Social Question

Paxan8's avatar

What are your feelings about human Euthanasia?

Asked by Paxan8 (452 points ) July 26th, 2010

I would like to start a discussion about human euthanasia. Does the Fluther populous think it’s fair to keep humans alive that are living in misery and agony just because they are humans?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

78 Answers

WillWorkForChocolate's avatar

IMO, if a person is dying anyway and they are suffering, give em enough morphine or whatever to put them out of their misery.

Neizvestnaya's avatar

If a person is suffering so much they want to die then I’m in favor of it.

For unrehabituals like torturers, molesters, rapists and serial killers then I also believe in Euthanasia in order to keep the greater population safe. Prison just gives them a different place to be criminals.

Your_Majesty's avatar

I won’t agree if euthanasia is committed by someone toward other people since I believe that everyone own their own life and no one can decide how one’s life should end. I won’t accept excuses if ones say that an ill person that cannot speak anymore should be euthanised by other people to end the suffering. This is the same for animals/pets,just because we own them it doesn’t mean we own their life.

Many creature and human died naturally before they invented ‘euthanasia’ procedure. If euthanasia is so necessary to release ‘pain’ then all of us/people who suffer a lot should be euthanised. Should poor citizen who suffer from famine for long period must be euthanised? Most of them still want to live no matter how hard their life.

If one wish to die then so be it,but please spare others life.

ZEPHYRA's avatar

I’m all for dying with dignity and less pain.

max_gutierrez's avatar

j think you could choose, obviously not at the moment, but something like in your documents an answer for that question

faye's avatar

I believe it is an injustice to not use enough sedation and/or analgesic to keep a person comfortable. I was a nurse on a palliative unit and we’ve all given the last analgesic before a patient dies. It was a funny (in a bad way) feeling at first but soon enough I was glad I could help them pass the last few hours comfortable.

ragingloli's avatar

Only if the one to be killed explicitly agrees to being killed.
Without consent it is murder.

stardust's avatar

If a person is suffering so much and they want to die, then I think it’s only fair for them to make that decision.

whitenoise's avatar

Wow…. Now that’s a loaded question.

Well there are actually a few questions…

re: “What are your feelings about human Euthanasia?”
I think having autonomy over the way one dies is an important value and euthanasia can contribute to that in a great way.

re: “Does the Fluther populous think it’s fair to keep humans alive that are living in misery and agony just because they are humans?”

* That depends…. if these people want to be kept alive… then sure. I would even see it as our duty to keep them alive and prevent anyone from attempting to euthanize them.

* That depends… can we change these circumstances? Then with all means focus on that.

* That depends… do you mean to say “force these people to stay alive, against their will?” In that case I might see a slight possibility for euthanasia. But even then… only with consent and only if the burden of living is without hope for improvement.

And… keep in mind… euthanasia is different from suicide. Euthanasia also asks of involvement of someone doing the killing. There is a difference between allowing to die and killing someone that needs very good justification.

What’s all this about “youth in Asia” – I happen to like these kids.

tranquilsea's avatar

I’ve always thought it was crazy that we would euthanize a suffering pet out of compassion yet we let people live in tremendous amounts of pain.

Of course the impetus must be from the dying person. If they want to die and need help doing so, then their wishes should be respected.

CaptainHarley's avatar

Well, let’s see here… I’m 67, I’ve got cancer and diabetes, I no longer work, I’m just a net drain on the economy. Why hot just euthanize me?

ragingloli's avatar

@CaptainHarley
Nice straw man, mate.

ChocolateReigns's avatar

I suppose it’d be alright if the person really wants it and they’re going to die soon anyway, but it would have to be closely guarded so it wouldn’t fall into the wrong hands.

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

I agree with euthanasia.

Spider's avatar

The movie “You Don’t Know Jack” (with Al Pacino) exposes many scenarios about assisted suicide and how decisions were made to either assist people or not. One example was a young man who wanted to die after he attempted suicide by fire and survived. He was already depressed, and the scarring effects (not just physical) contributed to his depression, so he was advised to get psychological help. However, others had much more legitimate reasons to end their lives.

The movie also eluded to the fact that with issues like this it doesn’t matter what “other people” think. No one can say whether what one feels is right or wrong. You do what you feel you have to do when you’re faced with a situation, and live (or not) with the consequences.

