(December 11, 2013 at 12:48 am)Raeven Wrote:(December 11, 2013 at 12:37 am)pineapplebunnybounce Wrote: DNR isn't the same as euthanasia. Depending on your disease, to even get to the point you need resuscitation is most probably going to be absolute hell.
Euthanasia isn't an option so far, right? Even what Raevan describes is assisted suicide, not euthanasia. There're ways for people to go peacefully if the medical community is willing to help. Deep anesthesia and then death. No pain.
I think the problem isn't so much about inheritance. It's what if you change your mind? Say alzheimer's, at the time of diagnosis, you sign a paper saying at certain stage of the disease, as determined by however many doctors, you'd like to die. What if when you get to that stage you keep saying you don't want to die? Which will do you honour? And how often do you get to change it as your disease progresses?
I think I actually addressed that further down in my post. And I DID describe a situation where euthanasia could be employed through the express wishes of the individual, through his/her designee.
As for the Alzheimer's situation, if you are not deemed competent to make an informed decision at any point in time -- whether asking to terminate your life or otherwise -- then that would be dispositive.
Oh I was referring to the situation your state allows (prescribing drugs for suicide), that probably doesn't qualify as euthanasia. Yea I did read the rest of your post and I largely agree.
When you say dispositive you mean that would be used as evidence that they cannot change the original decision to die because they're deemed incompetent?
