Compare and contrast.

Two recent news stories.  The first involves a young woman in full control of her faculties, who has decided to starve herself to death.  A judge held that she should be force-fed in an attempt to keep her alive, although this is contrary to her wishes. The second case is of a young man who is a Jehovah's Witness, also in full control of his faculties, who was suffering from sickle cell anaemia and refused the blood transfusion which could - probably would - have saved his life.  He wanted to live, but the law could not interfere and force him to have the transfusion against his wishes.  Somehow I find it difficult to reconcile these two cases.  A woman who wants to die is forced by the law to live, and a man who wants to live dies because the law is powerless to intervene.  Makes little sense to me.