(Quote)
Can I butt in an answer?
Whilst this is tricky I can have a go. It should be for people who physically have no hope of survival, and their physical deterioration will involve huge pain.
If we start saying people who mentally have problems should be killed, where in gods name do you stop? Mentally ill, disabled, people who "don't think like the rest of us do"?
[/quote]
Okay, so where would you stand on say, a person who was previously very physical/involed in the arts of some kind maybe, who through illness or accident finds themselves paralysed and never able to do any off the things previously able to again. Said person may not be in pain and could potentially live for a long time, and yet, it could be utter torment mentally for the patient.
My basic thoughts are that the mechanics should be in place for Euthanasia, but it should be on a case by case basis. To restrict it to certain cases is potentially cruel, and of course to just open it up leaves it open to abuse.
Its a legal minefield and as such I can understand why polititians etc want to keep it at arms length, but I do think that say in Belgium, that they seem to have the balance right. As Bever said, its a great headline (and yeah, I was a little shocked when I first read it), but as ever, the actual story is far more complex...