As for the prolonging life treatment, the opinion seems divided.
I think "that the person has living permitted only while there is possibility to be useful for the future of the human race in the future of the person" before the right or wrong of the prolonging life treatment.
In the present situation, it seems that it is in the idea of the mainstream that it says "that anything should live long a little why about the person".
This seems to be a result of sticking to living too much, too, and to lose sight of original "the purpose that the person lives".
That the person ages and dying are a natural thing.
It is natural to do it but it is not the division which dies in the suddenness of some day, and body here and there becomes bad gradually and ends life last.
If treating surely, a little is long if treating one after another the part which was made bad in the process to the death and will be able to live if treating and going.
However, will the treatment act are not act contrary to the life of the original human being of dying, living naturally ?
It is the very person and then the family that should have a decisive power about the treatment method.
The idea of the doctor and the nurse at the hospital is a reference opinion only.
To avoid trouble, too, it thinks that it is that the idea of the very person is shown beforehand beforehand.
The problem can be evaded if making a prolonging life treatment card like a donor card and its consciousness specifies a treatment method in case of the passing away style な disease and the accident beforehand beforehand.