Euthanasia in Canada, Supreme Court Ruled this Morning

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
Kimmio - which would you prefer?
I believe that if/when the time comes I will refuse to have a feeding tube. Should I be allowed to starve to death. Or forced against my will to have a feeding tube inserted and nourishment poured into me. Or after careful discussion of my medical condition at the time, and all my alternatives, a doctor agrees to give me some pills that will allow me to die with dignity.
Who's decision should that be - mine or yours?
 
BetteTheRed said:
I wish we'd stop pronouncing "palliative care" as if it were some sort of magic bullet that would cure everything.

If you listen to the interview with Dr. Low's widow that I posted, she described how he went 'deaf'. He felt as if there was a freight train in his head, getting louder and louder and louder until finally, it drowned out all external noise, and all he could do was to try and read her lips. But, of course, the tumour blinded him, as well. He spent his last few days in "palliative sedation" as he suffocated and his kidneys shut down.

I just don't get why we allow our critters the dignity of a good death and not our neighbours.
Click to expand...

One key difference would have to be that people are not critters.
 
So, why do we treat our animals with more compassion than our dying neighbour? Did Dr. Low not deserve the kind of death that he envisioned? Why would we allow him to suffer so when there was a compassionate alternative?
 
BetteTheRed said:
I wish we'd stop pronouncing "palliative care" as if it were some sort of magic bullet that would cure everything.

If you listen to the interview with Dr. Low's widow that I posted, she described how he went 'deaf'. He felt as if there was a freight train in his head, getting louder and louder and louder until finally, it drowned out all external noise, and all he could do was to try and read her lips. But, of course, the tumour blinded him, as well. He spent his last few days in "palliative sedation" as he suffocated and his kidneys shut down.

I just don't get why we allow our critters the dignity of a good death and not our neighbours.
Click to expand...

He had a terminal illness and he wasn't a young man and I would be less concerned that he made an unwise choice than let's say ...a young person from a poor socioeconomic background with a chronic physical impairment and accompanying depression deciding that death was a better option than the oppressed position they were stuck in - and a doctor supporting them in that choice as per any popular view that such a situation is acceptable grounds to assist someone to die rather than help them live - when it's the oppressed position that needs attention.

But if we support carte blanche, as per the current ruling that all irreparable painful conditions are okay reasons to die - Bette don't you see the negative possibilities?
 
The Conservative MP because he has economic means is no longer disabled or able to speak for the disabled because his economic wealth disqualifies him? Because he has money he should be happy to be in a wheelchair and in pain. Huh.

Also, suggesting that because of a lack of economic means or political position people with disabilities are not astute enough to choose how they want to die actually further stigmatizes them (us) and puts them in a psychological position of not being able to fight for change (why bother - I'm disadvantaged nothing I say or do matters). And basically - people who support your position speak for all people with disabilities but people who do not are not representative. My experience does not count because I am economically privileged (to say nothing of how I use that privilege to advance social change). It would also be like saying that no one can have access to aspirin because if you give a child with a fever aspirin they could get Reyes disease so therefore because we can't be 100% certain that someone will not give a child an aspirin no one can have access to it (rather than doing what we have done and low dosage or cardiac aspirin is available behind the counter).

And crud. I just entered the conversation with you again. Thankfully I'm off to my Mom's for the day and away from the computer so I can disengage (although I know this topic will come up when we are together).
 
Ok, if I understand you right it would be ok for an old person, but not for someone young. We've already established that this would only apply to adults. At what age should a person be able to choose: 60? 70? or should they wait until they are 85 or 90?
I'm 74 now - am I old enough to make a competent decision?
 
Seeler said:
Kimmio - which would you prefer?
I believe that if/when the time comes I will refuse to have a feeding tube. Should I be allowed to starve to death. Or forced against my will to have a feeding tube inserted and nourishment poured into me. Or after careful discussion of my medical condition at the time, and all my alternatives, a doctor agrees to give me some pills that will allow me to die with dignity.
Who's decision should that be - mine or yours?
Click to expand...

Yours. I made my case already for that. Do you see at all how we have to be careful - because of those with severe disabilities, never in a position of relative priveledge - who always had a condition that caused pain and never a decline from 'normal' - yet that is their life and they want to be equal - and how their lives are valued is vulnerable under this law? And considering they have been responsible for changing human rights and accessibility laws that are going to benefit the aging baby boomers - can their voices and fears be considered even if they are still the 'least' among us?

It was not long ago that such people were euthanized without consent - and no one noticed because they were out of the way. Hence the fear of the slippery slope. It runs deep in the community - especially since they are still the least represented in society.
 
