Medical assistance in dying is no solution

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

If the system is shown to have flaws, I am all in favour of fixing those flaws,

Some of the reported flaws are:

" protocols are not respected, consents are not obtained, the pressures exerted by families are strong and difficult to manage."

Obviously people do not follow the protocols set by the government.  That would seem to indicate that would be impossible to fix.  How do you make people follow the protocols, obtain consents, stop pressure from families and others if they have already proven they are not willing to do so?  This is a direct result of the flaws of human nature, not necessarily the protocols.  If people are not willing to follow the system protocols, then I don't see how it can be "fixed".   Many people who do not explicitly request MAID will continue to die.

Edited October 2, 2023 by blackbird

[Guest]

22 minutes ago, blackbird said:

If the system has proven to put to death people who have not asked to die, why would you support such a system?  I understand you said repeatedly that you want to have the freedom of choice.

But if that means many others are being put to death against their wishes, would that be enough for you to reconsider the whole thing?  This article has just come to my attention and adds a whole new perspective.  You probably were not aware of it either.

 

Can you show me those proven cases?  I am curious as to how they came about. 

That said, I would still support MAID, yes.  I would support improved efforts to ensure the choice was made freely, but once that has been established, the choice should be carried out.

[blackbird]

8 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Can you show me those proven cases?  I am curious as to how they came about. 

That said, I would still support MAID, yes.  I would support improved efforts to ensure the choice was made freely, but once that has been established, the choice should be carried out.

As just an ordinary citizen, I obviously don't have access to the records of individual cases.  I doubt if anyone would be able to obtain access.  It would be denied on the basis of confidentiality just as everything else in government or the health care system is.  

Also, I doubt if the records would give you the facts in written form.  Who is going to record the violations of protocols?

If you still support MAID, then your support and other's support of it is the reason why many continue, who have not requested it, to be put to death.  So you cannot claim it's your choice any more if it is causing the death of countless others.

Edited October 2, 2023 by blackbird

[Zeitgeist]

34 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

If you ever come to know someone who commits suicide you will then learn how untrue that statement is. 

I’ve known them and I don’t judge them.  No one knows what it’s like to walk in someone else’s shoes.  I don’t think poorly of people who make that choice.  I just think it’s sad.  Life is for the living, and we need to take care of the living and cherish life.  That means providing the best care, including palliative care and treatment for depression and pain.  MAID just looks a lot to me like letting someone jump off the bridge instead of showing them that life is worth living.  It sometimes looks like we’re encouraging them to jump.  

Edited October 2, 2023 by Zeitgeist

[Aristides]

54 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Doing yourself in is your problem, no one else’s, not morally or financially.

Well if you are concerned about money, it is a lot less expensive to allow people the death they desire than forcing them to be kept alive against their will for an extended period.

12 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

I’ve known them and I don’t judge them.  No one knows what it’s like to walk in someone else’s shoes.  I don’t think poorly of people who make that choice.  I just think it’s sad.  Life is for the living, and we need to take care of the living and cherish life.  That means providing the best care, including palliative care and treatment for depression and pain.  MAID just looks a lot to me like letting someone jump off the bridge instead of showing them that life is worth living.  It sometimes looks like we’re encouraging them to jump.  

How the hell do you know if their life is worth living, don't they get a say in the matter? After all it is their life, not yours.

Edited October 2, 2023 by Aristides

[Aristides]

20 minutes ago, blackbird said:

As just an ordinary citizen, I obviously don't have access to the records of individual cases.  I doubt if anyone would be able to obtain access.  It would be denied on the basis of confidentiality just as everything else in government or the health care system is.  

Also, I doubt if the records would give you the facts in written form.  Who is going to record the violations of protocols?

If you still support MAID, then your support and other's support of it is the reason why many continue, who have not requested it, to be put to death.  So you cannot claim it's your choice any more if it is causing the death of countless others.

So you don't know.

[Zeitgeist]

4 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Well if you are concerned about money, it is a lot less expensive to allow people the death they desire than forcing them to be kept alive against their will for an extended period.

