I do believe in the right to bodily autonomy - but I'm in a bind. You or I could theoretically choose the time and manner of our own celestial departure at any point we felt like, we could throw a toaster in the bath, throw ourselves off a bridge, do any number of things. The State does interfere with those rights, if it can catch us enacting them in advance - with a general assumption that we would want to live. I work with people who are regularly prevented from killing themselves. Their bodily autonomy is regularly overturned for what is generally considered to be a societal good.

I'm just not sure whether the state should take a contrary role. That is, the state should take proactive efforts, both legal and medicinal to empower death in the case of someone seeking direct help from the state. Sometimes the state does withdraw treatment at the High Court level, usually for children with no chance of recovery from a serious illness (Alfie Evans and Charlie Gard spring to mind) - and those cases are fucking horrible from start to finish.

I don't know. I still don't know.

I'm inclined towards lessening restrictions, but I'm wary as hell about it given the Canadians are now expanding the scope of euthanasia into mental illness. That makes me profoundly uncomfortable as someone who works in that field. :o/