The most honest way I can answer the question personally is that I think humans should have the right to end their own lives in certain circumstances.

BoBo1946's avatar

No, i’ll take whatever is dished out!

anartist's avatar

That is what a living will is for, to make your intent known before you become incapacitated.
It is a step further along the path of ‘do not intubate’ and ‘do not resuscitate’

kess's avatar

if you understand the end from the beginning you would know you are NOT responsible for doling out and appropriating justice.

For unfairness will continue and abound among men until the time of the end of this age.

And at that Time all will get what is their fair portion.

You should instead dole out goodness from a pure heart upon all men, both the just and the unjust.
And allow others to fill their hearts with their desires whether it be for good or for evil.

By doing such, you would not be found wanting.

antimatter's avatar

I think it’s a matter of choice, if I am dieing and I know it’s the right way out than I would like to ask for it.

whitenoise's avatar

@kess… I take it you approach this from a religious point of view?

Would that mean you are not approving off euthanasia?

Ron_C's avatar

Dying is a disease and it should be treated like anyother disease. Ease the pain and allow a peaceful transition. I cannot understand that if we allow our dogs to suffer from intractable and mortal pain fail put them to sleep we are considered cruel. If we do the same to people the sufferers are considered noble in their suffering.

The logic is very very sick. The only responsibility of a doctor should be to ease the suffering for people with a fatal disease should be to ease and shorten it according to the patients wishes. I have seen doctors fail to give adequate pain medication because they of legal limits because lawyers were afraid of the patients becoming addicts.

I think in my final days, I would rather see a caring veterinarian than a legally constrained medical doctor. Our assisted suicide are the most disgusting display of allowing religion into the legal system. They jailed and ridiculed Dr. Kevorkian. To me he is a hero in a field short of heroes.

I can only hope that I can find a caring doctor that will ease my final days.

whitenoise's avatar

@Ron_C Dying is a disease? How can you say that. It is a fully natural process.

All of us are dying on a continuous pace our whole life, be it that we regenerate to keep track. Pretty much all of our body cells will have been replaced every seven years.

Dying is not a disease, it is just the end of our life. Not dying, ever, now that would be a disease.

If you however, would say that dying is a medical state and should be treated like any (other) medical condition, you might be right. It is however a unique medical condition that has no reversal and may therefore merit a special treatment still.

Ron_C's avatar

@whitenoise in a sense you are correct, we start dying from the day we were born. The process at the end looks and feels anything but natural. You are in a poor and fatal medical state that needs to be treated. Prolonging life by inaction or heroic means is a disservice to the patient, and the family.

I am lucky, my father died just after I left on an errand. When I got back, he looked like he was asleep in his favorite chair. He still had the remote in his hand. I want the same kind of death, the last thing I want to feel is surprise.

kess's avatar

@whitenoise
There is only one true religion which is called LIFE of which I belong and see all things in that perspective.

Since all belong to such, some knowing and others ignorant, they nevertheless will fulfill their good purpose.

When you meet your point of decision you will make the right choice,so be assured and rest.

It is the same for me as it is for you.

But with knowlege there is light and freedom

daytonamisticrip's avatar

Neizvestnaya i want you to think about this question a little longer. what if you were the one that had to “Euthanasia” the person. Euthanasia is a “funny” word. how you might ask. its a sugar coated way of saying KILLING

whitenoise's avatar

Well… thank you, @kess. (I guess)

ItsAHabit's avatar

With proper protections, people should be able to end their lives legally. We treat our terminally ill dogs more humanely than we treat human beings by taking them out of their pain and misery. Yes, there’s a distinction in that dogs can’t tell us that when they are terminal and in excruciating pain that they want to be released from it. But humans can and, after all, it is their life they’re talking about, not ours. People deserve that dignity.

Neizvestnaya's avatar

@CaptainHarley
Are you in so much physical pain and suffering that each day is unmanageable for you and even with assistance or hospital/facility care you’d rather be dead? Being less than your optimum doesn’t seem a reasonable request for euthanasia, not to me and probably not to most other people.

josie's avatar

If somebody wants to kill themselves, they should be allowed to do it. The problem arises when you really do not know what they want to do, or when they need someone to do the job for them. In the first case, if they are not lucid, or even conscious, there is always a doubt. But what if they left instructions that they will not be kept alive. Who will step up and finish them off. Certainly many people are inclined to do so, but they put themselves at legal risk. In principle, nobody in a hopeless situation should be made a prisoner of their misery. But there is always this odd little thing about God being the only broker of life and death. Funny, but when I was in the service, nobody said anything about killing the enemy and my relationship to God. But in the area of euthanasia it seems to matter.
I digress.
I would like to see people grow up a little bit about having sympathy for the suffering person at the end of their life. As the baby boomers get older it will become a bigger issue.

