Ana Estrada fought successfully in court to obtain the right to decide when to end her life with the help of medical professionals.
A Peruvian psychologist who suffered from an incurable disease that weakened her muscles and had her confined to her bed for several years died by euthanasia, becoming the first person in the country to obtain the right to die with medical assistance, her lawyer said Monday.
Ana Estrada fought for years in Peruvian courts for the right to die with dignity, and became a celebrity in the conservative country where euthanasia and assisted suicide are illegal.
In 2022, Estrada was granted an exception by the nation’s Supreme Court, which upheld a ruling by a lower court that gave Estrada the right to decide when to end her life, and said that those who helped her would not be punished. Estrada became the first person to obtain the right to die with medical assistance in Peru.
“Ana’s struggle for her right to die with dignity has helped to educate thousands of Peruvians about this right and the importance of defending it,” her lawyer, Josefina Miró Quesada, said in a statement. “Her struggle transcended our nation’s borders.”
Good. The right to a dignified end of life should not be infringed when the conditions of living are unbearable.
Those who want some people to sit around and suffer, to not be able to participate in anything, to be a high maintenance ornament in someone’s life, because they feel it’s morally incorrect to give someone peace, need to get their heads checked and their morals examined pronto.
Forcing someone other than yourself to suffer because of your morals is sociopathic. You don’t live that life, so you don’t get to decide. You already have your own priveliged life to decide over. It’s not your right to decide what other people do with theirs, even if you’re close family. If a person is of sound mind and wants to start that long, beurocratic laden process, then so be it.
There should be barrier to entry, but not a complete ban.
The thing is, it can and will be abused either way it goes, and keeping people alive has more benefit so far than killing them or letting them die…
So you are in favour of banning cars, guns, alcohol, knives, hammers, axes, all the strong painkillers, rope, and all the other things I can think of that have been abused causing death?
Not at all, I’m for basically no restrictions on those items you mentioned.