Assisted Suicide in Canada.

[On Guard for Thee]

Doctors shouldnt be killing cowards who are too weak to face death head on. When I get old and sick and I'm dying I will refuse all medication and look death right in the eye. I want to be able to say good bye to everyone not just lay on a bed all drugged out taking my last breath unconscious.

This is a law for the weak. Those who have no guts to face death and no pain tolerance. I wonder if it will lawful to kill children who suffer as well. Probably since they now have charter rights. SO doctors will be in the business of killing sick children, wonderful.

You have fun with that. I dont like pain. Pass me the morphine.

[LemonPureLeaf]

You have fun with that. I dont like pain. Pass me the morphine.

If you have terminal cancer or liver disease they will drug you out so you cannot say goodbye to your family or anything. Terrible. My father passed in this fashion which is why I'm so against it. They basically keep you in a drug induced coma until you die. No thank you. I want to face death.

[On Guard for Thee]

If you have terminal cancer or liver disease they will drug you out so you cannot say goodbye to your family or anything. Terrible. My father passed in this fashion which is why I'm so against it. They basically keep you in a drug induced coma until you die. No thank you. I want to face death.

And you have every right to do that. Why try to take away the rights of others who have a different idea...

[LemonPureLeaf]

And you have every right to do that. Why try to take away the rights of others who have a different idea...

People can kill themselves all they want. I just like it that they will soon force Doctors to do it for them.

[cybercoma]

People can kill themselves all they want. I just like it that they will soon force Doctors to do it for them.

The legislation will be written such that doctors cannot be forced to do it, but would have to refer them to someone who will.

[LemonPureLeaf]

The legislation will be written such that doctors cannot be forced to do it, but would have to refer them to someone who will.

It doesn't surprise me that this goes along with the decline of moral and ethical values in our society. I hope I die soon so I don't have to be part of it for much longer.

[overthere]

I hope I die soon

luckily and ironically that may soon be arranged.

[overthere]

If you have terminal cancer or liver disease they will drug you out so you cannot say goodbye to your family or anything. Terrible. My father passed in this fashion which is why I'm so against it. They basically keep you in a drug induced coma until you die. No thank you. I want to face death.

Not where I live. When my father was dying of cancer and started to feel pain he was asked if he wanted morphine, and it was explained that it would mean he would become incoherent and perhaps never regain consciousness. He waited until he could not take it anymore, then accepted. Nobody forced a coma on him or on us.

[On Guard for Thee]

It doesn't surprise me that this goes along with the decline of moral and ethical values in our society. I hope I die soon so I don't have to be part of it for much longer.

What is immoral about not wanting to suffer from pain that will only go away upon death, or unethical about someone providing assistance to do what I can legally do anyway to stop that pain.

[nerve]

I thought I should add these people should volunteer as brain transplant patients, to help advance the cure to terminal disease.

http://articles.philly.com/1998-07-02/news/25737590_1_brain-cells-alma-cerasini-brain-disorders

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&ei=gzbuVJHyNoyQyASN-4BI&url=http://gizmodo.com/the-crazy-science-behind-a-proposed-human-head-transpla-1688014257&ved=0CBsQqQIoADAA&usg=AFQjCNHKS_GhsBc4j-PjgF-QzoYTQnEmgg&sig2=woRyZ-S1uT2QaUh82IW7_A

Edited February 25, 2015 by nerve

[LemonPureLeaf]

I thought I should add these people should volunteer as brain transplant patients, to help advance the cure to terminal disease.

I don't understand. Please rephrase your position on the subject.

[nerve]

I don't understand. Please rephrase your position on the subject.

See above

1. People should have the right to die.

2. Keep the state out of it, while insuring public accountability.

3. Do not give doctors the right to murder.

4. Use technology that facilitates a window to rethink it.

5. Strongly encourage terminals to volunteer for brain transplant procedures so all disease will be curable through cloning and surgery.

Edited February 25, 2015 by nerve

[guyser]

3. Do not give doctors the right to murder.

They never have nor will they ever be permitted to. Where the H does that notion come from?

[Rue]

Not where I live. When my father was dying of cancer and started to feel pain he was asked if he wanted morphine, and it was explained that it would mean he would become incoherent and perhaps never regain consciousness. He waited until he could not take it anymore, then accepted. Nobody forced a coma on him or on us.

