Fabula discussion

Hi! To my mind this book wasn't bad. It left me hungry for other books by Jojo Moyes. I'm contemplating reading The Girl You Left Behind now... Anyway, back to this particular read, as I said in my review I think, to put it in a nutshell, Me Before You is high quality mainstream fiction. I mean it's not exactly highbrow, is it? However, it is not an easy read either as it deals with a grave topic and raises a few serious questions. So how do you like this eclectic mixture of "heavy" and "light"? I have some other questions as well:
1) I would like to discuss the meaning of the novel's title. What do you think it means? Is it appropriate for the book?
2) What did everyone think of the non-Louisa chapters? Were they necessary? Did your opinion change after you read Mr. Traynor's / Mrs. Traynor's / Nathan's / Treena's side of the story? Were you wondering what Will had to say?
3) When Lou first learns of Will's intentions to go to Dignitas to end his life, she is shocked that his mother, Camilla, could be prepared to play such a role in her son's death and thinks of her as heartless. How do you feel about Camilla as a character? Do you think this view of her is justified?
4) Did you judge or hate any charecter in this book? Maybe Patric for leaking private information to the press or Treena for being selfish and mean to her sister or even Lou's mother for trying to prohibit Lou from going to Dignitas???
5) What is your general opinion of euthanasia and assisted suicide? Was your opinion changed after reading Me Before You?
P.S.: you're more than welcome to share any thoughts provoked by this novel.

I found this book to be an extremely easy-read. I suppose, that all books by Jojo Moyes are as such, as i picked one promotional collected stories book and a couple of chapters The Girl you left behind were there.(it's a mystery,but every time you suggest a book, it inconceivably appears in my surroundings).

I see where you're coming from with the suggestion, that it's mainstream fiction, but I'm lost when it comes to definition of quality. Don't get me wrong, it's a decent book, but it lacks something, which i couldn't quite put my finger on. It's fast-paced,no-nonsense low-brow chick lit, but there is an elusive feeling, that you read fiction, not exactly plausible plot.
Yet, some of the characters seem feasible (Mr. Traynor, whose reasoning and decisions i managed to comprehend), but the rest of them were not weak, but overpoweringly fabricated. I don't know why, but i caught myself wondering, whether i would guess the ending and i did, as it was so easy to crack the code the author provided).
Again,regarding the coping with grave topic bit-the problem was outlined,but i saw no further development. It's like a mantra Louisa was repeating,that she should do her best and get him out of his misery. And yet, neither was there a winning formula, nor the sense of upcoming denouement.
I find this mixture of "Let's touch upon grave matter and then dilute with fun whimsical staff" rather frustrating, as it makes me think,that the author sells out.
Now, moving on to the questions
1) I still can't decipher the meaning,tbh. It's either the egoistic plea on the behalf of Will, or the altruistic sacrifice by Louisa. Might be both of them mixed.
2) I suppose, that the insight given from the point of view of supporting characters was necessary, but their thoughts seemed so distant and somehow contrived, as if they were thoughts Louisa prescribed them in her diary.
3) Well, i would go that far to label her cruel and heartless,as she had her own demons to cope with.Mrs Traynor is portrayed as a strong powerful woman,but vulnerable at the same time. Her decisions are firm and brutal, but they are never impulsive or hasty. At the end of the day,Will was a grown-up, capable of deciding which turn his life should make.
4)Actually, every character had their own function, just as people do in everyday life. There is always a villain, a stubborn person or selfish one. They accompanied the story and shaped the edges, filled the gaps and made the story digestible. We couldn't really judge them,as we don't know how we would act if in their shoes.
5)My view of euthanasia is a straightforward one-if the person is in a right mind and capable of sane evaluation of his condition, then why shouldn't they be allowed to take destiny in their own hands?
I don't understand, when opponents of this concept ardently make a stand for basically tormenting the person rather than freeing them from the plight. Isn't it unethical, when you have stripped a person of any choice?

Sorry,if it came across rather harsh,as I didn't wish to slate the book.It's just that it didn't strike a chord as something,which gives sufficient food for thought.Somewhere along the lines there is a serious context,but it's lost in between attempts to satisfy a choosy reader.