Will's desire to withdrawal all life support and refuse his treatment
is supported by legal precedent, even though it is likely that his refusal
of treatment will result in his death. Conversely, Will does not have the
legal right to demand treatment or intervention which would hasten his
death. Therefore, were Will placed on life support, and it was known that
his desire was not to have such support given to him, then this could be
withdrawn. There is a catch-22 situation in the Supreme Court has found
that while laws which prohibit physician assisted suicide are not
considered unconstitutional, laws permitting physician assisted suicide are
not unconstitutional. The withdrawal of intervention on Will's part is
based on the assumption that Will's request for the removal of intervention
is a rational one, in light of his illness, his pain and his desire to
avoid becoming a burden to his family...
[ View Full Essay]