I am not sure where you are Overthere. In the Greater Toronto Area, the protocol in final stages of cancer is to allow people to go back home to die in their homes and they are given a morphine drip that they control and administer to themselves.

My friend had one. He had a fast growing bone cancer. He had the morphine drip to block his pain and he was not incoherent. It would depend of course. I had a long pre death discussion with him for about an hour and a half. He was quite lucid and I was amazed how calm he was at his situation.

He waited for his wife to go downstairs in the kitchen before he died.

Now I know each person is different and care is different but I am sorry to hear your father could not have this kind of protocol. My mother died after being in and out of comas over a year and a half from complications from leukemia. They did not have this protocol in Montreal back in the 60s and 70's.

Pastoral care as they call it, now features where sending someone home is not possible, sending them to hospices, or home like settings where they are administered morphine drips they can control. There used to something called a Brompton Cocktail, a mix of narcotics given to final stage cancer patients in pain.

Now of course not all diseases in their final stage causing pain can be given the same protocol (course of medication). I am no cancer expert but I believe my friend who is an oncologist told me each person reacts differently to pain and some cancers like pancreas cancer or liver cancer or spinal cancer can be say more painful then other cancers. Then again if you have other pain causing illnesses like say Lupus, some pain medications might not work at all.

Its a very difficult thing. What makes me sad about your story is your father may have lived in pain when he could have been given morphine or something else. I just hope you are o.k. with it. Nothing else matters I guess at this point. I did when reading your post immediately understand you when you referred to forcing a coma on him. They did that with my mother twice. The second time it brain damaged her and reduced her from a high i.q. medical professor and neurologist to 8 year old. That was harder to deal with then when she was in pain.

Myself I just want people to have the option to die with dignity, without pain where possible, and when there is no point of recovery to be able to choose their day of death and assure it be done with no complications.

I believe the protocol used in Vermont, Washington and Oregon states where patients must be in final stage and screened by a panel of 10 doctors first, works and eventually will be the procedure used in Canada. It builds in protections so as not to impose this option on anyone or be used against disabled persons without their full consent.

This issue triggers extreme fear in disabled people who feel any euthanasia law will be used to kill them to save money or by religious persons who believe it goes against their fundamental beliefs. It is possible to accommodate both groups and still allow others the right to die pain free and with dignity.

[Rue]

She above

1. People should have the right to die.

2. Keep the state out of it, while insuring public accountability.

3. Do not give doctors the right to murder.

4. Use technology that facilitates a window to rethink it.

5. Strongly encourage terminals to volunteer for brain transplant procedures so all disease will be curable through cloning and surgery.

With due respect, in response to 5, we are not at a point in time with medical knowledge where brain transplant procedures are used. It is also unlikely brain transplants would assist in helping people with terminal illnesses causing overwhelming pain.

You might have a notion you can remove a brain from one body and put it in another that is healthy. That is most improbable in the future. A brain once removed from its original body does not continue to operate. There are immediate chemical reactions to shut it down-once the heart stops, it stops in laymans language. If you remove it it would be impossible to place it in an immediate environment capable of sustaining it with the right liquids and chemicals it receives from the body's nervous and blood systems. Your body is inter-connected to the brain. One can not operate without the other.

In regards to 3, the last thing doctor's want is to murder anyone. They might be faced with a situation however where someone is in overwhelming pain. Their college of physicians code requires they administer as much pain medication as possible to contain and block pain. On the other hand if they do that and it causes someone to die, they are left exposed to criminal liability which I think is unfair. All they ask is for clear guidelines.

I will give you one example of what I mean. There was a true case in Halifax where an emergency physician working part-time on the intensive care unit was called in. A patient who was in his very last minutes of life from lung cancer and who had said his final prayers and said goodbye to his family asked and had his breathing tube removed. Usually people die once the tube is out. He had a rare reaction where he slowly choked and was screaming to be killed. The physician gave him morphine and he then died. This physician was charged with murder. It split the town in two. The family supported the doctor. The doctor was a woman of outstanding reputation. The criminal Judge at the preliminary inquiry knew if the trial proceeded it would cause great pain for the surviving family, the doctor and so many others of religious and disability groups fearing what had happened. So he said, he could not tell if the final needle that doctor gave the patient, or previous shots administered in accumulation with her shot killed the patient. He declared there was insufficient evidence to prove the final shot alone killed the patient and therefore with that reasonable doubt threw out the case.

