Leave a comment

mpfl December 14 2005, 04:24:40 UTC
You appear to argue my stance on the whole thing exactly.

The issue of quality of life is very important to me. The problem, however, is that quality of life is a very hard thing to predict. If the child is born into hard social circumstances, such as extreme poverty/homelessness/totally uncaring parents, it is possible to change them but it is not certain that it will be.

If a foetus is determined to have a very high risk of having a congenital disease that could drastically reduce their life expectancy, it would generally be accepted to abort. We do not know, however, whether effective treatment for that congenital disease will be developed before the death of the child.

I am very much in favour of euthenasia. The problem is that it be managed very carefully so that the government does not end up with the power to euthenise its citizens against their will. There are various scenarios in which it is completely possible.

If I come down with a terminal illness that will kill me in five years time, over two painful years, I want to be able to die on my terms.

Reply

ataxi December 14 2005, 04:45:40 UTC
I'm glad we basically agree, it's always reassuring to be able to express your views and find you have them in common with other people.

I think the "sliding scale" factors like expected quality of life, and the risk of problems drafting and administering the related legislation are real and much more difficult to talk around than what I've discussed above. However I think too many people dive into debate about legislation without even bothering to define exactly what it is laws should aim to achieve.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up