Because what we're talking about here is choice. And we need to respect that other people's choices may not be the same as our own without forcing our personal ideology upon them.
I find it bizarre that it is perfectly legal and acceptable to cease treatment, cease feeding, etc a terminally ill person, if they so wish. Which results in a slowish death (over days to weeks) of starvation or dehydration, but a person can not choose to have a quick death by a drug or similar, over in seconds.
I think many of you would also find it interesting that it is legal to overdose somebody with morphine, as long as the intent is to relieve pain (not to kill), and the person/family is informed that increasing the morphine dose to relieve pain may suppress the respiratory system and death may occur. So euthanasia pretty much does already occur quite regularly, just not by that name.
And as a pp has already pointed out, do not resus (DNR) and ACD (advanced care directives) already exist, a euthanasia order could be implemented in a similar manner with little to no extra risk of a 'victim.'
Also, i find that a person will undergo a treatment they do not want (eg chemo) and fight even though they have no quality of life, because they do not want their family/children etc to suffer the loss of themselves. They may be coerced into fighting when they would rather pass peacefuly at home, by family members who dont want to let go. Rather than someone coercing a family member to die so they can collect inheritance.
Sent from my GT-I9100T using BubHub
But with euthanasia, I don't need to say yes because the person has made that decision for themselves.
Pregnant for the first-time?
Not sure where to start? We can help!
Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!