How putting this woman in jail for murder would have made sense is beyond me. Surely we all agree that poor man had to be helped and not left to choke slowly.

[nerve]

They never have nor will they ever be permitted to. Where the H does that notion come from?

Doctor assisted suicide is patient assisted murder.

Suicide was a crime so a doctor facilitating that is aiding suicide. The doctor participating in killing someone is accessory to murder.

All that aside this type of murder is seen as OK, but don't trust doctors.

They have abused their powers before, providing them with legal protections against murder is the wrong way to go.

I am not saying all the people a dr hates will be prescribed death, but doctors are not to be universally trusted, a blanket right to kill their Patients must be avoided.

This is why the law should only empower the public not state institutions, socialists should never be givrn authority over the public general.

Edited February 26, 2015 by nerve

[cybercoma]

It's not murder because we have a legal code called the Criminal Code of Canada that defines murder. Your definition is not included in that, as court precedent has decided.

[On Guard for Thee]

Doctor assisted suicide is patient assisted murder.

Suicide was all a crime so a doctor facilitating that is aiding suicide. The doctor participating in killing someone is accessory to murder.

All that aside this type of murder is seen as OK, but don't trust doctors.

Ey have abused their powers before, providing them with legal protections against murder is the wrong way to go.

Suicide is not a crime in Canada. Aiding someone to do what is already legal is legal. Murder is illegal. You should try inculcating the difference..

[nerve]

It's not murder because we have a legal code called the Criminal Code of Canada that defines murder. Your definition is not included in that, as court precedent has decided.

Yes and it is still murder but legal murder in Canada, that is the problem.

You need to recognize the difference between lawful and criminal acts. It is still murder.

Edited February 26, 2015 by nerve

[jacee]

Doctor assisted suicide is patient assisted murder.

Suicide was all a crime so a doctor facilitating that is aiding suicide. The doctor participating in killing someone is accessory to murder.

All that aside this type of murder is seen as OK, but don't trust doctors.

They have abused their powers before, providing them with legal protections against murder is the wrong way to go.

I am not saying all the people a dr hates will be prescribed death, but doctors are not to be universally trusted, a blanket right to kill their Patients must be avoided.

This is why the law should only empower the public not state institutions, socialists should never be divided authority over the public general.

Suicide isn't a crime anymore.

.

[On Guard for Thee]

Yes and it is still murder but legal murder in Canada, that is the problem.

The courts, the Charter, and most Canadians disagree with you.

[LemonPureLeaf]

Doctor assisted suicide is patient assisted murder.

Suicide was all a crime so a doctor facilitating that is aiding suicide. The doctor participating in killing someone is accessory to murder.

All that aside this type of murder is seen as OK, but don't trust doctors.

They have abused their powers before, providing them with legal protections against murder is the wrong way to go.

I am not saying all the people a dr hates will be prescribed death, but doctors are not to be universally trusted, a blanket right to kill their Patients must be avoided.

This is why the law should only empower the public not state institutions, socialists should never be divided authority over the public general.

Wow, it's like you're my twin brother...another alter ego...lol.

I totally agree with you on this. Seriously it's like we're sharing a brain.

I wonder how many young children will be put to death by these doctors....makes me afraid for any child who has a terminal sickness. Doctors killing children is not what we need in this country.

Edited February 25, 2015 by LemonPureLeaf

[nerve]

Suicide isn't a crime anymore.

.

Was is past tence.

It actually is, but there is no need to prosecute the offender so it isn't enforced. (Intent should still be criminal technically)

Assisting suicide 246b is under review.

Kindly understand canadian law is not universal truth.

246. Every one who, with intent to enable or assist himself or another person to commit an indictable offence,

(a) attempts, by any means, to choke, suffocate or strangle another person, or by any means calculated to choke, suffocate or strangle, attempts to render another person insensible, unconscious or incapable of resistance, or

( administers or causes to be administered to any person, or attempts to administer to any person, or causes or attempts to cause any person to take a stupefying or overpowering drug, matter or thing,

is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for life.

R.S., c. C-34, s. 230; 1972, c. 13, s. 70.