Neizvestnaya's avatar

@josie
I agree. I used to believe we humans should hang in there and fight until the last breath but for what, I don’t know, probably for the love of others. When my Grandfather was suffering the worst of his Alzheimers near the end then in his clear moments he would say his was no way to live, not able to taste food, control his own bowels, sleep without heavy meds and always in pain, nothing of pleasure worked for him any longer and he was terrified of his blank out states of mind. He wanted to die in his sleep soooo bad instead of being put in a medical facility like he knew was coming. In the end he started trading pills with other patients, hording them up, eating as little as possible and going outside in the cold or rain when he could. He was dead within a year of going into the care/med facility

josie's avatar

@Neizvestnaya That is rough stuff. Sorry to hear it.
I wonder, in the case of a failing father or mother, if the children would be willing to “pull the plug” or what ever (assuming they would be absolved of legal consequence)- or would they demand that somebody else do the deed? I would do it, but not without personal internal conflict. But I think a lot of people talk a fast game about euthanasia, but do not have the moral strength to actually participate.

Neizvestnaya's avatar

@josie
I know my mother wouldn’t have been able to do it and she’d have asked me to and… I would have because I loved and respected the man as the giver of the most learning and love in my life. We didn’t get that option, it was much worse just as it is for a lot of people. The living relatives end up feeling like crap for putting the sick and suffering through so many hoops, trying to “do the right thing”, trying to figure out what that “right thing” really is. Thank you.

CaptainHarley's avatar

@ragingloli @Neizvestnaya

That is neither a personal complaint about pain, nor a straw man. It is the logical conclusion to the practice of euthinasia: first those who truly want death as a release from pain, then those who merely want death, then those who don’t want death but who are in serious pain, then those who don’t want death but who may soon be in serious pain… the quitessential slippery-slope.

josie's avatar

@CaptainHarley Anybody tries to euthanize you against your will has to get past me to do it.
I think (I hope) the question is What if someone really wants to end it all because they reasonably recognize that there is nothing left but a painful, demoralizing decline into death? Should there be a legal and socially acceptable method available to them to peacefully and painlessly end there lives. Why not allow them to willfully administer a lethal dose of barbiturates or the like. I know that you are a warrior and not inclined to look at things that way, so I am not talking about you. But it is too bad that a reasonable person who is clearly at the end cannot simply say, Give me the juice and I’ll take it. Warrior or not, when my time comes, I would like to have the option.

zophu's avatar

I say freeze em’ and see if we can fix them in the future if they don’t want to be alive as they are anymore. But people with freezers want money. . .

CaptainHarley's avatar

So who will decide who is to be euthenized?

You? What if you’re not capable of communicating your wishes?

Spouse? What if your spouse predeceases you?

Parents? What if your parents are dead?

Children? What if they just want the burden over and the estate settled?

Other family members? What if they don’t even know you, and really couldn’t care less if you live or die?

Your doctor? There are no more funds to pay for your care, so why not just pull the plug?

Some state or federal official? NOT ON YOUR LIFE!!!!

zophu's avatar

Yeah, just work to ease their suffering, without killing them. Seems like the best thing to do. Even though it sucks.

whitenoise's avatar

@CaptainHarley
Slippery slope arguments are not too convincing to me.

Sure, if one would go down the path you suggest, then that is wrong. I do not believe, however, anyone is suggesting to do that. Nor is there any reason to think that going down that path is inevitable, once the first step is set.

Your argument is akin to choosing not to eat at all, since eating will inevitably lead…
to eating a bit too much, to being somewhat overweighted, to being extremely obese, to dying from a heart attack.

CaptainHarley's avatar

@whitenoise

And how many obese people are there in the US?

whitenoise's avatar

@CaptainHarley

There are indeed quite some obese people in the US, so…
Do you suggest that we should put a ban on all food?