How the hell do you know if their life is worth living, don't they get a say in the matter? After all it is their life, not yours.

As a Christian one believes there is always hope and that it’s wrong to despair.  Nevertheless, I don’t pretend to understand what brings someone to the point of ending it all. I don’t judge them.

[blackbird]

8 minutes ago, Aristides said:

So you don't know.

It is in this article.   Obviously I don't have access to the records.  I don't think anybody can access the actual records.  It is not something the government would want to release because it would expose the government.  Such violations of the protocols would not be written down anyway.  

But there likely have been many individual reports by relatives and friends of people who died in MAID and who felt their death was contrary to the protocols.

What Euthanasia is and Nine Reasons why it is Always Wrong - Campagne Québec-Vie (cqv.qc.ca)

Edited October 2, 2023 by blackbird

[blackbird]

10 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

How the hell do you know if their life is worth living, don't they get a say in the matter?

Obviously there are reports that many people did not get a say in the matter.  Protocols were broken or not followed in many cases apparently.  

RCMP called to investigate multiple cases of veterans being offered medically assisted death | CBC News

Medical assistance in dying: Police investigating B.C. case | CTV News

Edited October 2, 2023 by blackbird

[Guest]

30 minutes ago, blackbird said:

As just an ordinary citizen, I obviously don't have access to the records of individual cases.  I doubt if anyone would be able to obtain access.  It would be denied on the basis of confidentiality just as everything else in government or the health care system is.  

Also, I doubt if the records would give you the facts in written form.  Who is going to record the violations of protocols?

If you still support MAID, then your support and other's support of it is the reason why many continue, who have not requested it, to be put to death.  So you cannot claim it's your choice any more if it is causing the death of countless others.

It seems to me you have no actual data to support your position.   The article you posted does not provide any information or data on the subject.

I'm sure pressure is applied wrongly in some cases, but I would bet that the number of cases is low, and not nearly as high as your "countless" implies.  Of course, I have no data to back up that position either.

So I will continue to support the right of people who want to to end their lives with as little suffering, and as much dignity, as possible.  I will remain open to any changes to MAID proposed to address the issues that worry you so much.

[Aristides]

10 minutes ago, blackbird said:

It is in this article.   Obviously I don't have access to the records.  I don't think anybody can access the actual records.  It is not something the government would want to release because it would expose the government.  Such violations of the protocols would not be written down anyway.  

But there likely have been many individual reports by relatives and friends of people who died in MAID and who felt their death was contrary to the protocols.

What Euthanasia is and Nine Reasons why it is Always Wrong - Campagne Québec-Vie (cqv.qc.ca)

So you don't know.

[blackbird]

19 minutes ago, Aristides said:

So you don't know.

'Nothing about this felt OK': The troubling debate over a 'good' death for all

As a doctor, killing patients has long been taboo. Ferrukh Faruqui examines the ethics of extending eligibility for euthanasia — MAiD — to those who are not dying

'Nothing about this felt OK': The troubling debate over a 'good' death for all | National Post

[Aristides]

13 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

As a Christian one believes there is always hope and that it’s wrong to despair.  Nevertheless, I don’t pretend to understand what brings someone to the point of ending it all. I don’t judge them.

 

I can respect your right to believe whatever you want as a Christian but you have no right to impose those beliefs on others.

You are judging them if you call their actions a sin.

[blackbird]

6 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

It seems to me you have no actual data to support your position.   The article you posted does not provide any information or data on the subject.

I'm sure pressure is applied wrongly in some cases, but I would bet that the number of cases is low, and not nearly as high as your "countless" implies.  Of course, I have no data to back up that position either.

So I will continue to support the right of people who want to to end their lives with as little suffering, and as much dignity, as possible.  I will remain open to any changes to MAID proposed to address the issues that worry you so much.

Of course I don't have the actual data and individual reports because that is kept confidential.  The whole thing is being done behind closed doors and in secret.

But if there are a few reports of protocols not being followed, you can be sure that is only the tip of the iceberg.

Edited October 2, 2023 by blackbird

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Of course I don't have the actual data and individual reports because that is kept confidential.  The whole thing is being done behind closed doors and in secret.

