[thrwaway69]

The thing is why does everyone seem to forget here that some people don't have money, resources, family, environment or location to get access to many things that could help. Poor people surely will get happy if they get money, right? Surely therapy without a single worry in life will help them, right?

Do you tell others to think about how happy you could be in a few years when they are sad? No, you don't.

Do you encourage systematically poor people to suck it up because things will get better?

Same mentality is used to justify racial injustices and inequality. Things will get better in future so suck it up for the movement. These people are in pain and should be able to stop it if they see it not worth it. Obviously there can be some time period such as a year or two before you can access euthanasia. Otherwise, it's cruel to let people suffer for years in false hopes.

[ElFitz]

I don't know how things work where you are, but I tend to reason based on the context and environment I know.

Over here, we have a universal social security. While imperfect, incredibly bureaucratic, and hard to navigate at times, it ensures everyone can get access to most if not all medical care, for free for those who are in extremely precarious financial situations.

But that is a political and social choice that was made in this country decades ago, and it is true it is not the same in many other places.

Now, I want to believe this isn't what you meant, but another way to read your response could be "It'll take too long and it's too hard, too expensive, to help poor people out of their pain. We should instead let them put themselves out of their misery"

[thrwaway69]

> Another way to read your response could be "It'll take too long and it's too hard, too expensive, to help poor people out of their pain. We should instead let them put themselves out of their misery"

No. We should never stop trying to help people but if the help is causing suffering to others. It should not be done beyond a reasonable duration. What that reasonable duration is - I don't know. 2 years? 5 years? A decade? All are valid answers. It is highly contextual.

Regardless of that, having legal euthansia is better than not having it at all.

See - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23915237