Euthanasia in Canada, Supreme Court Ruled this Morning

[ChemGal]

For me, I'm glad that mental suffering and disability are included. It's a bit like when I have a super bad migraine and I go to the ER and they ask me how bad my pain is on a scale of 1-10. Based on what I say they triage me and give me drugs to control the pain and nausea. Someone else with the same level of pain may wither at home or not find it as bad as I do. I see suffering much like that - maybe for me X condition makes MY life not worth living. If I am found to be of sound mind and have tried enough options (not sure how that would be defined) I should be allowed to opt for this choice. I actually find it to be a form of reverse-discrimination when people say that people with depression/mental illness should not qualify because their life is worth living no matter what. In my opinion that is crap. If I look at my own case (and I believe I have detailed it in other posts) I have tried almost everything that is available to me and I have economic resources available to me and a really awesome support system but you know the suffering is pretty extreme and if I, after deliberating, chose that the suffering is more than I can handle then I should get this choice (I am not saying that I should be able to walk into an ER and say kill me now but that I should be able to have the same consideration given to me for my suffering just as we would give someone with terminal cancer).

I agree with all of that. I don't know if disability specifically needs to be mentioned, I think medical condition, without the parenthesis was sufficient for inclusivity.

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

I really don't think it's a seperate issue. Because of the wording of the ruling I do think it's part of this debate - albeit, maybe there are better places for me to debate it.

 

[Luce NDs]

This is a doctor's calling? Odd with the medical investment in pharmacetica ... I thought the industry was about busying people to consume things that would make them sic-Eire ... and thus repeat calls!

Consider the estimated 14B$ business of statins ... that are liberally prescribed based on an estimate that 20 odd % of lives can be saved by their application. Few question the statistics that are said to be overblown considering that on study claims that 1 life in 158 can be saved over a 5 to 10 year term. Does the statistic depend on the calculating vocate ... or is this too an advocate for livid behaviour leaving some people upright and purple over how they've been had.

Sources? Look them up I can't remember as I so much junk in my head about statins, steroids, sterols .. and other olefins that my head begins to swim. Recall my background in chemistry ... and my levitating to organic relationships and biochemistry that can connect ephrines, pseudoephrines, epinephrine and norepinephrine and other fatty steroids that make up adrenal material like the brain ... the great code that cannot be unraveled because it does not support the mind in the preposition you believed it was in.

Do you know how many professionals don't like chemistry and can relate to little in such alchemy? Thus the question struck by many about what we know from history when history is writ by those that were compulsive about oppressing it so common folk wouldn't know when they were screwed.

Like myth it is a literary squeeze that should be questioned as the bible states ... there are those hard heads that would have conflict with that and so where I Nelle should this go on? If well distributed ... the naïveté would cause even the precursors of lyres to be somnolent about tribulation all about them ... all we would hear would be the OEm'rs ... perhaps some real bummers of stories about Christian Golden Rules that were one sided ... perhaps one legged navel gazers like Ahab?

 

[Delightful Life]

Coming Soon to a reality near you
alternatives to PreUploading (otherwise known as 'death before appointed time')

just spritz some Reboot. wait a few hours in the special ExoWomb. feel the years melt away as your cells revert through your ontogeny back to much simpler times, but still maintaining your soul, of course. then the normal process of ontogeny continues. this time, you'll be different, as if your parents had Done It AgainTM.

Brundlebooths. Step in and the latest in analog supercomputing will scan you down to your femtosoul, take you apart, store your information (more space available at cheap rates -- buy now!) and then...

Step up to the HAL -9001 where your brain, the seat of You, will be carefully and lovingly preserved in a special medium and then dissected and scanned, capturing Your essence and then uploaded into cyberspace, where all your meatbody concerns will be nonexistant. And you can instantiate yourself multiple times, vote multiple times, even pay taxes multiple times! A sliding price scale & insurance for those with low social wealth.

Virgin Intergalactic is now offering one-way trips to the Black Hole at the Centre of our Galaxy, where you will be brought in using our precise calculations into an orbit where you will be constantly falling yet never reaching the event singularity of the black hole and, due to relativity, you'll live longer than the end of universe.