But if there are a few reports of protocols not being followed, you can be sure that is only the tip of the iceberg.

No I can't.  Nor can you.

I read the two articles you posted.  It sounds like a case worker was at fault in one of the VAC cases and possibly two more.  The cases were discovered and are being investigated.  It doesn't say what action has been taken against the case worker.

I don't see any issue in the second.

 

[blackbird]

27 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

No I can't.  Nor can you.

I read the two articles you posted.  It sounds like a case worker was at fault in one of the VAC cases and possibly two more.  The cases were discovered and are being investigated.  It doesn't say what action has been taken against the case worker.

I don't see any issue in the second.

 

 

[blackbird]

1 minute ago, blackbird said:

I don't see any issue in the second.

Is it too easy to die in Canada? Surprising approvals for medically assisted death -The Fifth Estate

Bing Videos

 

[blackbird]

38 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I don't see any issue in the second.

Canada is going too far with medical assistance in dying (thestar.com)

"Extending MAID to those with mental illnesses carries obvious risks, given that suicidal thoughts can be part and parcel of some psychological conditions. Advocates for the disabled warn that widening the MAID criteria makes their lives seem more disposable than others, and worry people with disabilities will feel pressure to go that route.

We’re hearing about more and more cases of people driven to despair by poverty and chronic illness, who can’t get the help they need from a badly stressed health system. Will some turn to MAID as a way out? In February, a 51-year-old Ontario woman chose to die because she couldn’t find affordable housing that wouldn’t aggravate her chemical sensitivities. Global News reports on the case of a 65-year-old man named Les Landry who’s considering MAID because he’s fallen into poverty and doesn’t see another solution."

MAID law is a slippery slope.

Edited October 2, 2023 by blackbird

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Central Alberta, west of Edmonton.  -2 at 07:30.

This sounds reasonable, but it also sounds like you want me to come up with said mechanism.  I'm okay with us all being able to drive, within the confines of the law, but I didn't come up with the laws.

You can't support the one without the other.  Nobody's asking you to write the language of the law - but if you cannot articulate a reasonable balance of intrusion vs choice then what you're saying is you agree with the concept but that  you don't agree to implement it in canada.

Quote

Same with MAID.  I support it as a right, and importantly, will continue to do so regardless of what controls are in place to prevent pressure being applied. 

Then you don't believe what you previously said.  You previously suggested that there shouldn't be restrictions and it should be the person's choice.

So will you support the law if, for example, someone other than the person must make the decision?

 

Lets put your statements to the example you did give.

"I support the right of everyone to drive whenever they wish, it should be their choice alone if they wish to drive!"

Ok - do you  support licensing?  YES!

Manditory training as outlined by the state? YES!

Age restrictions?  YES!

Requirements to have insurance as madated by the state?  YES!

Well then you DON"T believe it should just be a person's choice to drive at all, nor do you believe it should be a right. You think it's something that people should be allowed to do if the state agrees to it

So - what does MAID look like in your mind?

If you can't articulate at least the general parameters then you don't really believe in the reality of it and you certainly don't believe in the rights. You just believe it's a nice thought that you hope someday someone works out.

I find it beyond hypocritical to think that way.

So - do you actually believe in it and if so what does it look like, or do you not? And again  you're dodging the question. Your answer is "i don't really want to answer' - which is by definition dodging it.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, CdnFox said:

You can't support the one without the other.  Nobody's asking you to write the language of the law - but if you cannot articulate a reasonable balance of intrusion vs choice then what you're saying is you agree with the concept but that  you don't agree to implement it in canada.

No I'm not.  That statement doesn't make sense.  It's not up to me to articulate anything.  I support a person's right to MAID.  Period.  If there are problems with that process, as you have suggested, then I also support efforts to solve them.  Fill your boots.

4 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Then you don't believe what you previously said.  You previously suggested that there shouldn't be restrictions and it should be the person's choice.

See above.  Same question, same answer.

6 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

So will you support the law if, for example, someone other than the person must make the decision?

