I guess the first thing I would say is that our general understanding—I know that colleagues from the Department of Justice spoke in some detail about this the other day—is that we would regard the Supreme Court decision as having addressed both euthanasia and assisted suicide.
I think probably one of the most important considerations is simply that euthanasia, in effect, involves an act taken directly by, in this case, a legitimate authorized medical provider who is personally and directly responsible for taking steps to hasten the death of an individual. Assisted suicide engages the provider in a significant way, but at the end of the day, it's actually the individual who wishes to bring their life to an end who actually administers the medication that will hasten their death, so in effect the most important distinction is who provides advice and who administers medication that hastens a death.
Within those categories, you will find in various of these reports descriptions of voluntary euthanasia, involuntary euthanasia, and so on, but those are subcategories of those two essential distinctions.