Thanks to the latest Yttrium-Arsenic Hylozoic Wopr Electric Holocomputers, you'll gain instant Enlightenment and grok with fullness that You aren't, never will, never will be, but are really just a GUI that reality uses to explore itself. Talk aboot the ultimate CYBER!!!

This has been TEXTure, a subsidiary of Malcontent the Younger Transinc, coming to you from the Future

 

[Luce NDs]

Finally ... some Levite at the end of the hole ...

 

[Neo]

I was not going to post again on Wonder cafe . But find that many who posted here know nothing about The Lord my GOD. You would break His laws and make your own thinking in some ways you are greater than GOD. All who do so will face GOD in Judgment. Thou shell not Kill. That means your self as well...

Good to see you posting again @airclean33

 

[chansen]

I was not going to post again on Wonder cafe . But find that many who posted here know nothing about The Lord my GOD. You would break His laws and make your own thinking in some ways you are greater than GOD. All who do so will face GOD in Judgment. Thou shell not Kill. That means your self as well. If you believe not . I think you best read how the Jewish People felt about this.

What you think your God wants is irrelevant to he rest of Canada and Canadians. This will be a new law for Canada, not just Canadians who believe a certain way. And, it will not require you to seek a physician-assisted death, so you can die with your imaginary brownie points intact. For those of us not interested in collecting them, your concerns don't apply to us.

 

[Luce NDs]

As an extremist from just beyond the book (B'os chi?) where the gorse runs free ... I noted the key words "my God" ... a distinct indication of indelicate possession ... considering that the Bishop of Myra said that God was all over the place ... but God's ole was something subtle ... or a Rev King would say: "suffering hype no ticks" ... at least until settling down.

Like when well settled as god would this be hier oni mous bosche ... a word greatly redacted by those unfamiliar with Esperanto and how it alters the ethers of abstract dimensions ... which happen to be hommoe, or common as Johns when in dogma ... if it can't be consumed or related to ... it is Piscon or perhaps even Acheron ... one of those burning rivers ... of late when a proper love is found to be unrequited as freedom is in Us ... locked up at the end of the New Jork'n har bour! What's a nuj orque? That's a person coming up with an idea based solely on desire without related thought to the rest of selfie's ... those all wrappen up can't see beyond this until the gross awakening ... some say apocalypse ... that happens in scattered fashion depending on where intense gods are missing ... really just a scattering of icons if you understand the broad-based nature of intelligence! Probably just a trick of a lesser god ... who is near hypo-dermic ... causing an itchy under your skin as the 7 year scratch passes ... as mire niche!

AC believes the possessive case of god ... when metaphysical things (parallel, but not far off/ farce ID) are sensed within the system you can't see as ... ewe tend to be the limited factor ... or other wise human in error (Eire they say elsewhere)! You don't understand AC? That's because of the religious tendency against knowledge and logic assumed by some ancient authorities as they felt fit to grasp the possession of God's representatives ... when actually chi had run odd at the thought ... of a human god that is! This indicated in that final verse of the Gospel of John ... an indication of just out-of-here-Ness! It also accounts for the isolated and ethereal intellect of the Celts and Pics ... wee populations ignored in reality in conflict with the direction of everything ... that's God. That could be Caesar, or his arche priests who claimed possession of all wisdom ... but as human were possibly in error ... considering what we know of the eternal and the fact that few believe anything goes on beyond mortal normal Scie! It's just unnatural as response able thought ... thus quanta-like! That'd be a chimer-in display!

Some other isolated extremes will have a hellova time when not in control of something ... like Napoleon when ignored by people that didn't wish to allow him to walk all over their gardens ... this may be a metaphysical anal Ji set to words ... mere Semite? Thus the point of creation locking up emotions centre on a wee blue spot ... and thus IT goest!

 

[airclean33]

What you think your God wants is irrelevant to he rest of Canada and Canadians. This will be a new law for Canada, not just Canadians who believe a certain way. And, it will not require you to seek a physician-assisted death, so you can die with your imaginary brownie points intact. For those of us not interested in collecting them, your concerns don't apply to us.