Probably not.  You would have to clarify what you mean by that.

7 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Lets put your statements to the example you did give.

"I support the right of everyone to drive whenever they wish, it should be their choice alone if they wish to drive!"

Ok - do you  support licensing?  YES!

Manditory training as outlined by the state? YES!

Age restrictions?  YES!

Requirements to have insurance as madated by the state?  YES!

Well then you DON"T believe it should just be a person's choice to drive at all, nor do you believe it should be a right. You think it's something that people should be allowed to do if the state agrees to it

So - what does MAID look like in your mind?

First of all, I didn't say that.  I said this:

5 hours ago, bcsapper said:

I'm okay with us all being able to drive, within the confines of the law, but I didn't come up with the laws.

I'm surprised you would put quotes around what was obviously something you made up to support your point.

All that being said, the answer would be the same, really.  I support the right of everyone to die when they want to using MAID.

The medical professionals involved will have licences.  They will be trained.  All Canadians have medical insurance.

Age restrictions.  Interesting question.  I don't know.  I think that would have to be decided on a case by case basis.

 

19 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Well then you DON"T believe it should just be a person's choice to drive at all, nor do you believe it should be a right. You think it's something that people should be allowed to do if the state agrees to it

So - what does MAID look like in your mind?

If you can't articulate at least the general parameters then you don't really believe in the reality of it and you certainly don't believe in the rights. You just believe it's a nice thought that you hope someday someone works out.

I find it beyond hypocritical to think that way.

So - do you actually believe in it and if so what does it look like, or do you not? And again  you're dodging the question. Your answer is "i don't really want to answer' - which is by definition dodging it.

Let's remember here that your contentions about what I do and don't believe are based on a quote you made up and pretended I said, so your questions are moot there.

I have articulated my view such that you should have no problem understanding it, even if you don't like it.  No question was dodged.

You're going to ignore all that and tell me I'm a complete loser who doesn't have a clue what I'm talking about now, aren't you?

 

[eyeball]

4 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

First of all, I didn't say that.

?

[Zeitgeist]

2 hours ago, Aristides said:

 

I can respect your right to believe whatever you want as a Christian but you have no right to impose those beliefs on others.

You are judging them if you call their actions a sin.

One can cal a sin a sin without judging the sinner.  

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, bcsapper said:

No I'm not.  That statement doesn't make sense.  It's not up to me to articulate anything.

 

It is if you're going to voice your concerns for something that is being abused to kill people.

"I support the nazi's fully - Now i don't think they should be gassing people but it's not up to me to say what should be done about the gas chambers. So they have my full support!"

See how that works? if you support it you have to be willing to discuss how that's to be addressed OR you're saying you support the abuses.  Pretending that they're not completely connected is irrational.

It would appear this is over your head.  You seem to believe you can support something entirely and still not address the abuses that are occuring in the real world. That's not rational.

I think we're done here. You're never going to get your head around the concept that if you say you support something but you're unwilling to address the abuses then in the end you're supporting the abuses OR you don't really mean what you say when you claim to support it. 

As to the rest - back to your dishonest discussion tactics.  Very predictable.

[Guest]

7 hours ago, CdnFox said:

It is if you're going to voice your concerns for something that is being abused to kill people.

"I support the nazi's fully - Now i don't think they should be gassing people but it's not up to me to say what should be done about the gas chambers. So they have my full support!"

See how that works? if you support it you have to be willing to discuss how that's to be addressed OR you're saying you support the abuses.  Pretending that they're not completely connected is irrational.

It would appear this is over your head.  You seem to believe you can support something entirely and still not address the abuses that are occuring in the real world. That's not rational.

I think we're done here. You're never going to get your head around the concept that if you say you support something but you're unwilling to address the abuses then in the end you're supporting the abuses OR you don't really mean what you say when you claim to support it. 

As to the rest - back to your dishonest discussion tactics.  Very predictable.

I should have bought a bloody lottery ticket...

[Aristides]

10 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

One can cal a sin a sin without judging the sinner.  

No you can't, when you judge an action you judge the person who committed it.