Quote Originally Posted by rachel06 View Post
It seems to me that either you think it is a good idea to protect some people from themselves, or you don't.
snip
But once you agree that SOME people are simply "disabled" - by age, or some kind of illness, or a psychological condition - from being able to make certain decisions for themselves, including the right to make decisions regarding their physical property, their bodies, then the questions is, who falls into that category?
Who indeed?

OK, we were discussing adults and the option of doing with your body what you want - or, a clarification, I was.

I have another question: who are qualified to determine if other people should be put under guardianship?

And insane people. Once you know that someone is insane, then they just can't make those decisions. So who's insane? Again, I'm confortable making the blanket judgment that physically-healthy people who want to "consent" to stuff are just nuts and can't consent to anything.
I guess the long and short of it is that I am not. Not at all. I tend to regard the powerposition of the whole set of mind doctors with scepsis, since morality, religion and other people's ideas have more to say than actual research, often enough. Consider how many of this profession are willing to call us crazy because of what we are and want.

You might disagree, and want to make a case-by-case determination; but unless you really believe that ANYONE, no matter what their condition, owns and can dispose of themselves in any way they like, I think you will need to agree that at least some people just aren't in a position to agreed to be snuffed.
THere will always be some, but the question is who is to determine who they are?
IMO taking people's choices away from them, which is what we are discussing here, put on its edge, is a darn serious thing. And to me it takes a good deal of justificantion, rather than arguing why people should be able to think and act for themselves.