There are several European countries that legalized forms of euthanasia on request, in cases of “unbearable suffering, without expectation of improvement”. So far there is no reason, whatsoever, to expect these countries to legalize murder as well.

Ethical objections based on the sanctity of life are fully valid. These are hard to argue against and I also understand your argument.

The difference between murder and euthanasia is so big, however, that I don’t feel it is a realistic argument in modern civilized democracies.

whitenoise's avatar

With thanks to @ETpro, on another thread on fluther, I stumbled across this photo

Now I finally know why Asia is supposed to be so scary.

CaptainHarley's avatar

@whitenoise

As I have been at pains to say on many topics, the US is NOT scandanavia! Just the difference in population homogenaity alone renders many scandanavian practices null and void in the US.

whitenoise's avatar

@CaptainHarley
Well… The Netherlands aren’t part of Scandinavia either, nor are Switzerland, Oregon, Germany and Belgium.

(Although I fail to see the point, anyway, more so, since in contrast to the countries / US state above, I don’t believe any Scandinavian country has legalized euthanasia.)

CaptainHarley's avatar

@whitenoise

The point still stands. The US is and always has been a melting pot of the castoffs from all over the world. To try and impose the same socilistic programs here that other, more homogenous countries have emplimented is an exercise in futility.

whitenoise's avatar

@CaptainHarley You’re losing me there… please help me back on track.

What does socialism (that was what you meant, right?) have to do with euthanasia?
I don’t see the link.

Furthermore, could you please stop pulling the socialism card, just because you talk to a European? In Europe, we have actually had some experience with socialism and virtually none of the current countries in Europe could be referred to as having a socialistic political structure.

Virtually all of them are modern, well functioning democracies with (very) modern institutions and free market economies. The ones I referred to above are, definitely.
edit:
The EU is actually the biggest (free market) economy in the world.
($16,447 billion in 2009, according to IMF).

ragingloli's avatar

@CaptainHarley
Other countries are not exactly homogenous.
We have a huge muslim population, then we have vietnamese, chinese, greek, etc, all with their distinct cultural distinctiveness still intact, and we have no problems integrating them into the social system. Claiming that having a comprehensive social safety net can not be done because people are too different, is simply a lie.
And to follow up on what whitenoise said, none of the European countries is socialist.
Socialism means that the means of production are owned by the workers themselves and the workers, via democratic processes, decide directly what to produce.
European countries are all capitalist.

anartist's avatar

@CaptainHarley I don’t think many Americans would particularly like to think of themselves or their families as the world’s castoffs. Many people came here by choice with great hope and great courage, and often little else.

CaptainHarley's avatar

@anartist

Agreed, but they were still the unwanted.

@whitenoise

As I understand it, ethuenasia is a position advocated almost exclusively by those who push a socialist agenda.

@ragingloli

I don’t recall stating that there is anything wrong with Europe or Europeans or the EU. If I did, please accept my humble apologies.

whitenoise's avatar

@CaptainHarley
As I understand it, some people seem to use the term “socialism” when they run out of arguments. They don’t necessarily even need to know what socialism is, or what they are talking about.

Must be a left-over from the McCarthy era.
You don’t like someone? Wham!!! Label them a commie!

I am really sick and tired of these (indirect) labels. I am a not a socialist and I recent the argument being raised every time, just because I ask people about their reasoning.
It is insulting. Insulting to me and also to your own intelligence.

CaptainHarley's avatar

So sue me.

I honestly see the advocacy of euthenasia as being part of, if not technically a “socialist” agenda, then at the very least a very liberal agenda. Sorry if that offends, but I try very hard to tell the truth.

zophu's avatar

@CaptainHarley Aren’t there some good agendas that could be called liberal or socialist? Like free-speech and public education? I don’t think it’s productive to call things any type of blank agenda in arguments against them. Social systems are inherently complex and traits that can be associated with one can be used in ways that don’t necessarily sympathize with the use of that system.

whitenoise's avatar

@CaptainHarley I won’t sue you, I will just care less about your posts.

ragingloli's avatar

Just know that universal healthcare was invented by Bismarck.
Bismarck was a staunch conservative.

CaptainHarley's avatar

@ragingloli… Good grief. Bismark was an aristocratic oligarch, hardly what I would call a “conservative.”

