>

THe happy part is that more lifes are safe.
those who oppose the legalization of euthanasia argue that it is morally wrong to intentionally end a life, and that allowing euthanasia could lead to abuse and coercion of vulnerable individuals
solve that, and the issue would no longer be an issue >

That’s a good point, I hadn’t though about abuse and coercion. Maybe there is a way to make the terms and conditions prevent this; I think requiring both a signature from the patient and their next of kin, along with a terminal diagnosis, ensures that in most cases euthanasia will be performed to prevent prolonged, unnecessary suffering. But I can still think of situations where this might not be the case, or at least the full case. >

Where I live (The Netherlands), euthanasia is legal in quite a broad range of cases, I’m pretty sure we’re the furthest along in this respect of any country. It’s well-regulated, and there don’t really seem to be any particular issues with abuse or coercion. It goes through your GP and requires a separate, independent doctor to sign off on it as well, so there are safeguards in place to prevent such issues. 
Though what does play a part in that as well is that the GP has a very central role in Dutch healthcare. Basically everyone has a GP, and they’ll generally know you pretty well already and have a pre-existing relationship, so they’re not some faceless doctor you’ve never really met before then. In most cases, they’ll have been involved and well aware of the health problems that lead to the euthanasia request in the first place. >

Not sure about what? Yeah, severe psychiatric disorders can serve as a basis for potentially granting a euthanasia request, what’s your point? >

For a 17 year old girl? Yes, she may be suffering, but her brain isn't even fully developed, and euthanasia seems like a frighteningly final solution to a problem, which at 17 she can't have tried too many treatments for yet.
In Psychiatry we generally try to avoid suicide, so granting euthanasia for it's disorders is not something I'd support. >

What 17 year old girl? Did you even read your own article? >

Swing and a miss! Never a good idea to trust the Daily Mail, frankly. 
She didn’t receive euthanasia, she requested it and was denied. Here’s a more reputable source with the actual story. >

Palliavtive care for a 17-year old commiting suicide, and euthanasia for a 25 year old, sorry.
The Netherlands are still fucked up. >

A valid worry with euthanasia and assisted suicide is that it is a way to practice eugenics. 
That the government of a country would further underfund and make like difficult for undesirables (disabled people, veterans, people with mental health issues, homeless, those in poverty, LGBT+, POC) to push them instead towards assisted suicide which would save them money and for fun eugenic reasons etc. 
This is pretty worrying. There isn’t guarentees agaisnt this in any assisted suicide issue.
If a country doesn’t have really solid social nets, this isninevitable. >

Okay yeah this has changed my mind the most. Anything the government can be involved in, you have to assume they will abuse it and use it for their agendas. I can definitely see mass scale coercion of certain demographics. >

Do give them a delta if they changed your mind. >

On the topic of abortion:

a few conditions I think should be met; abortion (in places where it’s legal) is pretty well regulated already, usually before 24 weeks of pregnancy, sometimes after 24 weeks in cases where the pregnancy will cause serious health problems for the baby or mother.

24 weeks is past the point of viability outside of the womb - it is possible, with medical intervention, to deliver a viable infant at 21 weeks gestation. An abortion after this point is comparable to infanticide.
On the topic of euthanasia:

it would save resources, particularly in hospitals that are keeping terminal patients alive. I have no problem with this, it’s entirely a persons choice, or their family’s choice, whether they want to prolong ur life as long as possible. But the option is there for people who want to end their suffering.

Many terminal patients end up on palliative care, where no major interventions to save the patient's life will be taken and treatment is more focused on making sure that the patient is comfortable and not in pain. When the patient dies, they die, but that's more nature taking its course rather than an active intervention.
In the case of actual euthanasia, legalizing it ultimately creates a system like what Canada has right now, where people who are disabled or otherwise need care or support are pressured into euthanasia because the government doesn't want to pay for it.
It may sound good to you, but Canada's euthanasia laws, which are by far the most permissive in the world, have created a culture not unlike that of Nazi Germany, in which the Third Reich used euthanasia to perform "mercy killings" on the disabled. >

The sad part is that if illegal it will all happen anyway in a way more harmful way.