[trimom]

I view myself as deeply pro-life and this measure makes complete sense to me. Technology can delay natural death far beyond what is reasonable.

At some point the decision to allow death to happen (not to CAUSE death) is the right one.

[Dr. Sivana]

This is fine just as long as it is understood that dialysis is trreatment, but food and water are simply sustenance.

[ari-freedom]

the problem is when others step in on their behalf to refuse treatment. Terri Schiavo comes to mind

[Neoliberalnot]

Not many years ago my mother refused cancer treatment after two visits for radiation therapy. She would not take chemo and chose to avoid delaying the inevitable. She had metastatic disease and died in about 4 months. She was 80 years and a devout Christian. Worst time of my life — God rest her soul.

[gracesdad]

Sounds right to me.

[pgkdan]

I oppose abortion and euthanasia but see no problem with this measure as it's being reported here. My mother died of kidney disease and spent the last 2 years of her life on dialysis. She had treatment every other day and because her BP would often drop precipitously it would often take 8 or 9 hours to complete her treatment. She'd leave there feeling sick and tired and wouldn't feel better for 2 days...just in time to do it all over again.

I too have kidney disease and because I also have kidney cancer I've only got 1 kidney and I've already decided that I'll never submit to dialysis. I just refuse to spend my life tied to a machine. I hope that I'm years away from having to enforce that decision, but either way I don't want to be kept alive by any machine.