Hi Chansen. Never could stop from answering you. Your wrong chansen Canada or Canadians did not past this law . it was past by Supreme Court with out asking if Canadians want to vote on it. By the way you may or may not know In Europe Belgium has had this law for a wile now. Out of all those KILL by it , 25 o/o did not give there Permission . Now Belgium wants to star KILLING Children.


-- Should children have the right to ask for their own deaths?

In Belgium, where euthanasia is now legal for people over the age of 18, the government is considering extending it to children — something that no other country has done. The same bill would offer the right to die to adults with early dementia.

Advocates argue that euthanasia for children, with the consent of their parents, is necessary to give families an option in a desperately painful situation. But opponents have questioned whether children can reasonably decide to end their own lives.
You can believe what you want Chansen. I myself know and Believe there is a GOD. We will all stand before Him one day.

 

[chansen]

I don't care if you believe in a God or not. I'm just saying that once you invoke your God as an argument why everyone should be bound by his rules, you cease to be taken seriously.

 

[BetteTheRed]

I don't think we need to invoke God here, as much as understand the concept of consent. Children cannot legally consent.

 

[revjohn]

Your wrong chansen Canada or Canadians did not past this law . it was past by Supreme Court without asking if Canadians want to vote on it.

Nobody passed a law. Most definitely the Supreme Court did not pass a law. Such a statement betrays a fundamental ignorance not only of how laws are passed in Canada but also of what the Supreme Court of Canada does. At any rate it is so factually wrong it doesn't come near to the truth.

What the Supreme Court did was rule that the blanket prohibition surrounding physician assisted suicide was unconstitutional. Then it suspended that ruling for 12 months so that the various legal jurisdictions in the country could make laws governing access to physician assisted suicide.

The Supreme Court does not create laws. That is not the job of the Supreme Court. Ever. The job of the Supreme Court is to consider all legislation and to rule upon its constitutionality as well as to consider rulings of lesser courts and rule on appeals of those rulings.

Canadians as a rule do not vote on laws. Laws are formed in Parliament (federally) or in the various Houses of Assembly or Legislative Assemblies. There politicians vote on whether or not any bill should become law.

Also Belgium does not have "this" law (since the Supreme Court never passed a law) Belgium has a law that grants individuals access to physician assisted suicide. Canada can choose to duplicate Belgium's law or Canada can create a law that is very different. It will be up to Canadian Politicians to decide.

 

[airclean33]

Nobody passed a law. Most definitely the Supreme Court did not pass a law. Such a statement betrays a fundamental ignorance not only of how laws are passed in Canada but also of what the Supreme Court of Canada does. At any rate it is so factually wrong it doesn't come near to the truth.

What the Supreme Court did was rule that the blanket prohibition surrounding physician assisted suicide was unconstitutional. Then it suspended that ruling for 12 months so that the various legal jurisdictions in the country could make laws governing access to physician assisted suicide.

The Supreme Court does not create laws. That is not the job of the Supreme Court. Ever. The job of the Supreme Court is to consider all legislation and to rule upon its constitutionality as well as to consider rulings of lesser courts and rule on appeals of those rulings.

Canadians as a rule do not vote on laws. Laws are formed in Parliament (federally) or in the various Houses of Assembly or Legislative Assemblies. There politicians vote on whether or not any bill should become law.

Also Belgium does not have "this" law (since the Supreme Court never passed a law) Belgium has a law that grants individuals access to physician assisted suicide. Canada can choose to duplicate Belgium's law or Canada can create a law that is very different. It will be up to Canadian Politicians to decide.

You are right John . as you posted The Goverment is looking at it. The same Goverment that filled the Supreme Court. That you as a Minster in the Church of GOD seems to have not much to say what GOD may say about it . I find to be a shame.

 

[Seeler]

I don't care if you believe in a God or not. I'm just saying that once you invoke your God as an argument why everyone should be bound by his rules, you cease to be taken seriously.

Chansen is right in this. Individuals certainly have the right to rely on their faith and belief in making life and death decisions for themselves. My faith will certainly be part of my decision if and when the time comes. But this is not something we can impose on everyone.