@whitenoise… Not much I can do about that. Sorry you feel that way.

@zophu… Any subjet can be explained away if you throw sufficient verbage at it.

whitenoise's avatar

@CaptainHarley
From your contributions, so far, I’ve distilled two political definitions that might be helpful to anyone that wants to interpret your contributions:

Socialism:
The political doctrine, held by people that make statements or have committed to actions that @CaptainHarley disagrees with. Sometimes referred to as “un-American”, or “European”, or “Scandinavian”.

Conservatism:
A political doctrine, held by people that make statements that @CaptainHarley agrees with. The followers of this doctrine are also sometimes referred to as “true Americas”.

CaptainHarley's avatar

@whitenoise

Have it your way. Nothing I can say or do will dissuade you, so have at it.

Ron_C's avatar

@CaptainHarley “Good grief. Bismark was an aristocratic oligarch, hardly what I would call a “conservative.”

Sounds like a card carrying neoconservative tea party member to me. Keep the government out of their business, abolish inheritance tax, stop taxing corporations and the rich. Money and power accumulate and you get an aristocratic oligarch running the show instead of a democratically elected government. All we need is 8 more years of a Reagan or Bush type presidency then you might as well have voting over the Internet because no matter how we vote the Oligarchy or corporatist selects the leadership.

CaptainHarley's avatar

@Ron_C

I could as easily say that “four more years of Obama and the democrats will have us so far in debt that we will never get out except by taxing our grandchildren’s grandchildren at or near 100%, in which case they will be, in efffect, slaves, which will make democracy a joke.”

Ron_C's avatar

I know that my previous comment veered from the intent of the thread. I read through all of the comments and think that I found a couple common themes. Some of you seem to equate the right to be euthanized a “socialist” policy. I don’t get it but that is what a few of you said. Others insist that life is worth living no matter the pain or prognosis. A few think that euthanasia is acceptable but it is wrong to ask a stranger to pull the plug.

Finally,there is my faction that is hoping that there is a compassionate doctor or relative that is willing to put me to sleep when I have had enough. I have it specified in my living will, I just hope my will is followed.

tranquilsea's avatar

@CaptainHarley Your debt problems started long before the current administration took over. Watch I.O.U.S.A.

CaptainHarley's avatar

@tranquilsea

How well I know! Two wrongs, however, do not make one right. A plague on BOTH parties!

Paxan8's avatar

Okey Dokey…I fear we have gotten off track here. Somehow a philosophical question about euthanasia has turned into a political debate. I don’t believe the government should have anything to do with euthanasia except pass a law whether it’s going to be considered murder or not. If I might take us a bit farther and suggest we delve into what would be determining factor to cause “mercy killing?” is it that a person no longer has a viable life? Well what shold be considered a viable life? And I think their is a differnce between “pulling the plug” and euthanasia. Chosing not to keep someone on life support and killing someone who is in great pain are two differnt things.

CaptainHarley's avatar

I have never understood why anyone would need “assisted suicide.” If you’re in too much pain and your life isn’t worth living, get a gun and blow your head off. That usuallly works.

As far as “mercy killing” goes, I strongly suspect that it’s committed by those who just don’t want to take care of their dying relative.

Paxan8's avatar

@CaptainHarley you are freaking hilarious. You may not have access to a gun or be too weak to perform the suicide. You might be afraid the method you chose won’t work. I mean you can’t kill yourself by taking too many sleeping pills, that usually just puts you to sleep for 12 hours or so. As far as not wanting to take care of dying relatives, why would someone want to force their relatives to take care of them when they are dying? Why not speed up the process?

zophu's avatar

@Paxan8 Actually, important fact, you can kill yourself by taking too many sleeping pills. It often fails, but it can kill you. And at a certain points it will definitely kill you.

CaptainHarley's avatar

If I were alone and daying, I would most certainly want my grown children to take care of me. After all, they’re getting a sizeable bundle of money when I die, the least they can do is make my last days a bit more comfortable. Besides, I like being around them.

I’ll tell you why lots of people would opt for “assisted suicide,” they want to leave, but they want it to be painless, like falling sleep. They’re scared to take their own lives because it might hurt. : |

whitenoise's avatar

@CaptainHarley

Your view of the world comes across as cold and cynical to me. So far, I have never met anyone that I felt would be in favor of their relative’s euthanasia, from a cost perspective.