Marginal note:Traps likely to cause bodily harm

247. (1) Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years, who with intent to cause death or bodily harm to a person, whether ascertained or not,

(a) sets or places a trap, device or other thing that is likely to cause death or bodily harm to a person; or

( being in occupation or possession of a place, knowingly permits such a trap, device or other thing to remain in that place.

Marginal note:Bodily harm

(2) Every one who commits an offence under subsection (1) and thereby causes bodily harm to any other person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years.

Marginal note:Offence-related place

(3) Every one who commits an offence under subsection (1), in a place kept or used for the purpose of committing another indictable offence, is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to a term of imprisonment not exceeding ten years.

Marginal note:Offence-related place bodily harm

(4) Every one who commits an offence under subsection (1), in a place kept or used for the purpose of committing another indictable offence, and thereby causes bodily harm to a person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to a term of imprisonment not exceeding fourteen years.

Marginal note:Death

(5) Every one who commits an offence under subsection (1) and thereby causes the death of any other person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for life.

Edited February 25, 2015 by nerve

[nerve]

With due respect, in response to 5, we are not at a point in time with medical knowledge where brain transplant procedures are used. It is also unlikely brain transplants would assist in helping people with terminal illnesses causing overwhelming pain.

You might have a notion you can remove a brain from one body and put it in another that is healthy. That is most improbable in the future. A brain once removed from its original body does not continue to operate.

Rue you are wrong.

They transplanted several brains, and brain tissue already.

This is pretty much where other organ transplants were to start such a heart transplants. The two major issues right now are preventing rejection after successful surgery - easily achievable with cloning, and connecting the motor system , that advance will also cure paralysis. They have ideas on this. They can all bypass the motor systems via sensors now.

Your belief is out of date.

People are holding back the science for ethics reasons on both human cloning and brain transplants, yet will allow people to kill themselves, it is nonsensical.

It is both possible and has happened. Educate yourself else you are lying to the world.

Edited February 25, 2015 by nerve

[guyser]

I will give you one example of what I mean. There was a true case in Halifax where an emergency physician working part-time on the intensive care unit was called in. A patient who was in his very last minutes of life from lung cancer and who had said his final prayers and said goodbye to his family asked and had his breathing tube removed. Usually people die once the tube is out. He had a rare reaction where he slowly choked and was screaming to be killed.

Cool story bro! Thanks for that....story I mean.

Parttime physician in the ICU?

Asked to have tube removed?

Screaming to be killed?

Rare reaction?

Where does this fantasy come from? The Bill Oreilly/Brian Willimas School of Journalism...where if the facts arent good enough, make it better by introducing untruths, just like you did?

Asked to have tube removed? Nope, his family (wife and son) did that.

Screaming? He couldnt talk, was intubated, had no capacity to talk..since he could barely breath.

Rare reaction? He had open pussing chest wounds.

The physician gave him morphine and he then died.

Yes he died.But not from morphine . He died from KCI, potassium chloride.

But Why not mention that she administered 4 times the drugs a normal Dr would over a 24 hr period? She took less than 8hours to give 4 times that to him. Seven hours 40 minutes to be exact.

This physician was charged with murder.

By the Police without connsulting the Crown.

But why was she charged? Because Drs who worked with here were alarmed at the gross amount of drugs she decided to administer. And when asked 4 days later why she gave such a dose she said " I dont know."

Drs also thought the Hospital would bury this. So one Dr. went to the Police and she was subsequently charged.

It split the town in two. The family supported the doctor.

Until the family found out the details.

. The criminal Judge at the preliminary inquiry knew if the trial proceeded it would cause great pain for the surviving family, the doctor and so many others of religious and disability groups fearing what had happened.

No he didnt. The Crown informed him if the case went on he (Crown) would reduce any charge to manslaughter

So he said, he could not tell if the final needle that doctor gave the patient, or previous shots administered in accumulation with her shot killed the patient. He declared there was insufficient evidence to prove the final shot alone killed the patient and therefore with that reasonable doubt threw out the case.

The Judge testified as a Medical witness, a Doctor? Wow, that guy is learned. He gets to adjudicate a case AND testify in it.

Wow, thats cool !

How putting this woman in jail for murder would have made sense is beyond me.

Well, considering the facts as laid out by you....I concur.

But the real facts are vastly different and if any Dr does what she did, absent of any legislation, they too will feel the wrath, and rightly so.

Surely we all agree that poor man had to be helped and not left to choke slowly.

Cool story bro.

Got any more?