UCCan Statement on Medical Assistance in Dying

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

As I understand it chansen, @Kimmio was not thanking me for holding any position, but rather for striving to understand where she was coming from.

Yes, and for your graciousness considering we have been at odds recently.

 

[Pinga]

I am curious about the post, and wonder about the community that put the statement. @revjohn , you often know the way these things work, or @GordW ....was this a committee struck after a GC, or a committee formed due to the legislation or did it come from an ongoign committee.

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

I was wondering why you were thanking me, but it appears you were thanking Jae. Jae will latch on to unpopular positions just to mess with people, so when you have his support, that should raise an eyebrow. I know it won't, but on the misguided thought that you might consider something I write, I'll put it out there.

I should have let the flags and moderator action go and made good my intended escape from this thread earlier today. I let it drag me back in.

Like DaisyJane said, I can respect what you've been through, even if I don't completely understand it. If I don't understand your experiences completely, then you don't understand mine. You haven't held your son's hand while he writhed and cried in dystonic pain for hours every day, for weeks, knowing his heart could give out at any time, being told to expect it, and wondering if there was anything to gain for all the misery. And my two year experience in this world is dwarfed by DaisyJane's journey with her son.

You don't understand either of us, and you demean our experiences and our input. You summarily dismiss any opinion on this topic you don't agree with. You use slippery slope and fear-based arguments like a religious fundamentalist. This is all backfiring and alienating you from support, quite predictably.

Now I really am done with you on this. There is no point of view to exchange with you - only yours is relevant. And that's why you'll never convince anyone.

I agonize when I hear your stories. It hurts to read them. I also agonize when I hear about adults with disabilities who have very little but their lives and commit suicide because they have their supports removed due to bureaucratic red tape. I agonize at the thought of those who already have little in the way of support...discriminated against in any sort of gainful employment, discriminated against in social opportunities that others take for granted, at the mercy of a draconian welfare system...ending up with nothing but that option. I agonize at the thought that people might want to do this so as not to burden their families. I agonize that those who could pursue available supports and resources - while they exist - might choose not to because they are ashamed at their loss of capacity. I agonize that if they don't choose them, the budget will look favourably at ending those options. It's already been documented that MAID is saving the government money. I agonize that a person with a disability who has other options could potentially choose MAID anyway, for any of the above reasons, but because they have the added layer of having a chronic disability caused by a condition they might (or might not directly) eventually die from - suicide prevention doesn't need to be offered with the same moral imperative. I agonize that they have such little time to change their minds. I agonize that because it is a "medical procedure" there is no duty to warn family to intervene or any other professional who could help them so they can live. I agonize about a lot of things. It's not all about me...I am seeing a big picture that changes society in some pretty fundamental ways and I'm seeing more negatives than positives in that change.

 

[chansen]

You're not agonizing. You've decided what's valid and what's not.

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

Believe what you want. I cried over your son, many times. Everybody here did. I realize that is cold comfort but it is agonizing - it pains everyone here, what you and he, and your family went through.


To not allow me to express my view or to tell me I shouldn't be able to - when it wasn't about you. You made it about you - that is really unfair. You said some really shitty things today that were totally undeserved. I don't know how you can still antagonize me. I don't think you view me or my concerns on this as valid, or respect me, at all. Nothing I said deserved that. That was agonizing. And I think you hate me. You made that clear. I don't understand why you hate me so much...so much to have said that.

I agonize over all of this.

 

[chansen]

bulls**t. You've dismissed every opinion here that is not yours, and then claim you've been disrespected.

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

Oh...is that right? I think because I am the only one here voicing this particular opinion I've been disrespected about ten times over by everyone who doesn't share my view...and told that my views cause... yeah well, never mind. No disrespect there to speak of. Mother of God.

You can't even admit that was wrong and over the top? There is nothing I said that warranted that...but, crickets, from the crowd. Yet, I am blasted for being some kind of uncaring person who only argues selfish positions. Nobody who is in this conversation today said anything. Am I supposed to assume they agree...? I'm so horrible and selfish because I am the only one here who disagrees with MAID as is now?

Can you not see why adults with disabilities might feel a little extra vulnerable or discriminated against - as a "pre-existing condition" of society?


When am I allowed to say f*** off?

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

oh, I can't. That would damage goodwill toward people with disabilities, apparently. That was harsh and unfair and I still continued to get piled on. I feel like swearing too.

Imagine someone arguing about racial discrimination, and fears around that, even if they did it badly. Would you say the same thing? Somehow I doubt it.

 

[Luce NDs]

Amen, in a perfect world.

Again past, present, future, perfect tense or angst ... it is all imperfect in the end we are virtual unknowns ... what ever cracked ... as the too cheeky part indicates ... Ba'aL'm ... de bote chi weeps ...

