I agree that euthanasia should not be a substitute for palliative care but, without doubt, it would complement palliative care (Too problematic to legalise euthanasia, by Dr Joanna Chan Shi-En; Nov 12).

Legalising euthanasia in Singapore will not be a great problem, provided a consensus is reached among parliamentarians, doctors, legal experts and other stakeholders.

There is certainly a fear that elderly people - with dementia and other such illnesses - who seek not to "be a burden" to their families might abuse the availability of euthanasia to end their lives.

I am sure safeguarding the legality of euthanasia will be the responsibility of the legal system in conjunction with the doctors' professionalism.

The importance of both palliative care and the availability of euthanasia should not be underestimated.

A terminally ill patient with unbearable and untreatable pain in the last stage of the dying process suffers a great deal.

At this juncture, palliative care seeks neither to hasten death nor prolong the dying process, but to turn off the food, fluid and medication tubes in the understanding that they will not have any bearing on the patient's life.

In such a situation, the availability of euthanasia would be, without doubt, a compassionate option.

Dr Chan's argument that legalising euthanasia would abet the depressed to commit suicide is intriguing.

Associating euthanasia - the purpose of which is to hasten the death of a terminally ill patient with unbearable and untreatable pain in the last stage of dying - with someone committing suicide because he is unable to cope with the miseries of life, is unreasonable.

While committing suicide is illegal in Singapore, the non-availability of euthanasia for someone who is terminally ill with unbearable pain and has become nothing more than a vegetable is immoral.

S. Ratnakumar