I don't think I have a problem with it yet, because I'm rationalizing. It somehow makes sense. I'm not sure I would feel the same if someone I cared for decided this would be the solution to their problem though.
I suspect many people will feel similarly. If my suspicions are correct, I wonder if we're witnessing a paradigm shift about problems such as alcoholism, drugs and homelessness. Are we as a society beginning to accept that some people are beyond redemption and should just be considered a "loss"? How far can we take this?
Every life has a beginning, a middle, and an end. Some lives are very short, a few are very long, and most somewhere in the middle of the curve (something the insurance companies call the actuarial).
Everyone wants to live as long as possible, but how you get from beginning to end varies widely. What works for me, may not work for you. Trying to impress one social groups idea of 'proper lifestyle' is what causes most of the problems in America (possibly elsewhere) today.
There are times, when a little bit of the problem, is a better cure than all the societal enforced behavioral change. For the most part, we really are smart people.
I have read of a shift from treating addiction as a criminal issue to treating it as a public health issue, and this seems to fit with that. As with cancer, when a cure seems sufficiently improbable, trying to salvage remaining dignity while also reducing costs to society, through hospices, is certainly thought of well around here.
I suspect many people will feel similarly. If my suspicions are correct, I wonder if we're witnessing a paradigm shift about problems such as alcoholism, drugs and homelessness. Are we as a society beginning to accept that some people are beyond redemption and should just be considered a "loss"? How far can we take this?