🚀 go-pugleaf

> What we have seen however, is the Act being used as an insurance
> policy against fear. People who are obviously willing to tolerate
> their level of pain or suffering are "signing up" to be killed later,
> if the need arises.

That is how it should be. The process of having got all the signatures
takes quite a few months to get. How do people know how much they will
deterioate in the next few months? If what you are saying is the case,
people can apply for the euthanasia law, when and only when the pain is
insufferable. In the few months it takes to get all the legal
requirements, how much extra suffering must these people take.
These people know they will die from their disease. What is wrong with
them "signing up" to have their lives ended (not killed) for when they
feel they are ready to leave this world?

> An even more macabre possibility is that a patient's mental condition
> may deteriorate to the point of incompetence, leading to the situation
> that a person could be killed who is clearly incompetent to take a
> life and death decision. The fact they took out an "insurance policy"
> against fear earlier in their illness is no consolation, they would be
> unable to reasonably agree at the end, yet they could be killed
> anyway.

In my opinion I think people who had "signed up" were aware that they
could be mentally uncapable in the future. That is when these people
would no longer like to live and to stop their families seeing them in
such a condition. The people that took out these so called insurance
policies have made the decision to die. That is one prerequisite to
getting all the signatures. You must be sure that you want to end your
life in the near future (thats why you need a psychologists signature).
I am definitely sure that they would not want to live if they can't make
decisions for themselves.

> If you read the RTI Act you will learn that a signed request is like a
> sword of Damocles. It is not up to the patient when or how it drops,
> but the doctor. The patient does not even have to be conscious.

The patient (or it's legal authority in case of mental incapacity) does
have to be concious to in fact press the return button to inject the
necessary medicines. If the act had said what you state and the act was
still in force, if such a case occured then the courts would make a
change to the act.

An Act of Parliament is a guide to the law. It is then up to the courts
to specify the law if a problem occurs with the act.

Jim
-- 
Jim Adamopoulos			Contact: 0419 431 877
Student:   Bachelor of Commerce
Deakin University Australia
e-mail:  jadamo@deakin.edu.au           
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/4861