your premise that killing people to take their organs is a perverse incentive doesn't make sense to me.. The person who could have a perverse incentive would be

your premise that killing people to take their organs is a perverse incentive doesn't make sense to me.. The person who could have a perverse incentive would be the person receiving organs, when there are far easier, cheaper, and effective ways for a physician to increase profit. Additionally, people who are sick enough to qualify are the least likely candidates for organ donation/transplantation. Also did you even read the articles posted? It no where states or alludes to the idea that the state is providing euthanasia to solve either depression or poverty. I really don't get how you came to that conclusion. All it says is that people with severe medical disabilities who are too impoverished to get adequate care the state isn't providing would rather die. It's free to change medical regulation allowing physician assisted suicide. On the other hand, we don't even know how to solve poverty, even if the political willpower and money suddenly appeared.