David Goodall Killed himself earlier this month. He was 104. He was not terminal

David Goodall Killed himself earlier this month.
He was 104. He was not terminally ill, nor was he in physical pain. But as the Australian scientist and right-to-die advocate told the New York Times, “I no longer want to continue life, and I’m happy to have a chance tomorrow to end it.” And so he traveled to a Swiss clinic to die via physician-assisted suicide.
His death, as the Times portrayed it, was a celebration of the “dying with dignity” movement: a chance for a man who had lived a long and full life to exit this world on his own terms. His death was entirely on scriipt – he died, the Times tells us, to the closing strains of Beethoven’s “Ode to Joy,” the very song he’d chosen. …
By and large, media coverage of cases like Goodall’s has been positive. Those who make the decision are generally characterized as brave pioneers.
But Goodall’s case and the right-to-die movement have their critics, in both the religious and secular sphere. …
But what makes Goodall’s case particularly distinct was that he was not ill and was in fact, though frain, in good health. He simply did not want to live any longer. And, he argued, nobody else should have to either. He hoped he would live on”as an instrument of freeing the elderly from the need to pursue their life irrespective.” (Tara Burton, “What We Lose When We Gain the Right to Die,” Vox.com, March 21, 2018. https://www.conx.com/2018/5/21/17360978/right-to-die-assisted-dying-suicide-david-goodall Links to an external site.. Reprinted by permission of Vox Media, LLC.
Provide reasons for your answers: unlike many people who seek t end their lives, Goodall was not in physical pain or apparent mental agony. He simply didn’t want to live anymore. Do you think he had a right to end his life even though he was not physically suffering? Does such a right outweigh the inherent value of life?
Response should be 100-200 words in length, reflecting on the prompt above.