 

[chansen]

Jihad me at "Chansen is right..."

 

[revjohn]

The same Goverment that filled the Supreme Court.

Well, yes and no. 5 of the 9 Justices were appointed by the current Prime Minister. Which really doesn't mean anything. They are judges and expected not to be politically partisan. That probably explains several recent unanimous decisions which did not support the current federal government's understanding of what passes for legal.

Not really sure what you were attempting to imply with your comment.

That you as a Minster in the Church of GOD seems to have not much to say what GOD may say about it . I find to be a shame.

We are already aware that you find me shameful. Perhaps you have found another character deficit of mine apart from the drinking to condemn.

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

I read an article the other day, now can't find it, in one of the major papers - basically saying this ruling is not just restricted to doctors, but applies to anyone. So they are really, really going to have to tighten up the laws surrounding this and specify who can 'assist' and under very stringent circumstances. Something like 73% of doctors don't want to do it. Almost the percentage of Canadians who supposedly approve it. It goes against their Hippocratic Oathe. So, hopefully the laws will be so tight as to apply to so few situations, that it doesn't change current laws barely at all.

There has to be a way for people to be accountable for abusing the laws and exploiting elders and people with disabilities. And there needs to be (I am not sure what it is yet) a legal mechanism and process for taking to task the fact that the wrong definition (not the legal definition) of disabilities was used in the ruling, and changing that.

 

[blackbelt1961]

Good to see you posting again @airclean33

welcome back Brother Airclean, i know his hard on here sometimes, but we need to respect each others views and love one and other

 

[Justme]

You can access the Canadian Medical Association who represents most Canadian doctors views at www.cma.ca - it's front and centre on their page. 45 percent of physicians support physician-assisted death and 27% would perform such actions. You will note that the association wants to protect physicians who do not wish to perform such a service; protect any vulnerable populations while ensuring timely access for people who want this service. They are working within the system to ensure just legislation.

I direct you to the following quotes

In the wake of the CMA’s annual General Council meeting in August, the association’s long-standing policy against medical aid in dying was changed to support the right of all physicians, within the bounds of existing legislation, to follow their conscience when deciding whether or not to provide medical aid in dying.

A 2014 survey of 5,000 members showed 45 per cent favoured legalizing physician-assisted death, while 27 per cent said they would likely participate if the act is legalized.

In its news release, the CMA stated the association would conduct a detailed analysis of the ruling and its implications.

The Supreme Court set out some criteria that would define individuals who would be eligible for physician-assisted dying, noting that they must be competent adults who clearly consent and are suffering with a “grievous, irremediable medical condition” that is intolerable to the individual.
https://www.cma.ca/En/Pages/end-of-...ke-lead-role-in-crafting-new-regulations.aspx

___
https://www.cma.ca/En/Pages/cma-front-and-centre-following-supreme-court-decision.aspx
Simpson was able to clearly articulate the CMA’s main points about wanting to help craft any legislation dealing with medical aid in dying as well as respecting the perspectives of all CMA members on the issue.

The CMA also sent an email to all members the day of the decision stating these same views.

“Our main task now, as an association, is to work with the legislatures, our patients and others to make sure that any potential law contains safeguards against abuse and protects the rights of patients and physicians, both those who elect to participate and those who elect not to participate,” said Simpson in the letter.

One of the most detailed interviews with Simpson was conducted by John Geddes of Maclean’s.

“… over the next 12 months …. we’ll need to balance the need to provide this service (medical aid in dying) to the small number of patients who need it and are eligible for it and protecting physicians from being coerced if they don’t want to participate in this,” Simpson said in that interview.

“We have to provide the educational tools and the regulatory framework that would allow this to be done in a way that makes everyone feel that the vulnerable are meticulously protected, but that those who need this procedure do get it in a timely way.”

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

Since when do people speak to people "You will note..."?

They shifted their position after the ruling because they were on the other side of it before. I read somewhere that 73% wouldn't do it. Doctors recognize the slippery slope. In the past several court challenges they were on the other side. Don't expect a complete embrace of this.