Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

‘Disturbing’: Experts troubled by Canada’s euthanasia laws


OverSword

Recommended Posts

Quote

 

Alan Nichols had a history of depression and other medical issues, but none were life-threatening. When the 61-year-old Canadian was hospitalized in June 2019 over fears he might be suicidal, he asked his brother to “bust him out” as soon as possible.

Within a month, Nichols submitted a request to be euthanized and he was killed, despite concerns raised by his family and a nurse practitioner.

His application for euthanasia listed only one health condition as the reason for his request to die: hearing loss.

Nichols’ family reported the case to police and health authorities, arguing that he lacked the capacity to understand the process and was not suffering unbearably — among the requirements for euthanasia. They say he was not taking needed medication, wasn’t using the cochlear implant that helped him hear, and that hospital staffers improperly helped him request euthanasia.

 

Link

Below are a group of poll questions reflecting Canadas attitude about assisted suicide for various reasons including poverty and homelessness 

https://researchco.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Tables_MAiD_CAN_05May2023.pdf

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, OverSword said:

How about the part where the hospitals ethics director is talking to a patient about how much money it costs to continue treatment and then offers euthanasia as an option?  That, to me is completely messed up.  The man says it felt like coercion.

 

You're talking about this guy?

Quote

Roger Foley, who has a degenerative brain disorder and is hospitalized in London, Ontario, was so alarmed by staffers mentioning euthanasia that he began secretly recording some of their conversations.

 

In one recording obtained by the AP, the hospital’s director of ethics told Foley that for him to remain in the hospital, it would cost “north of $1,500 a day.” Foley replied that mentioning fees felt like coercion and asked what plan there was for his long-term care.

 

“Roger, this is not my show,” the ethicist responded. “My piece of this was to talk to you, (to see) if you had an interest in assisted dying.”

 

Foley said he had never previously mentioned euthanasia. The hospital says there is no prohibition on staff raising the issue.

I think Belgium's restriction of making it so that the doctors and medical team can't bring it up themselves as an option because when they bring it up  "it sounds too much like a recommendation" is a good idea 

Edited by spartan max2
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's forum members who argue we should be electing younger Presidents/Prime Ministers because they bring much needed fresh progressive ideas to solve problems in the modern world.  They also argue we should lower the voting age to 16 yrs old. 

Look at these results from this survey on euthanasia among 18-34 yr olds

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, acidhead said:

There's forum members who argue we should be electing younger Presidents/Prime Ministers because they bring much needed fresh progressive ideas to solve problems in the modern world.  They also argue we should lower the voting age to 16 yrs old. 

Look at these results from this survey on euthanasia among 18-34 yr olds

 

 

I'm not for politicians younger than 40,or older than 70...by 40 most have had plenty of life experience,by 70 most need to slow down a little.

This is a tough topic,but I can see this being legal,but only for terminally ill people, people with long term illnesses that mess with all their functioning like Parkinson's,ect.

That said,one's life is ones personal decision...

Eta

Don't lower the voting age,up it to 21...

I was a 17 year old idiot who thought Dubya was a decent president...by 21,I couldn't stand the stupid b*****d.

Edited by CrimsonKing
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, OverSword said:

How about the part where the hospitals ethics director is talking to a patient about how much money it costs to continue treatment and then offers euthanasia as an option?  That, to me is completely messed up.  The man says it felt like coercion.

 

Is that not also a reality in our society?  If a hospital knew they  were not getting paid would a hospital send a patient off to hospice?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Medical assistance in dying is not euthanasia. Those are two different things. If a patient chooses to use MAID they take the drugs themselves in a medical facility. It's not administered by a doctor. 

A online friends mother was diagnosed with Glioblastoma and she decided to take advantage of Canadas MAID. She picked the time and day, she received counseling and knew at anytime up until she took the meds that she could opt out, no judgement. She chose this with purpose and died peacefully, surrounded by a small group of family. It was very much what she wanted. 

(PS, upping the voting age is right wing crap. Selective service is 18 so unless you up that age requirement it's pretty obvious it's the GOP trying to keep young people from voting because they're more progressive. )

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm 100% fine with upping the age for selective service,I'll go one better...get rid of it altogether, while upping the voting age.

I'm not the GOP,most people under 21 don't have much real life experience... it's just common sense.

At 16 most are working their first jobs,they have little clue what responsibility is yet...Some people seem to think even our animals should have a say,anything for a vote.

 

Edited by CrimsonKing
I hate autocorrect
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

Is that not also a reality in our society?  If a hospital knew they  were not getting paid would a hospital send a patient off to hospice?

But what they don't do is say "You can't pay, would you like us to kill as an alternative to hospice?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, darkmoonlady said:

Medical assistance in dying is not euthanasia.

You're right because euthanasia the is killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma by definition.  In Canada they'll do it because you're going deaf apparently.  

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, OverSword said:

You're right because euthanasia the is killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma by definition.  In Canada they'll do it because you're going deaf apparently.  

Yeah going deaf isn't exactly Alzheimer's...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, OverSword said:

You're right because euthanasia the is killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma by definition.  In Canada they'll do it because you're going deaf apparently.  

What are you even talking about? Care to elaborate?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, darkmoonlady said:

What are you even talking about? Care to elaborate?

Did you read the article at all before commenting?  Do you know what this thread is about?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, OverSword said:

But what they don't do is say "You can't pay, would you like us to kill as an alternative to hospice?"

True enough.  So far.

Edited by Tatetopa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Did you read the article at all before commenting?  Do you know what this thread is about?

