Dai Henwood has cancer

[harm_less]

Very much a hot potato in terms of legislation. The subject is obviously 'not of sound mind' to make the decision themselves and either declares their intention in advance (but how early is an insurance that they're not already in mental decline?) or a watertight method EPA must be implemented that is 100% free of coercion and/or conflict of interest.

We can make Donor decisions on our drivers licences. We can complete Advance Care Directives (Min of Health website), we can write our wills, appoint executors and give EPOA's ,assign guardians for our children, decide inheritances, determine DNR status -  why the hell can we not specify how we want to end our lives?

Because some people have the idea THEY should say how WE should live or die, usually based on their religion...

It is sickeningly selfish of them. Not to mention arrogant, entitled, and authoritarian...

The caution I see in this proposition is that a person's death can be assigned to someone else who may well stand to gain from the event. My mother died early last year after over 15 years of mental decline. Sure she had a DNR in place (a prerequisite of the resthome) and I held EPOA for both financial and medical matters. I had no knowledge of her will contents until after her death but if that had been the case and I also held her life in my hands by way of an end of life ruling do you not see a potential conflict of interest?