Might not matter, given this timeline.... By the time a decision like this would have to be made, science and medicine may have solved this.
This idea has crossed my mind a few times over the last few years.
Dystopian horror movies sometimes have the scenario where people are going off to die or kill themselves. Logan's Run was one I think. That idea.
But... What if they're young/early adult/say 25-years-old, healthy their whole life, and their life is something like 80 years or a 100 years long? But a set end date.
A few times I've thought, "Hey, they've got a longer "young" life. That doesn't sound so bad. Definitely not horrific."
So given a choice like this, which would you choose?
Regular life. You might die earlier or later. You might physically and mentally fall apart toward the end. The end might drag out 20 or 30 years now with present medicine.
Or, would you take being a healthy 25-year-old, and be very certain (accidents aside), that you will stay young and healthy, disease free, but the catch is at the end of a set period of years, you're done. Dead. Time's up.
On one hand, it might be horrific that you have to die like that, but on the other... That's still a long, long time of staying younger and healthy.
Add reality, and I imagine we'll be able to keep people living longer. I suppose in this scenario it would be a one-time decision (probably on your parents part), where science can keep you young, but can only control the length of your life up to a given point. And apparently, it's the same given point for everyone.
So, which would you choose?
Also on the reality side, we're looking at disease, dying younger/middle/older, having a low quality of life for decades possibly at the end. There's not a lot of movie-style drama, but being stuck in a body that's physically broken down or having your mind break down does sound horrific. And it's real. Even scarier.