 

[Mrs.Anteater]

Kimmio, as a person with a disability, have you, like Seeler, put some thought into what you want or don't want done in case you loose your mental capacity? Are you aware, that everything will be done if you do not declare your wish beforehand and determine a delegate? Are you wanting to be kept alive at all costs, even if it means you spend years in a hospital bed , unable to communicate or mobilize , completely dependent on others?

Don't you think, that, if Canada develops into a dicatorship, a dictator could make euthanasia laws in a heartbeat? It wouldn't need to be based on any pre existing laws.
It sounds like you think, that MAD would allow people with disabilities to commit suicide easier. I would argue, that people who apply for MAD out of financial reasons, would have the chance to be identified and helped, because they applied. Other as if they went on and committed suicide.
Statistics say, NS had sixtysome applications for assisted dying- half of which actually happened.

 

[DaisyJane]

I find this thread very disappointing. While I applaud the MAID legislation, I also think the topic opens up wonderful opportunities to really unpack issues related to life, death, disability, suffering, self-determination and so on. These conversations, while very difficult, are good ones to have.

For example, I am developing a university course right now that explores disability and the Christian faith. One of the topics we will explore is the perceived interrelationship between disability and suffering - and we'll try to nuance that conversation. Ultimately my point would be that you cannot arbitrarily conflate the two, but you also cannot deny (competent, adults) people with disabilities the right to self-determine and to define THEIR definition of suffering.

I would love to have a rich dialogue about this/these topics. I would find it very helpful. But it seems that every time we try, things get derailed - specifically by Kimmio. Her need to have the conversation align with her views, to have her experience and ideas rule the conversation, and her willingness to use every unhelpful logical fallacy and emotional form of blackmail available to do so, really undercuts healthy dialogue. It is too bad.

 

[Pinga]

Daisy Jane, it is in a way, what could happen in a classroom. Unlike math courses, the emotions, personal history, and fears could result in overwhelming reactions.

Something to consider as planning for the course

 

[Pinga]

@Kimmio : the challenge is you overwhelm the thread and discount, no deny, all other viewpoints as valid.

It is not that there isn't validity in ensuring protection of vulnerable people.

The point is you come across as someone ranting in the centre of the room, unable to listen or respond.

This results in frustration to all
It results in your arguments being ignored or thrown into a general pile of crap
This is too bad, as there are important things to discuss in the midst of the noise

 

[Jaebius]

I would love to have a rich dialogue about this/these topics. I would find it very helpful. But it seems that every time we try, things get derailed - specifically by Kimmio. Her need to have the conversation align with her views, to have her experience and ideas rule the conversation, and her willingness to use every unhelpful logical fallacy and emotional form of blackmail available to do so, really undercuts healthy dialogue. It is too bad.

For a rich dialogue to occur, voices outside the majority must be allowed to be heard. @Kimmio's opinion on these topics is at times very emotion-driven, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be added into the mix. We should each enter into dialogue as the people who we are, and value as best we can one another's input.

 

[Luce NDs]

Imaginary numbers can upset a definitive Math Courses as they include go rounds and cyclic ide'ars that some will not accept whatever ... and thus our drunken wobble ...

Twas only designed by mysteries to encourage the unknowns (us) to carry on ... and not forget the linear in the circle ... "Q"!

Tis a phi in concept ... a part of greater philosophy ... mortals attempt to confine it and thus are po'ly prepared for beyond ... they will be BIF'd ...

 

[DaisyJane]

@Pinga.
Excellent point and thanks for the reminder! As a class professor I have a bit more ability to manage the conversation and ensure that all voices are heard equally - which is helpful. And, like WC, the class often deals with these sorts of situations.

@Jae. I agree with you. Completely. And as someone who lives with a disability and works in the world of disability I would really value Kimmio's thoughts. But in these sorts of situations we need people to enter into the conversation in a way that allows all voices to be heard, and we need people to speak in a way that does not devalue others. Emotion is fine, but you need to know how to engage in conversations you are emotionally attached to. Many of us have strong emotional connections to this subject. Many of us have lived through harrowing, deeply painful experiences that we carry into this thread. Many of us have pretty powerful feelings boiling just below the surface. But we have been able to engage the conversation in a way that honours our emotional connectedness, while also honouring others' voices and emotional connectedness. I find Kimmio struggles with that at times and resorts to tactics that amplify her voice while devaluing others' while also confusing the conversation.

