By what means would you ensure that caregivers make a bona fide effort to keep unprofitable patients happy, thus causing them to live longer and cost more money?
Introduce the market back into the system (what a concept! A conservative one, at that!)
Before anyone says, "the poor would suffer," it should be realized that it wouldn't even have to be a fully monetary market. Even public funding can benefit from a ratings market, with compensation tied to patient-given ratings.
There isn't really enough incentive today in many cases, but there isn't a disincentive either. Institutions may not be keen on spending a lot of money on their patients' happiness, but they're more likely to get new patients if it looks like they're caring for their existing ones; thus, they have incentive to care for patients at least to the extent that doing so doesn't increase costs.
By contrast, adding "right to die" to the equation creates an incentive to deny patients event those comforts which would have no direct cost, since making the patient happier may cause the patient to stick around longer.