Expansion of MAID delayed until after next election

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
I’m frustrated reading the article comments. People can’t seem to connect the dots between the time we’re living in, and how the duplicity to the south of us is going to affect that. Bait n switch is real when there’s a concerted effort to undo social progress, instead, advancing fascism. They also don’t understand that a conservative MP tabled the original bill with DwD but it was designed by lawyers for “disability” to fall through the cracks in the legislation. The safeguards were never strong enough and DwD never wanted them to be. And they don’t understand or even know the history of just how similarly the Aktion T4 propaganda promoted “dignified” or “merciful” death as a blessing to the well to do, while atrocities were going on unnoticed. People were made to believe it was just. The similarities are uncanny as far as what DwD promotes. There’s a nazi propaganda movie about how Nazi euthanasia unfolded - the movie is about a fictional court case arguing the same points ours did in reality - but to raise that is taboo. People arguing that just because “nazis had traffic laws and we have traffic laws doesn’t mean…” when looking at a law that singles out disabled people (for death “approval”) are either just completely ignorant or they’re evil. If it’s the former it’s still evil because they obviously don’t care to learn all of what we deal with - the systemic ableism - that’s actually driving the excuses for this law. And the doctor mentioned is refusing to acknowledge that Track 2 is not a right given to any Canadian. That’s a lie. Not the “healthy stock” (used that phrase on purpose, because that’s what’s happening - eugenics). Only disabled people are given the “right” to track 2 whether they acknowledge that or not. Chronic medical conditions are disabilities. She’s angry that we want to protect populations more vulnerable to suicide, from suicide - and instead wants them to have better access to it as a “right”. Just look to the south and the blatant dismantling of civil rights progress and threats to Canada and you can see where this is going if not stopped, and repealed. It’s upsetting. She’s killed hundreds. Some of them were nowhere close to dying. She’s the first to have some of her cases investigated. The article didn’t mention that.
 
Last edited:
Dear God, help people understand what’s going on, and wake up their consciences. This is an empathy problem, a bigotry problem, and an ignorance of history problem - and no political sides are getting the whole picture. If the mainstream doesn’t get it - especially people who claim to be progressives - and take it to heart - history repeats. Track 2 serves fascist intentions - it does. Despite people sticking their heads in the sand. It needs to be repealed.
 
Last edited:
Empathy???? Is it something the willful would rather put to rest? Within the masses is a great deal of hatred towards such items ... we'd rather not know is the word!

It even starts that way: "In the beginning a dark formless void ...!" It is just how it goes ... slipping by without understanding ... but you're not allowed to say that because of propaganda on paranoia ...

Then the counter proposal" "fear not". Choices ... those struck by it are seized ...
 
I couldn't read the article. I'm quite concerned about disabled people and people with mental health struggles being included in MAID. It really is ableism at work isn't it.

The term "dying with dignity" is a problem. I've known more than one person who died from cancer in the last while, the most recent being last week. One person chose MAID. She was actively dying, so fit the original intention for MAID. The others died in hospital, in Palliative Care. Those who died in Palliative Care were treated well, and died with dignity. They chose not to use MAID.

Suggesting that death is only dignified if you get to choose the timing misses the mark doesn't it.

Does a person who lives with a disability no inherently have dignity? Do we have too look and act in certain ways to be considered to have dignity?
 
I’d encourage people to read the report (link up thread) that the article is based on. At least skim through it - and see how much the UN is concerned about the ableism at work in many areas, in Canada. We’re not even close to meeting obligations under the UNCRPD that were committed to.
 
After an encounter with a old neighbor who was hostile about foreign matter in our surroundings ... I'd say humans are suffering ablism ... and have the ability to offend the most ridiculous objects that they should be depending on ... as they are doing jobs that norms can't handle!

The norm is to get up and offend everything ... even if it is inefficient in your own survival! There is no Joey in the world ... just observe Trump's happy face! It took a bad turn ... yet this attitude, mood or emotion is building to a point of no return ...
 
It is never nice to lose family members, however they leave. Every close death seems to leave a hole in the fabric of my life. It is great that your aunt is at peace with leaving and that she has a supportive method to do so.
One of our friend's who has Parkinson's is now in a Nursing Home and understands very little. His wife - also a long term friend - wishes they had applied for MAID before things got this bad.
 
