Oh...lovely.

It's not compassion pushing the euthanasia laws in Europe.  It's the fact that those who are terminally ill suck down a massive dollar amount of the socialist medical services, leaving less money available for those who can be helped.  It's a cold-blooded assessment of return on investment; there is no compassion anywhere but perhaps in the doctors who can't stand to see their patients suffer, and in the family members whose loved ones are suffering with no relief in sight but death.

Now, Belgium had decided that the practice of euthanasia can and should be extended to children.  Individuals who are incapable of informed consent to smoke, drink, and have sex.  Why is it that the government believes that giving informed consent to taking poison is any different?

Is this what we want for our country?  If we follow in Europe's footsteps with permitting the termination of the terminally ill, how long will it be before it's determined that nobody who is terminally ill can knowingly consent because of the medications they're on, and that all terminally ill individuals, whether it's a 90 year old or a 9 month old, must be terminated? 

And how long will it be before people are wrongfully diagnosed as terminal, and terminated when they've got years of high-quality life left?

Case in point: when my husband worked as a loan shark payday lender, he had a regular customer for the prepaid visas.  This woman was diagnosed as having less than a year to live with lung cancer (I think).  We saw her, recently, at Sam's Club.  It's been more than five years since that diagnosis.  And, from what I know of her, she's lived--really lived--every day of that extra time.

Euthanasia laws bother me, less because I have a problem with people choosing to end their own lives, and more because of the rationale behind them.  Especially when there's a distinct possibility that the person who will be euthanized either can't choose it for themselves, or are ordered to die to save money in a system of socialized medicine.