MAID Concerns - How Will Our Politicians Respond?

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

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

Joined
Jun 28, 2014
Messages
29,140
Location
BC
Would a doctor give an application without asking you why , how or how do you see your life?
I would hope there would be some discussion with a lot of listening and compassion.

I do hugely agree that these matters are not an illness. But we have made a lot of bad choices as a society and some still do not get they are responsible for neglect when, say nothing done for homeless populations. Our city has had 7 studies saying the same thing and 43 years later nothing done.
Political will is a killer of just actions for those we have left out again and again. Or when the premier makes promises that will save lives then does nothing and people die because this was not done. When is he accountable for the loss of life?

There are so many failures of will to do what is right and just and faithful to life itself. Love is the only answer. real love unselfishly given. It seems Conservatives are the ones who mainly find it hard to help people. So many things offered to the rich, and those who donate to them.. at least here.

Conflicts of interest are rising. The Church's Insurer wants you to put your health records on their site. Yes, it's a choice I won't take up.

How do they get to have such things when they say they are separate, but it's under their umbrella that makes
it a real heavy conflicted interest.
Banks have companies that sell insurance of their own money. I know older bank managers find that a complicated lack of good will.
Glad they are no longer in it.

I think when we have to be alone a lot we may get too used to having things come to us. Having smart things that record
what we do isn't helpful.

I try to keep Wi Fi out of here. WHO says it's a cancer causing agent. Radiation 24/7 with 5G without checks and balances is not healthy.
Zoom is tiring with reason. It fires up many parts of the brain at the same time. We are nit used to that. I imagine that is more harmful in the long run,.It's a wonder any of us are sane.... meaning in our God mind... in my thinking that is.

God help us to discern and keep loving.
SW7
An application to die shouldn't be available to me from my doctor. That's sick and disturbing. It's not compassion. It's not "dignified". It's not God's love. I'm not physically dying (well everyone is closer to death all the time but I mean that I still have many years of life expectancy). That's what I don't think is understood. To offer a death application on the basis of disability is egregious discrimination. The powers that be may want to crush my will to live, but I'm not dead yet.

"I would hope"...isn't good enough. It's negligently far from good enough. That's how we got into this mess. "I would hope" just means a lot of people are going to be killed while people continue to say "I would hope..." and look the other way. We need some more stringent accountability to life and death issues, than that.

It shouldn't be available because I have a disability anymore than it should be available to a person of colour because of their ethnicity, or an able bodied white male who is suicidal for that matter.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 28, 2014
Messages
29,140
Location
BC
Should it be available for someone diagnosed with dementia, but currently competent?
That's not the area of this law I am talking about. Quit trying to get around acknowledging that. Everytime I bring up disability concerns which are a distinct aspect of this law, you say "What about...?" And miss the distinct aspect of this law that is so disturbing. Everybody does. They think about themselves acquiring something down the road and forget about those of us in the danger zone - and don't realize that was because we were underhandedly "included" and the public was oblivious to disability rights and everyday ableism - and the politicians and lawyers who are glad to implement the economic expediency inherent in broadening "death as medical treatment", took advantage of that.
 
Last edited:

Lastpointe

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2014
Messages
4,009
Location
Toronto
I agree with you Kimmio. This feels like we are going to allow medical staff to offer death to people solely based in their disability. Instead of offering more support

the issue of supporting people with disabilities and LTC clients is that we need to support them. Financially
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2014
Messages
29,140
Location
BC
What am I bargaining here? If I say it's ok for dementia patients to have advanced directives, you'll say maybe it's bad for people with disabilities to be able to be killed by doctors because society doesn't give them options? Is that what's going on here? Are we bargaining chips?
 

BetteTheRed

Resident Heretic
Joined
Jun 6, 2014
Messages
19,053
No, Kimmio, I was honestly just wondering.

So, we leave it at two things: terminal illness, and irrelievable quality of life, like end-stage COPD/MS/ALS/CKD? Do we include advanced directives? Would that be fine with you?
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2014
Messages
29,140
Location
BC
I agree with you Kimmio. This feels like we are going to allow medical staff to offer death to people solely based in their disability. Instead of offering more support

the issue of supporting people with disabilities and LTC clients is that we need to support them. Financially
Or any upper-middle aged adult who is likely to acquire some sort of chronic health problem even if it's easily treatable. And most are going to require some extra support that's at least partly subsidized. Not even just people with disabilities are implicated. Everyone is. But we are more specifically targeted by this law. We were used as the linch-pin of it.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 28, 2014
Messages
29,140
Location
BC
Are any of you saying you disapprove of spending the resources on people with disabilities? We know there are people who've always hated and/or resented us for existing. I hope no one here does.
 