BetteTheRed said:
So, why do we treat our animals with more compassion than our dying neighbour? Did Dr. Low not deserve the kind of death that he envisioned? Why would we allow him to suffer so when there was a compassionate alternative?
Click to expand...
BetteTheRed said:
So, why do we treat our animals with more compassion than our dying neighbour? Did Dr. Low not deserve the kind of death that he envisioned? Why would we allow him to suffer so when there was a compassionate alternative?
Click to expand...
Some of that is selfishness - we want to keep our family members - friends - and neighbors around for our own reasons rather than truly granting them the freedom to make their own choices. Note that I am speaking in general here. Keeping our neighbors as we would like them to be also means that we can stave off having to deal closely with our own mortality. Then - for many people - there are moral and religious considerations. Writings from various traditions speak of the sanctity of life and the wrongfulness of unduly taking it. As for compassion - it's a mute point. Assisted suicide is not truly an issue of compassion. How could it be?
 
Justme said:
The Conservative MP because he has economic means is no longer disabled or able to speak for the disabled because his economic wealth disqualifies him? Because he has money he should be happy to be in a wheelchair and in pain. Huh.

Also, suggesting that because of a lack of economic means or political position people with disabilities are not astute enough to choose how they want to die actually further stigmatizes them (us) and puts them in a psychological position of not being able to fight for change (why bother - I'm disadvantaged nothing I say or do matters). And basically - people who support your position speak for all people with disabilities but people who do not are not representative. My experience does not count because I am economically privileged (to say nothing of how I use that privilege to advance social change). It would also be like saying that no one can have access to aspirin because if you give a child with a fever aspirin they could get Reyes disease so therefore because we can't be 100% certain that someone will not give a child an aspirin no one can have access to it (rather than doing what we have done and low dosage or cardiac aspirin is available behind the counter).

And crud. I just entered the conversation with you again. Thankfully I'm off to my Mom's for the day and away from the computer so I can disengage (although I know this topic will come up when we are together).
Click to expand...
I believe the advantaged with disabilities are less "dis-abled" than the disadvantaged with disabilities. Because it is not impairment alone that defines disability. And with that advantage and the insight comes responsibility. I unfortunately got too discouraged.

... some say if you can't beat em join em, though. Have you ever watched the movie The Butler? It's about civil rights but a similar polarization between people. Some wanted equality, others wanted personal comfort/ security. Ideally, someday both?

Oh I never said marginalized people with disabilities aren't or can't be astute. They're just not powerful. That's the point. They don't want power they're still fighting for equality.
 
Last edited:
BetteTheRed said:
I'm beginning to think that I watched a different video of Dr. Low than others did. How would assisted suicide have been anything BUT an act of compassion for deep suffering?
Click to expand...

It can perhaps be an issue of other things - wisdom - freedom - respect. Compassion - however - entails becoming as one with someone else - or a group of others - in order to join in their experiences and help them from the level at which they are at. For assisted suicide to be an act of compassion to someone like Dr. Low - the assisting physician would her/himself have to become as ill.
 
Interestingly PWDs have comparable levels of post secondary education to the mainstream - but are still largely poor and under/ unemployed. That should tell us something about how the status quo system is working. (@Justme)
 
Last edited:
It is interesting the way opinions are dismissed

Justme, Chemgal, seeler aren't disabled enough to have opinions that matter (as they don't agree with kimmio)
Jae, it seems as you espoused the sanctity of life you are fine
The mp, because he chose to work for the people and is clearly significantly disabled is now too privileged to have an opinion of merit
The prof 's priviilege doesn't seem to matter as he agrees with kimmio
position
The.....aah no need to go on, the pattern is consistent
 
@Justme i could've been you where you're at. I was on a similar path - not exactly but i thought i could secure a good life for myself and make change from the inside out for others. It didn't hapoen. I identify with your voice. It used to be my voice. But somewhere I just stopped believing in what I was doing then. I saw disparity being created by the very field I was in that was supposed to help, and couldn't take it. I got sick. Health declined. Got depressed, and a series of events followed. I'm not where I thought I would be and I don't want to be there anymore. This isn't ideal either. But I still believe in what I am saying now regardless. I fear for what will happen to the struggle for real equality of marginalized people with severe disabilities and those who've worked so long and brought benefit to everyone (Human Rights, Accessibilty for everyone) if their reasons for fighting to live for equality are reduced to impairments others are dying to escape.
 
Last edited:
Pinga said:
It is interesting the way opinions are dismissed

Justme, Chemgal, seeler aren't disabled enough to have opinions that matter (as they don't agree with kimmio)
Jae, it seems as you espoused the sanctity of life you are fine
The mp, because he chose to work for the people and is clearly significantly disabled is now too privileged to have an opinion of merit
The prof 's priviilege doesn't seem to matter as he agrees with kimmio
position
The.....aah no need to go on, the pattern is consistent
Click to expand...

I'm sorry you don't understand and/ or agree with my position and have refused to look at all the sources I have provided to at least hear me out. Those sources are the reason people with disabilities have more accessibility in the first place - that will benefit you some day too - but still far from equality. It's a point of view worth considering but alas it comes from me is all you can see, and what the hell do I know?
 
