10 February 2017

My personal feeling is that...

..Canadian euthanasia legislation was long overdue... but obviously there's many more facets to that conversation...

When the Supreme Court decreed that euthanasia was permitted by Canada’s charter of human rights, it launched the country into deep waters. If medical journals are already advertising how much money could be saved if people choose euthanasia, how much incentive will the government have to create a better palliative care system?
No one is saying the economic consequences are not considerable, but obviously, that one line item should not drive the debate.


6 comments:

Anonymous said...

old white guy says..............as someone who is in the latter portion of his life I do not worry about those who really do wish to kill themselves. I do worry about some moron with the government telling someone they have to die because the government says so.

Anonymous said...

If this is to be only guided by the cost/benefit model then I agree with it; provided it is applied to the present Liberal Gov't. and monitored to make sure the numbers are correct. Steve O

Neo Conservative said...

*
justin just gave another 375 million to his friends at bombardier... they have to make that up somewhere.

*

Dollops said...

Anyone who believes that "death with dignity" will remain just that is being willfully ignorant of the wholesale slaughter of innocents that resulted from "saving pregnant girls from coathangers". There couldn't be better examples of Be Careful What You Wish For. The time-tested attitude of "forbid, but judiciously overlook" gives more protection to potential victims, and victims there will always be.

Ed said...

I get that we as individuals do not see ourselves as being particularly affected by this type of legislation (If someone wants to kill themselves…..OK just don’t take one of us down with you). I too am very concerned that the govt would control this.
However, I would respectively suggest that the idea of euthanasia has some very far reaching consequences. If you do not uphold that all human life has inherent worth (the basis of our laws on taking another’s life) it is open season on pretty much anything. It is being sold to us with the use of some heart wrenching stories about the pain that x person has to endure because they can’t get euthanasia. The same reasoning was given in the Netherlands,one of the first countries to adopt euthanasia laws (see below for a report from 1991 and how far it had gone in 15 years……it has gone a lot further now). Do a little research on how it is handled in the UK (see Liverpool Care Pathway)
"The Report of the Dutch Governmental Committee on Euthanasia," shows the impact of 15 years of de facto legalized euthanasia. At the time of the report (1990). nearly 20% (19.4%) of all deaths were a result of euthanasia. More stunning, 11.3% of the total number of the 14,691 deaths in the country in the Netherlands are cases of involuntary euthanasia in which people were killed against their will. Source: "The Report of the Dutch Governmental Committee on Euthanasia," Richard Fenigsen, M.D., Ph.D., Issues of Law and Medicine, Vol. 7, No. 3, 1991, p 341.
Now the Dutch Pediatric Association has asked to be able to put to death severely handicapped newborns. (AP wire 7/30/92)
http://www.str.org/quickthoughts/holland-euthanasia-s-slippery-slope#.WJ3ynG8rKUk

Neo Conservative said...

*
ed, i appreciate that there are all sorts of complexities emerging from what was originally seen as a fairly straightforward issue.

as i have detailed previously, a friend of ours elected to take her own life on december 27, 2016 after finding out that she had a particularly virulent form of als.

the availability of this service, for andrea, was definitely a blessing. had it not been available, she would likely have stepped in front of a subway train, or thrown herself off her balcony.

i guess it's not that simple for a lot of folk. and, of course, i trust the government as far i can throw them.

*