Originally Posted by
Bacchus
One of the key factors for me, and one that always makes the thorniest problems with the topic of euthanasia, is informed consent. I agree that someone should be able to make well-informed choices about their own lives and bodies, with things like cool-down periods in place to ensure that the patient has time to fully consider the implications of their choice, not just because they were having one particularly bad day. It's much harder when it is instances of people who are not able (either due to unconsciousness or intellectual disability) to make that choice themselves. I remember the Terry Schiavo case getting a lot of attention when I was in high school. It was an example of a patient being in a persistent vegetative state having their feeding tube removed; the patient's husband and parents were divided about what should happen. You start talking about valuing life versus considering quality of life. It can become a slippery slope, because without informed consent who are we to make that decision for someone else, and say that their life isn't worth continuing?