SpankyMcFarland

The opinion of some obscure British right-winger is hardly the world. What should we think of a country that wasted years on a hare-brained project like Brexit? BTW you’d be better off putting that quoted stuff from Murray in a format with quotes that clearly indicates where it comes from. It may be obvious to most people here but I need all the guidance I can get to show me who is talking.

Paying attention doesn’t mean slavishly following. However, when an issue becomes the settled will of the people over time then it should not be simply ignored.

I think politicians should pay attention to public opinion in a democracy.

Wait a minute b’y, not so fast, hold your horses there and go easy on the uppercase typing. This is not a digital situation, eg, perfection or catastrophe. There’s a large grey zone of could do better in between that we will always be in. Yes, we certainly have problems (and I support a private sector BTW), but we’re not Haiti yet in my humble opinion. A bit of perspective is called for.

And errors don’t happen in the US or Europe? You guys need to get out more and learn a little gratitude.

Just spell out the changes you want in the legislation. I don’t think we disagree that much in this matter actually.

We have problems which I have highlighted in the past but to call it a complete disaster is hyperbole. People are receiving life saving treatment every day in this country and the progress made on, say, lung cancer has been nothing short of miraculous.

Again to the conservatives here: has Poilievre promised to get rid of MAID completely if he gets the chance? If not, why not?

People have much the same criticisms of health care for the dying in the UK as we have here. There are always going to be shortcomings in how very sick people are treated. I don’t see it as a legitimate argument against MAID here. All I’m arguing for is some sort of MAID to be available for the worst cases. That’s it.

A simple question: should Canada have assisted suicide? Yes or no. The details beyond that are a completely different debate about which we can have many opinions.

So is Poilievre going to ban it completely if he gets in? Is that a promise?

Assisted suicide is coming in Britain. Look at the polls. People are tired of having to break the law at home or travel to Switzerland to get what they want. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/aug/28/two-thirds-of-britons-support-legalising-assisted-dying-poll-shows?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

As far as I can see, most of those links are about how our system was implemented, not whether one should exist under the conditions I defined. We are going to keep MAID. There is no doubt about that.

There’s no way we’re going back to a time when people of sound mind with painful or distressing terminal conditions couldn’t choose to die when they wanted to. That debate is over. Now we are into much thornier issues regarding mental illness and disabilities.

Medical assistance in dying is a blessed relief for some. Canada is not going back on this. The main question is where to draw the line.

I don’t have much of a dog in this fight either way but the notwithstanding clause was one of those things about Canada that took me a while to digest even a little bit. Up there with Progressive Conservative and the equalization formula.

What about somebody with ALS who faces a future of gasping for air? That’s a nightmare of mine. If they want a dignified death before that horrible stage, surely they should have the right to be given it? For years, doctors have helped patients like this leave the world, before MAID and in countries without it.

Medical assistance in dying goes back a long way before MAID and continues in countries without it. Having the option of a painless exit is one less thing to worry about.

Mental health care in most Western countries is inadequate. When effective drug treatment for schizophrenia came along in the Fifties, well-intentioned doctors and patient advocates proposed a new model, community care, to replace the dreaded asylums. Unfortunately, politicians and bean counters seized on this chance to gut psychiatric beds and then conveniently forgot about the community care and humane hospital settings stuff. After all, opening wards for the psychotic isn’t exactly the best photo-op for an ambitious minister. Hence our current ongoing crisis where extremely disturbed people can’t get a hospital bed or appropriate accommodation. This has nothing to do with MAID, though. The Americans may be in a worse place with this: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/asylums/special/excerpt.html but we have had terrible problems for decades too.

The evidence is mounting that many mental illnesses have a structural basis in the brain and are therefore neurological conditions too. There’s a fairly large literature on the cerebral abnormalities in schizophrenia, for example. Long ago it was called dementia praecox, ie, premature dementia or madness Consent and capacity are tricky issues. Most schizophrenic patients would have lucid periods that are considerably above the level adequate for consent. However, it’s understandable that governments are approaching this whole issue with caution. There will be bad outcomes.

There’s no conclusive solution to this problem. People are always going to feel something from their relatives, friends and carers about what they should do. Anyway, I’m not sure free will exists at all. If it does it’s a much feebler beast than it seems. What surprised me when the law was being promoted was how many across the political spectrum wanted fewer restrictions. I think we should still protect young adults, the mentally ill and those with disabilities like cerebral palsy from rash or pressured decisions. Perhaps strict criteria and a longer decision-making period could be required of those under 35? It’s definitely a blessing to have in place for the elderly if they need it. The expression ‘you can’t have your cake and eat it’ causes considerable confusion for those learning English, given that ‘having’ cake can also mean ‘eating’ cake in this ramshackle language. If we said ‘keep’ instead of ‘have’ there its meaning would be a lot clearer.

My landlady and her parents were sheltering in Budapest as enemy armies closed in. When her father returned without his watch they knew the Russians had arrived.

These are frequently not highly rational people but knowing there’s a high chance of being caught tends to be a deterrent to some of them. In fairness, problems with repeat offenders are not confined to Canada or the JT era. So flesh out what you are proposing and the number of offenders involved. How many extra prison spots/prisons/officers would be required? What would the cost of this be and what changes to the law would be needed? I’m not necessarily hostile to it but it has to be doable.

Is there too much oxygen in the atmosphere? Are conservatives anaerobic?

We are talking very serious crimes of violence on this thread, not the century-beating offender who has been stealing etc. And if we don’t catch offenders we can’t punish them.