Speaking as someone who had their career and marriage terminated by a life altering spinal injury, that was followed in the fullness of time by a hemorrhagic stroke. I broadly agree with the author and his article, which I find both cogent and persuasive!
Alan B.

This author follows his religious beliefs that life is preferable to all else, no matter what the suffering. He also wants to make sure that all others who don't agree with his views are also condemned to suffering right up to the bitter end.

Having worked with dying people for many years, including using 'best practice' palliative care of the highest effectiveness , I can assure you that there are still really awful painful deaths out there that also suffer from uncontrolled nausea, vomiting and fluid bowel motions right up until the bitter end.

All the while, these poor people are screaming for someone to end it all sooner, but no person or invisible God is able to help them. Until all these sorts of deaths can be avoided, then I , along with the overwhelming majority of Australians, will continue to advocate for voluntary euthanasia.

People like this author and his disciples are welcome to face any awful death right up to the bitter end, but have no right to force others to do the same.

The only folk trying to force their view here are the voluntary euthanasia advocates. People already have the option of creating a living will! All that is missing is removing criminal conduct on the part of practising doctors, who up levels of opioids to provide palliative comfort until it suppresses the life force. And far more common in our large hospitals than most folk would want to believe.

And who's able to say with complete certainty that some or any of the treatment meted out in aged care nursing homes is appropriate or even part of the problem and indeed some of the horror stories emanating from some of our nursing homes, where the focus was on maximised profits not best practice care?

Even today we find the overuse of antibiotics, and lack of basic cross infection prevention hygiene are widely reported?

Of course those in so called high care nursing positions want euthanasia, even as patients in their care withdraw their consent?

Moreover, given many of the ancient relics are no longer able to give informed consent, their cognitive abilities destroyed by big pharma's largest money spinner? Relatives who might well benefit as recipients are "persuaded to provide their proxy?

And we've all heard of overworked doctors signing off on patient's diagnosis, and medication delivery sight unseen?

Aged care is one area of a highly profitable industry (as much as a 22% premium that winds up padding the bank balances of foreign investors) that gets to bury their mistakes universally unquestioned?
Alan B.

The overuse of fluid tablets can cause nausea and vomiting, and just what you cause when medically acquired dehydration sucks absolutely critical protective fluid away from the brain? The preferred permanent cure? Euthanasia?

Overworked nurses deep into a 200 hour shift can and do get a little slack with essential cross infection prevention and often cranky and perhaps a little careless at being called out from an interrupted catnap to attend to a bedwetting elder?

I was call an effing B by a clearly enraged "carer", for having rung for a bottle and then been unable to use it, at will. Not all that unusual with spinal cord injuries! And yes I remember your name Nurse K. I once held onto my water as if it were gold for two days, even as the intravascular drip was forcing fluid into me.

My demented Father died in aged care. He was confined to his bed with a "management" catheter, (a pathway for renal infection) and contracted golden staph, due no doubt to lack of adequate cross infection prevention.

The nurses and assisting staff were just the nicest folk, and were very upset when the home lost its licence and their pay packets.
Alan B.

Alan, would you be fine and dandy if your right to refuse treatment or obtain painkillers was revoked? Because that's essentially what you're arguing for.

Since the proposed legislation is voluntary, those who seek an alteration in the law are forcing no one to do anything they do not wish to do.

200 hours, that`s some shift........
Keep religion out of it please.