State Ordered Euthanasia

[Don Corleone]

http://www.vancouversun.com/health/C...482/story.html

I'll hold off on my editorial stance until later. I'd prefer to cede the floor to others first.

But I am curious, and ask participants of each side to explain:

Pro-government ordered euthanasia: What common good is the state seeking in ordering the death of the child? I find the statements on risk of long-term infection in particularly poor taste and shows depraved indifference to the feelings of the parents, given that the removal of the breathing tube will result in almost certain death within the span of an hour.

Pro-parental-supremacy: Do parents (not necessarily here in the particular, but in the general sense) have absolute authority over the health care decisions of their children (ability and willingness to pay assumed)? If the decision of the parent could only possibly result in the prolonged physical suffering of a being no longer with any hope of improvement, should they still have the right to continue to inflict this suffering on their child? Isn't this the height of selfishness?

I'm genuinely curious about all viewpoints on this. Bonus points for making your case without attacking the other side. Extra bonus points for employing humor instead of vitriol.