessly turning things off at that stage, as it's sort of a moral buffer zone that prevents you from wheeling that back into a less clear zone. deliberation and necessary procedure is good. if mandating brain-dead patients to be kept alive would inevitably kill or maim some other people though, there should definitely never be such a law