I think there is a little hysteria. I think Eastwood was just laying the cards on the table about the issues revolving around euthanasia and presenting them in an unbiased light, at least I would like to think that. The fact is in today's world, euthanasia, like abortion, is a tangible issue, whether you agree with it or not. It's something that's already being practiced in some countries, and simply ignoring the issues surrounding it won't make it go away. For the record I'm pro-life, I don't know enough about the euthanasia issue but I'm pretty sure it's an issue I likely wouldn't agree with.
Part of the problem with any euthanasia discussion is that it's a very layered issue. There are different types of euthanasia depending on the situation, all the way from the most extreme like in this movie of outright killing a person whose health has dropped below what they consider an acceptable minimum, down to a level that's been commonly accepted for a long time of simply ending attempts currative medicine when a person's health has deteriorated to the point that the cure is potentially as lethal as the illness (and often in those extreme circumstances attempts to cure bring a lot of physical suffering, where as allowing nature to take its course generally offers a peaceful and rather pain free death). So it's a hard issue to be truly black and white on, at least once you dig in past the "public" faces the issue like Kevorkian.