Opinion
The NZZ introduces a proposal for an insurance model in the heading of a contribution: "One could voluntarily dispense with life-extending therapies at the end of life." This connection of insurance model and therapy delay requires a fundamental debate.
The human life is given by God, and there is a dignity that no one can give and no one can take away. It remains to a human being completely, even if he is old, seriously ill or dependent on help. This Christian conviction follows a clear commitment: financial considerations must not play any role in the question of whether someone can live and receive the necessary treatment.
Anyone who does not share this belief should be able to rely on this protection, and no one must justify his treatment costing money.
This is precisely where the Pandora's box threatens to open. If the waiver of life-extending therapies is financially rewarded, a highly personal decision will receive a price. This could lead to an expectation: who dispenses, relieves the community. Whoever wants to be further treated causes avoidable costs.
The word "voluntary" does not eliminate this problem. Let us introduce ourselves to a person who can hardly pay his insurance premiums. If a more favourable model was offered to him against a treatment failure, his decision would be under a pressure which a wealthy insurer does not feel in the same way.
Add to this... [truncated for model]