Quote:
Originally posted by Pike1483
I agree about the slippery-slope implications this could have. I'm completely against euthanasia and so-called "mercy killings" of infants. Who decides who gets to live and who doesn't? Who defines quality-of-life?
|
See thats just it... the Netherlands has defined it pretty exactly in legal and medical terms... the problem is when someone challenges the established terms to expand them.
As it stands now, in layman's terms, the baby has to have no hope of survival (off of support); there is really no discussion of quality of life (the current babies euthanized lives were projected in hours and days)
Hopefully no-one will try to expand it to include "quality of life", because of the subjective nature of that concept inside and outside the medical science field - while it's within the bounds of the medical science field everything is relatively cool... but once the decision making process is opened up you know that religion, politics, philosophy, and personal agendas are going to crop-up and creep-in.