Most people that I have known that opted for euthanasia, did so, because they wanted to die in the most dignified way possible. They wanted to be with their loved ones and take time to say their goodbyes and have closure. Most often the family is with them and that gives a lot of consolation and inner peace for all involved.

Euthanasia, as I view it, is not a morally allowed practice merely because someone becomes old and has lost economic value. Euthanasia has to do with people that have come into a state of unbearable suffering that has no chance of recovery. For instance from incurable cancer.

For most of these people, suicide isn’t a real option. For instance, because when one announces, it more or less still ends up being a similar problem for the ones left behind. Should they allow their loved one to commit suicide, or should they intervene. And saying your farewells is very important for people.

It is hard to commit suicide, while asking your wife and children to be with you while you do. (Especially when gory methods are chosen that imply a lot of clean-up.)

Ron_C's avatar

@CaptainHarley I would not want to burden my children and definitely don’t want them changing my diapers. I want a quick out as painless and as dignified as possible. Using a gun to commit suicide is chancy and messy. What my children owe me is their success in life, grandchildren, and a decent room to stay when we visit. I have a bit to leave them and I don’t want it eaten up by unnecessary medical expenses when I am terminal.

CaptainHarley's avatar

Medical expenses for me, as a 100% disabled veteran, aren’t an issue. I’m married to a retired nurse who has already told me that she doesn’t want anyone else taking care of me should I become incapable of doing so for myself. Since I have incurable cancer, the sort that spreads to the bones and becomes very painful as it develops, it’s likely that I will be at least partially incapacitated at some point. I am hoping that the pain can be controlled with medication, but I am sure that at some point it will override the medication. When and if that happens, I hope I have enough endurance to avoid seeking the easy way out. Suicide is, in my mind, unacceptable.

daytonamisticrip's avatar

agreed. i wouldn’t commit suicide if i was going threw pain worse than hell.

CaptainHarley's avatar

Pain, as we use to say in the Army, is good… it helps you to know that you’re still alive. : )

daytonamisticrip's avatar

i smile every time someone says that.

zophu's avatar

I gained the ability to change how I feel pain recently. I used to hate all pain, no matter what. But now, pain’s just pain. I’m not going to inflict it on myself without reason, and I’ll certainly avoid it when it’s practical to do so; but most minor and moderate pains are okay. They don’t annoy me as much as they used to. And I don’t fear it like I used to.

Maybe if I’m ever broken and dying slowly in a bed, I’ll be able to have a relationship with my pain like that, even if it’s extreme. No assisted suicide for me, thanks. I might pull through long enough to be given some kind of cybernetic implants or something that fix me up.

I mean, the best case scenario is uncertain. Anything could happen. But whether I’m euthanized or not, the worst-case-scenario is going to be the same.

Ron_C's avatar

@CaptainHarley “pain is good” like “greed is good” simplify situations beyond reason. We have this family saying that “if you are not bleeding, bruised, and exhausted, you are not really on vacation”. My daughter and I came up with that after our adventures with surfing in Hawaii. We were laying in the sand with bloody noses from smacks with a boogie board, I had a cut from corral, and ,earlier, my bike was, earlier, run off the road by a bus. We looked at each other and simultaneously said “now we are on vacation!”

Of course that is not cancer pain, the end of that pain was not death or a permanent vegetative state. I want, no demand, the right to die if I am in, or heading toward that state. It is not up to me to buy an gun and end it myself. If the care givers want to prepare a cocktail for me to trigger, fine, I’ll push the button. There should be no law to prevent that.

CaptainHarley's avatar

I tend to agree that there should be no law to prevent what you describe, but for those in a coma, or for some other reason unable to respond, I think that the law should be very clear about no one, and I mean NO one, else being able to make that decision for them.

daytonamisticrip's avatar

zophu Ive been trying to explain that to people for a while now. just because im in good terms with pain doesn’t mean i’ll hurt myself.

Ron_C's avatar

@CaptainHarley that is why there are medical power of attorney and Living Wills. My will had DNR and orders to pull the plug if I get in a persistent vegetative state.

whitenoise's avatar

@CaptainHarley
re:
, but for those in a coma, or for some other reason unable to respond, I think that the law should be very clear about no one, and I mean NO one, else being able to make that decision for them.

I totally agree.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther