Right to Die

[SpecialEdition]

i find myself wondering seriously about the need to actively preserve life. it seems almost to be a difference between on one hand, THEIR right to THEIR life, and on the other hand, SOCIETY'S right to THEIR life. i think that maybe if society is willing to take responsibility for withholding that individuals right to dispose of their life as they choose, then society should be willing in some significant way to responsibly provide for the life of that person. yet, if that person themselves, due to considerable pain or other interference of some variety, is unable to contribute in any meaningful way to society, how can the state justify the burden of the life of this person to taxpayers?

I think this is the big question. I think people are afraid that if they do not exhaust every opportunity and don't keep people hanging on by a thread that somehow the potential for a higher quality of life is wasted. Some people never see their quality of life raise and end up suffering. People, even in psychiatric care, will waste away because their will to live and care for themselves is so low (or non-existent) that their physical health decays also. Not to mention the damage that is done to oneself if they try to complete suicide. Imagine someone shooting themselves in the head and the suicide is not complete but they are permanently damaged, or if they over dose on medication or illegal drugs and the damage to their body is significant. So not only do they have to live with their psychological anguish but also their physical anguish. Would it not be better to give them the opportunity to present their case and ask for their life to be terminated in a safe environment?