BetteTheRed

Resident Heretic
Joined
Jun 6, 2014
Messages
19,053
I think that COVID and the whole CERB idea suggests to us that about $2000 is a much more reasonable disability support payment than the much lower average across provinces (in Ontario, it's about $1100 max I believe).
 

Mrs.Anteater

Just keep going....
Joined
Jun 6, 2014
Messages
4,846
Location
Nova Scotia
I think that COVID and the whole CERB idea suggests to us that about $2000 is a much more reasonable disability support payment than the much lower average across provinces (in Ontario, it's about $1100 max I believe).
$2000/ month doesn’t get you three staff taking turns to look after you 24/7. If that is the benchmark and group homes or LTC is unacceptable, then that does not seem to be financially doable. And that right ( to have your own 24/7 staff) needs to be given to all or to nobody, not just to the squeaky wheels that are loud enough to get the media or courts on board about the “ system”.
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2014
Messages
29,140
Location
BC
$2000/ month doesn’t get you three staff taking turns to look after you 24/7. If that is the benchmark and group homes or LTC is unacceptable, then that does not seem to be financially doable. And that right ( to have your own 24/7 staff) needs to be given to all or to nobody, not just to the squeaky wheels that are loud enough to get the media or courts on board about the “ system”.
Well don’t begrudge the squeaky wheels, or it’s sure to be given to nobody.
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2014
Messages
29,140
Location
BC
It is financially doable. Anything is financially possible. The economy is arbitrary. The stock market that the free market relies on, is arbitrary. It just takes public will to demand change to the way things are done. And make sure a bulk of resources are not held up by a few at the very top of the economic ladder.

so, unfortunately, to me it sounds like you think people with disabilities dying before their years are up, is the way to solve the financial challenges?
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2014
Messages
29,140
Location
BC
I don’t think people realize that the precedent that the Quebec court set in the Truchon case (his specifically) that has determined key parts of Bill C7 was financially motivated, and had nothing to do with compassion for “suffering” and was an abandonment of Canada’s human rights obligations under international law. The public already let that happen and that needs to be pointed out (repeatedly, it seems). That man died because he couldn’t bear the thought of the conditions of life in a Quebec nursing home. That‘s a social problem caused by neglect, that led to his death, not a personal choice motivated by true dignity or compassion. Yet, it set the legal precedent that Canada is accepting. When it’s really unacceptable. Our collective heart has dropped right out of here with Bill C7, and history won’t judge Canada well for it. Like it didn’t judge us well with residential schools and other ongoing racial injustices...this is a human rights injustice.
 
Last edited:

BetteTheRed

Resident Heretic
Joined
Jun 6, 2014
Messages
19,053
OK, Kimmio, but there's a range of care options. In Canada, above homelessness, probably the worst place to live is in a shelter, and I wouldn't put group homes, the average available "room in a crackhouse", most of LTC, particularly in Ontario/Quebec, much above those.

But it's a LONG, LONG, LONG way from decent group care, to 24/7 personal care, and you cut off conversation when you jump from "LTC is unbearable" to "every disabled person deserves personal 24/7 care", which I can't imagine any society could fund, even if the bulk of the economy were devoted to "caregiving".

And that's why people accuse you of cutting off conversation, Kimmio. You go from 0 to 60 in a heartbeat, with no time to consider nuance in the middle.
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2014
Messages
29,140
Location
BC
Well, can any of you try to relate at all to our government declaring that you’re not a full human being as required by international law in Canada? Probably not. You don’t have an appreciation of the dehumanization involved with this. There’s really no room for nuance in the UN warning, because this is dire.

Plus, after Covid made us aware, Quebec nursing homes have been revealed to be abhorrent places. I imagine Mr.Truchon was aware of it. im bothered by the faint suggestion that he was demanding too much. He should have had some level self directed care in a decent living environment at least - to try to accommodate a solution that is decent and respects both his autonomy and his extra needs. But he died because his only option was a nursing home in a province now known for some pretty terrible nursing homes. That wasn’t a win for him, it was an injustice to him. The court case should’ve highlighted the inadequacies and inappropriateness of how nursing homes function, and don’t meet diverse human needs well enough. Instead the verdict was made that people stuck in a truly horrible situation like that, that‘s human/ socially caused, should be able to (or have to) “choose” to die as the way out.
 
Last edited:

BetteTheRed

Resident Heretic
Joined
Jun 6, 2014
Messages
19,053
Kimmio, had you cared to listen for a bunch of years, you'd have heard my consistent complaints about LTC and mental illness,

It sucks to be not fully "abled" in Canada, as anywhere else on earth. Many of us know that to some degree - disability, mental health issues, sight or hearing issues.

And if you think the way that you might die - in a home, alone, with no-one visiting - well, sorta welcome to the club. We're not making different plans for old age.
 
Top