Supposing that your argument is true, and it may very well will be. It's still quite interesting that they phrase this as "being in his best interests". If he is brain-dead, and cannot even suffer, how could something possibly be in his best interests?
It's just an attempt to explain the decision. I agree it was a mistake to phrase it like that, as if the doctor had any right to decide such a thing and not his family.
That being said, if the brain stem is dead, this isn't euthanasia.
Supposing that your argument is true, and it may very well will be. It's still quite interesting that they phrase this as "being in his best interests". If he is brain-dead, and cannot even suffer, how could something possibly be in his best interests?
It's just an attempt to explain the decision. I agree it was a mistake to phrase it like that, as if the doctor had any right to decide such a thing and not his family.
That being said, if the brain stem is dead, this isn't euthanasia.