And sometimes you need to know when a conversation hits too close to home and then share that that is influencing how you engage the conversation. For example, I co-facilitate a support group for parents managing the transition of their very disabled children to out of home placements. It is an emotionally brutal time for many parents. Over the last month or so I have been living through some of these issues myself which has, in my opinion, hampered my ability to be an effective leader. For a few weeks I owned up to that. I shared that this was hitting a little too close to home emotionally and I would allow the other leader to step in to a greater extent until I had achieved some emotional equilibrium. I still talked and shared, I just did it in a way that acknowledged where I was at emotionally. It isn't that I shouldn't feel what I am feeling, it was just that there are times you need to acknowledge your how those feelings impact conversations and others.

 

[revjohn]

I am curious about the post, and wonder about the community that put the statement. @revjohn , you often know the way these things work, or @GordW ....was this a committee struck after a GC, or a committee formed due to the legislation or did it come from an ongoign committee.

To the best of my recollection:

The General Council Executive met, discussed the issue briefly and then tasked the Theology and Inte-Church Inter-Faith Committee with responsibility for preparing the report in 2015.

The Committee met, studied, consulted, deliberated and eventually pulled the report together for presentation to the GCE just now in 2017.

GCE has now decided to receive the report and adopt the recommendations.

Since the content of the report does not meet the threshold for denomination shaping or polity shaping I doubt that this will need to go before the plenary of General Council for ratification and the decision of the GCE will stand.

The full document complete with background and glossary is available here:

http://www.united-church.ca/sites/default/files/resources/medical-assistance-in-dying.pdf

It may be that information contained in those elements which are not included in the initial link might answer some of the questions or temper some of the responses given to date. I am hopeful but not optimistic.

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

@Kimmio : the challenge is you overwhelm the thread and discount, no deny, all other viewpoints as valid.

It is not that there isn't validity in ensuring protection of vulnerable people.

The point is you come across as someone ranting in the centre of the room, unable to listen or respond.

This results in frustration to all
It results in your arguments being ignored or thrown into a general pile of crap
This is too bad, as there are important things to discuss in the midst of the noise

What I did what not let up on the idea that this legislation is dangerous, rather than discount everyone else's point of view. When accusations were lobbed at me - accusations which were the result of others becoming too emotional - I pointed out that we are discussing different sets of problems.

In the midst of this I was told that I inspire horrible things (which I needn't repeat you all read them) ...and nobody said anything. Nothing. Just kept telling me how disrespectful I am, that I don't listen, and to F off.

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

Chansen pops off and says a bad things - makes a completely unfounded and emotionally driven accusation directed at me personally. DJ comes on and says to him, nice to see you. Then everything becomes about how I don't care about chansen and DJ. Then chansen claims my comments are more likely to inspire violence against disabled people. When all I am doing is maintaining that this law is dangerous in that it doesn't do enough to protect disabled people. I try to point out to DJ that we are arguing about different problems. I am told to F off because I don t understand what parents of disabled kids go through - when, how did this topic become about that? I do care but we are discussing different things. I am told I have a problem with my emotions. I am not happy with the conversation either.

 

[revjohn]

I find this thread very disappointing. While I applaud the MAID legislation, I also think the topic opens up wonderful opportunities to really unpack issues related to life, death, disability, suffering, self-determination and so on. These conversations, while very difficult, are good ones to have.

I'm on the fence yet. I think that there is opportunity. I think it is easily squandered. Too much heart on sleeves turns the conversation into fashion statement which is superficial and fails to reach anything of substance.

For example, I am developing a university course right now that explores disability and the Christian faith. One of the topics we will explore is the perceived interrelationship between disability and suffering - and we'll try to nuance that conversation. Ultimately my point would be that you cannot arbitrarily conflate the two, but you also cannot deny (competent, adults) people with disabilities the right to self-determine and to define THEIR definition of suffering.

The University course sounds fascinating. Which university will be offering it and which faculty if you don't mind my asking?

The issue is the conflict between pastoral response and effecting legislation. A pastoral response deals with folk where they are and it doesn't dictate to those folk what they must feel or what they must think. It comes alongside of without feeling obligated to feel or think the same way. Effecting legislation cannot change the way people think, at most, it gives individuals new permission to act or it curtails action previously enjoyed.

The legislation is in place. It will not be amended unless it can be shown that an amendment is required. Arguments about how it is deficient or wrong are, simply put, sound and fury signifying nothing. It represents a what might have been at the expense of what now is.

I would love to have a rich dialogue about this/these topics. I would find it very helpful. But it seems that every time we try, things get derailed - specifically by Kimmio. Her need to have the conversation align with her views, to have her experience and ideas rule the conversation, and her willingness to use every unhelpful logical fallacy and emotional form of blackmail available to do so, really undercuts healthy dialogue. It is too bad.

The wonderful thing about deraillment at Wondercafe2 is that the rest of the train is not obligated to jump the track just because one car does.

If you want to start a thread I will commit to carrying a portion of the discussion and I will further commit to sharpening my focus to the actual subject at hand.