[GCFL-discuss] Re: Difference between ending life and dispensing with external means to prolong it

[gcfl-discuss at gcfl.net]

Your examples give ME some food for thought. For example, would
witholding insulin from someone be "respecting their wishes" or killing
them? Would refusing to take it be suicide, or accepting death?

Basically, if a human body is functioning in a manner that allows life to
continue, without aid, nothing should be done which is known to end that
life.

If medication is available which will allow life to continue, it should
be available, but no person capable of making such a decision should be
required to accept it.

Same for machines that prolong a life that otherwise would end.

If an individual is conscious, but in extreme and continuous pain, any
pain relief available should be provided. (E.g., end stage bone cancer,
which in England is treated with injections of heroin -- allowing the
patient to function normally with their family for the last six months or
so).

If an individual has made their wishes clearly and unmistakably known,
they should be respected.

Of course, if a comatose individual's wishes are NOT clear, and their
next of kin do not agree, that is when we get high profile,
widely-publicized cases. Even so, politicians should not legislate for
individual circumstances. Laws should be written that will apply to
everyone alike, and leave private decisions up to individual choice.

Siarlys