Although it should have strict guidelines to ensure safety, I think that for the most part it should be. It has to be clear that the patient is in a constant state that they will never recover from and they should give consent when they are sane and sober or else it would be robbing them of their life. I believe that if someone is in constant pain, they should be put out of their misery in a safe and humane way. An analogy for this is that if you found a dying mouse or partially crushed ant, would you leave it there to die? Most people wouldn't and take it upon themselves to kill them in a way that is quick and as painless as possible. Of course, humans are more complex beings, but the analogy can still be used in this circumstance
I believe assisted suicide should be legal under only two terms.
1) You are very disabled and unable to function as a normal person
2) You have a terminal illness and would only suffer if left alive
Forcing those who suffer everyday to stay alive is just flat out cruel.
People with long term conditions who are feeling a burden to their families already could possibly choose suidicde over living their lives. It's my opinion that this is unnecessary because alternative treatments exist. Is widely believed that there are only two options open to patients with terminal illness: either they die slowly in unrelieved suffering or they receive euthanasia. In fact, there is a middle way, that of creative and compassionate caring. Meticulous research in Palliative medicine has in recent years shown that virtually all unpleasant symptoms experienced in the process of terminal illness can be either relieved or substantially alleviated by techniques already available.
This has had its practical expression in the hospice movement, which has enabled patients symptoms to be managed either at home or in the context of a caring in-patient facility. It is no surprise that in the Netherlands, where euthanasia is now accepted, there is only a very rudimentary hospice movement. By contrast, in the UK, which has well developed facilities to care specifically for the terminally ill, a House of Lords committee recently ruled that there should be no change in the law to allow euthanasia.
This is not to deny that there are many patients presently dying in homes and hospitals who are not benefiting from these advances. There are indeed many having suboptimal care. This is usually because facilities do not exist in the immediate area or because local medical practitioners lack the training and skills necessary to manage terminally ill patients properly. The solution to this is to make appropriate and effective care and training more widely available, not to give doctors the easy option of euthanasia. A law enabling euthanasia will undermine individual and corporate incentives for creative caring.