Robust safeguards, as laid out in the bill, can prevent undue influence from relatives/carers. As pointed out during the debate, it's far more likely a relative would discourage such action. You'd have to be extremely heartless to coerce someone to die early just to save a bit of money.

He definitely wasn't himself today.

I'll never understand the thought process behind such a statement. We could be in a relegation scrap and I'd still back him 100%.