An American writer is annoyed that unlike the US healthcare system, the NHS doesn’t waste vast amounts of time and money on services for people who are on their way out anyway. I’m not.
Admittedly, we should make euthanasia a more formalised and directly legal process, rather than something that happens by default – but focusing medical resources on people with a life ahead of them makes obvious sense (although if people really want to pay extra to be pointlessly kept alive, that should be their prerogative).
John
This is hugely sensitive and difficult subject, and rightly so.
You are right to say that euthanasia needs discussing and it needs to be very well regulated and properly above board.
And whilst you rightly say that resources need to be spent on the younger members of society – they are the future after all – another argument can be made simultaneously.
That is old people have paid into the pot for a longer period, contributed in many ways all their working life (which can be long.)
They then deserve a good standard of treatment to live, or treatment to die, above board and with transparency.
So some sort of correct balance needs to be found.
Where this theory all falls apart is the huge number of people who have been told by doctors that they only have a few weeks or months to live and are still alive many years later. If you give doctors the right to withhold treatment from those who they don’t think have a life ahead of them, we’ll never know how wrong they are.