4 ms·

Sure. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/23/three-netherlands-euthanasia-cases-investigated https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/23/three-netherla

Sure. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/23/three-netherlands-euthanasia-cases-investigated https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/23/three-netherla... the very fact that a patient has to be, legally "experiencing unbearable suffering, with no prospect of improvement, and to have a voluntary, sustained wish to die" is ripe for abuse, as the article makes clear has already happened. A euthanasia proponent said, "Whether things are clear for doctors is a difficult question, as unbearable suffering is different from one person to another." Maybe the Netherlands: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/jan/18/death-on-demand-has-euthanasia-gone-too-far-netherlands-assisted-dying https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/jan/18/death-on-demand... seems ideal to you. Not to me. Not even to a lot of Dutch doctors.

LodeOfCode 4y ago
I'd argue the "experiencing unbearable suffering" part is redundant anyway, since "I'd literally rather die than continue to experience this" is about as close to a definition as you're going to get. And while any standard of "sustained" and "prospect of improvement" will have their edge cases, that's arguably still better than either absolute of availability. The problem is ensuring it's truly voluntary, which seems rather difficult