Do you genuinely believe that this is a binary decision, or is this just anti-euthanasia rhetoric disguised as concern trolling?
Offering humane end-of-life options to people suffering today does not prohibit ongoing disease research towards potentially helping people in the future.
It's not entirely binary, but there is an obvious unpleasant tendency in e.g. Canada, to soft-push MAID onto potentially treatable patients who don't even seek medically assisted death.
I wouldn't want my government to have an option of dealing with the problem this way, and if I needed MAID, I'd just self-administer.
Comments
Do you genuinely believe that this is a binary decision, or is this just anti-euthanasia rhetoric disguised as concern trolling?
Offering humane end-of-life options to people suffering today does not prohibit ongoing disease research towards potentially helping people in the future.
It's not entirely binary, but there is an obvious unpleasant tendency in e.g. Canada, to soft-push MAID onto potentially treatable patients who don't even seek medically assisted death.
I wouldn't want my government to have an option of dealing with the problem this way, and if I needed MAID, I'd just self-administer.
Yes, it's a slippery slope once a state providing assistant to suicide is law imho.
It just doesnt seem something a state should be charged with.