This is an attempt to capture the differences in the different states. There are many reasons why we do not have uniform legislation on these things. Firstly it is a highly individualised field, with many different circumstances. But the underlying issues are not, we don't have the uniformity but we do have the uniform principle that each man has to make his own decision, he should look after his own affairs, he should protect his own freedom to do what he wants with his money.

However, that's not to say that there are not responsibilities that flow from that, there are. The issue is that as far as I can see and from what I have understood from others in this debate, the only way the state can deal with people like this is to take their money away from them.

However, that is going to happen anyway. The issue is: do you do it under criminal law or civil law? Under criminal law you get this automatic presumption. In my view, under criminal law is no longer appropriate. As I said earlier, the reason is the law already has a built-in presumption against anyone who is under 75 years old. That does apply automatically because the law is based on this underlying assumption that at 75, people are no longer interested in life, they aren't