I don’t think it’s right for people to project their own feelings of discomfort with another’s’ impairment onto them, especially if that person is being well taken care of. Wishing that they are well taken care of at the end of life, or at any age, rather than deciding another’s life is undignified in a different state of being, is what’s just, for the whole - for an entire group singled out and at risk. I understand it’s painful to see someone not be like their former self that others are used to, but doesn’t mean they are undignified lives - impairment is a natural part of life (there are no perfect people, disability is normal and natural because we were made fragile) and it’s no reason for the state to kill them - because that then becomes the standard for care. Especially when geopolitics is what it is. You can’t separate the two.
 
Last edited:
I worry about people with dementia who have given advanced requests (maybe they feel pressured that they’ll be a “burden”) and get killed even if they object - they can’t say no even if they still have a will to live in their altered state - but their families are supporting the decision because they’re “too far gone”. How awful for them. Even if it’s a day too soon. It’s still someone else’s life.
 
Kimmio Laughterlove said:
I don’t think it’s right for people to project their own feelings of discomfort with another’s’ impairment onto them, especially if that person is being well taken care of.
Click to expand...

I agree. My aunt though has made her own decision. We need to respect decisions that have been made freely and thoughtfully.
 
I will abide by the wishes of my parents' decisions made while lucid over any objections they would have while under the hold of dementia. And I would expect the same care from my kids toward me.
 
If they’re happy as they are as things change then no. Because you don’t know in advance. I think it’s awful so we have to agree to disagree. I’ve read people say “If I’m in a wheelchair, kill me.” What’s the difference? The issue is still other peoples’ projections, even onto the person before they become impaired so it colours their decision because of stigma. You wouldn’t say, “if I’m under the physiological grip of addiction, kill me. Or if I am under the grip of financial problems, kill me.” That shouldn’t happen. But people find it ok to kill those in the most vulnerable states. It may be “irreversible decline” from who they used to be - but isn’t that true of everyone, in some way, with time?

It’s horrible to think of someone with dementia being held down and killed while they object, or while they believe they’re being cared for.
 
Last edited:
I know my parents. I will do what I can to carry out their true wishes. If I don't promise them that, I expect they'll attempt to off themselves and that could go badly.
 
My aunt is ready to die. This is not theoretical for her. She's ready. She has chosen to use MAID and is doing the paperwork and whatever preparation is needed for that to happen. Her wishes need to be respected.

If @chansen is anything like his parents, I imagine they will make an informed decision that works for them.

There are times when we need to respect people's wishes.
 
I wasn’t speaking of anyone’s family’s choices. It’s not my place to interfere in their personal decisions. I don’t know them. But I maintain that the law drives a stigma about what constitutes a dignified life. Including regarding dementia patients. That’s a social problem, a political problem - the ableism that causes society and individuals to think it’s better to be dead than disabled (in any way “declined”) is the problem. It’s ableism, both socially imposed and internalized. Then we stop taking care of people, and then society stops seeing a need to tolerate or care about all kinds of people who aren’t “normal” - including themselves - whatever the bigotry of the day is. And that’s how deadly fascism can do enormous damage to everyone’s rights - starting with the most marginalized and vulnerable. I don’t believe the state has any place in deliberately killing patients who are not on the edge of dying. Some of my peers would argue that even track 1 is too lenient and I default to their lived and learned wisdom. That’s what the original law promised to prevent - safeguards to prevent abuse and a slippery slope - but failed miserably on (because they knew where they wanted to take it and wrote the law to throw disabled people under the bus - including vulnerable seniors) so things unimaginably dark a short time ago are becoming normalized. The original argument was to decriminalize murder for health professionals - for euthanizing people in exceptional end of life cases under strict circumstances. We have gone, way, way, beyond that.
 
Last edited:
It's crazy that people with non-terminal conditions have to resort to MAID instead of getting proper supports.

My aunt has her date set for Friday at 10 am. She has been waiting to get into a nursing home. She has though, been living with my cousin so that is probably a better option anyway. She's tired. She can't do what she loves to do like cook and quilt. She's ready.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top