You presume the docs aren't read or at least reviewed or that there aren't as many docs with opposing views that could be posted or differing views for different population
 
Under the rules of avarice (Icis Eve and the Christian Inuit; those that hate ABBA original process of genius?) the extreme need to control others and everything ... does this allow a god syndrome as affected by psychopaths and pathological extremes separated (divine'd) by a thin red line even tho' they can't read into satyr?

Perhaps I lack wisdom of the world to go there in dangerous ground where authority can see wee folk as better expendable as cheap labour and Ka*na*nun fodder in the war machine that is really profitable to a slight few! Do the math on what strong countries spend on defensive points versus ... healing social ideals like education and learning about the satire of a floe chart once represented as a tree of LOGOS ... a god of word and understanding? This could be expressed as the baptism of life (as Love) and the ideal of wisdom is just beyond (thin*king) as outlying fringe peoples ... population of borderline thinkers? Makes my wee spot of dark self giggle ... sort of like an internal gurgle of wee chits being rearranged for the great fallout ... NOSH-ite as the fecundity hits the ground for those interested in edits (roués) of worms ... anciently expressed as botes! A proper mind cannot retain anything without a crappy myth ... ask any psychologist who paid attention to class an assigned reading matter. One doctor told me a lot of PHD's didn't like word of writ and didn't read much to keep up to date in the evolution of unknowns. Thus the consequence of lesser and lesser inquisition of the metaphysical type sort of Eyre like Jayn ... Jaes female sleeping mate ... not suffering adequate arousal yet as somnolent humor? When the broad genre (extensive psyche?) awakens will the isolated be dissonant ... as Eris?

Thus evolution of everything (idealism inclusive) goes on undetected ... or as sublime psyche restive yetii. Advertising executives work with this intensively ... and wouldn't like us to be aware ... so such powerful business men state that the un conscience ... does not exist as a hole ... and thus the wholly part of hairy thinking! You see them going as paranoid asses ... fearing about loosing everything ... which is destiny itself ... except thought which like Hawking Radiation ... a shadowy wisdom only our Eire bunch can see! That is us subversive socialists ... quite like Allen Turning as I was reminded last evening.

I could stand behind a hairy donkey like that ... and project hymn up front as a song sung sadly about the culmination of human wisdom ... and there it rested on the 7th daze ... dumbfounded by all that evolved out of a numb desire ... numbi Nous gonad? Oh Ba aL's overhead ... as the obtuse higher organ of emotions shadowed by the restive organ of thought awaiting apocalypse ... but one should mention that as ineffable, or otherwise untouchable to wee people ... you know ... the M faction (root mean squares or just nerds)?

Now if the word is God ... is there something lower than this ... understanding? The Latin Empire called this eD'm-ism as a lower conscience than that experienced by Roman Souls that were determined to rule the wholly thing ... hairy as life is ...

It is said there is only one way out of this dark situation ... but how would I know ... it is considered religiously unlawful for me to know according to primary books of the bible Genesis 2:17 the logic that separates the singular from the*M, or the broader base of male and female creation than men believe are to be all about them in a self-centered situation. Alas Tom T Hall said in Water M'llen Whine that women too think about themselves when menfolk aren't around to screw up thoughts about the psychic portion!

Then if one considers old words do it in secret ... for the gifts of present ... don't like old things; thus the loss of Classic Wisdom about the Golden Laws ...
 
The Question is ---Can a Doctor be a Healer and a Killer in the same breath ?

Medical oaths and declarations---http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1121898/

A declaration marks an explicit commitment to ethical behaviour

Declaration of a new doctor

Now, as a new doctor, I solemnly promise that I will to the best of my ability serve humanity—caring for the sick, promoting good health, and alleviating pain and suffering.

I recognise that the practice of medicine is a privilege with which comes considerable responsibility and I will not abuse my position.

I will practise medicine with integrity, humility, honesty, and compassion—working with my fellow doctors and other colleagues to meet the needs of my patients.

I shall never intentionally do or administer anything to the overall harm of my patients.

I will not permit considerations of gender, race, religion, political affiliation, sexual orientation, nationality, or social standing to influence my duty of care.

I will oppose policies in breach of human rights and will not participate in them. I will strive to change laws that are contrary to my profession's ethics and will work towards a fairer distribution of health resources.

I will assist my patients to make informed decisions that coincide with their own values and beliefs and will uphold patient confidentiality.

I will recognise the limits of my knowledge and seek to maintain and increase my understanding and skills throughout my professional life. I will acknowledge and try to remedy my own mistakes and honestly assess and respond to those of others.

I will seek to promote the advancement of medical knowledge through teaching and research.

I make this declaration solemnly, freely, and upon my honour.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top