Yes and like I said euthanasia is not MAID. Two different things. So the article itself is suspect. The criteria and the set of requirements needed to get MAID would not be okayed for just hearing loss. To me there is a lot missing from the story. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, darkmoonlady said:

Yes and like I said euthanasia is not MAID. Two different things. So the article itself is suspect. The criteria and the set of requirements needed to get MAID would not be okayed for just hearing loss. To me there is a lot missing from the story. 

So you believe he was terminally ill without any proof at all? If that’s the case it will be out there somewhere so go find it. I think you underestimate how messed up the Canadian medical bureaucracy might be.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, OverSword said:

So you believe he was terminally ill without any proof at all? If that’s the case it will be out there somewhere so go find it. I think you underestimate how messed up the Canadian medical bureaucracy might be.

That is what is confusing, he had had a stroke and depression which depending on the severity could have qualified him for MAID, the hearing loss just seems like they were noting it. He was suicidal after the stroke. They can be catastrophic even if the family deemed him able to care for himself that doesn't mean he wasn't suffering to the level, they just didn't see it. Some people are more stoic than others. 

I can see both sides. The disability community comes out hard against any medical assisted suicide and sees it at pure eugenics. And I also think that not having it as an option means people suffer needlessly for a longer time than is truly neccessary. 

The articles I've read focused on someone with ALS who needed more financial help. No amount of money in the world was going to change his outcome. ALS is a horrible and degenerative disease with no cure. 

Disabled people absolutely need better support systems but every disabled person who chooses MAID isn't Eugenics at work. I'm disabled, I don't plan on dying anytime soon hopefully, but after finding out I had cancer, I immediately told my family and friends I will if it comes to it take advantage of Oregons assisted death help here. It's a personal choice. 

Edited by darkmoonlady
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, darkmoonlady said:

That is what is confusing, he had had a stroke and depression which depending on the severity could have qualified him for MAID, the hearing loss just seems like they were noting it. He was suicidal after the stroke. They can be catastrophic even if the family deemed him able to care for himself that doesn't mean he wasn't suffering to the level, they just didn't see it. Some people are more stoic than others. 

I can see both sides. The disability community comes out hard against any medical assisted suicide and sees it at pure eugenics. And I also think that not having it as an option means people suffer needlessly for a longer time than is truly neccessary. 

The articles I've read focused on someone with ALS who needed more financial help. No amount of money in the world was going to change his outcome. ALS is a horrible and degenerative disease with no cure. 

Disabled people absolutely need better support systems but every disabled person who chooses MAID isn't Eugenics at work. I'm disabled, I don't plan on dying anytime soon hopefully, but after finding out I had cancer, I immediately told my family and friends I will if it comes to it take advantage of Oregons assisted death help here. It's a personal choice. 

I get that completely and have envisioned circumstances in which I would end my life myself but in none of those fantasies am I offered help from my doctor.  For some reason that part offends me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@darkmoonlady maybe what I find difficult to deal with here is that you have a system of socialized medicine in which hospitals with a government budget would push people in the direction of assisted dying to save money. It feels so wrong.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, OverSword said:

@darkmoonlady maybe what I find difficult to deal with here is that you have a system of socialized medicine in which hospitals with a government budget would push people in the direction of assisted dying to save money. It feels so wrong.

And if that is what is happening then yes there needs to be more oversight. The reality is that for a lot of disabled people, your income is limited, your housing choices are even more limited. Sometimes the only choice is living in a care facility where it is a living hell. It's one of my biggest fears. And you do not get a choice, you get a conservatorship and lose control of your finances. That happens every day to disabled people and there are no other options other than homelessness. So choice between homelessness, care home or assisted suicide in very limited areas and only if you are terminal which a lot of severely disabled people qualify for. It's a terrible set of "choices". And it should not be that way, however the reality is that really is it. It's why I vote Democratic and whether you agree with me or not overall I've found Democrats are more apt to keep funding for disabled people to stay in their homes and have the help they need. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought healthcare was free in Canada??

I listened to a lady who had been approved to have one of those chair rail combo that brings you up your stairs. She still had a 6 month wait to have it installed in her home. 
 

After she complained about the wait, they offered to kill her instead. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, OverSword said:

So you believe he was terminally ill without any proof at all? If that’s the case it will be out there somewhere so go find it. I think you underestimate how messed up the Canadian medical bureaucracy might be.

According to the article you don't have to be terminally ill in Canada to request assisted suicide .

 

Quote

The law was later amended to allow people who are not terminally ill to choose death, significantly broadening the number of eligible people. Critics say that change removed a key safeguard aimed at protecting people with potentially years or decades of life left.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, OverSword said:

I get that completely and have envisioned circumstances in which I would end my life myself but in none of those fantasies am I offered help from my doctor.  For some reason that part offends me. 

Judging by @preacherman76   comments as , that seems to be the part that people get uncomfortable with. 

I think doctors typically try to list all the options. 

But I can see if my mom is in the hospital and they offer to help her die that it might ruffle some feathers. 

You guys seems like you would the the whole Belgium way of doing it 

Edited by spartan max2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Severe, chronic pain, whether mental or physical is a reasonable excuse. Unless you’ve been there, you can’t understand.

Death is a door, nothing more. I would never pretend to imagine that I have the right to tell someone, they can’t open it, if that is their solemn wish.

Life is a gift, but it can become a curse.  I will let my Maker choose for me, and I trust Him to allow my input.

Edited by Raptor Witness
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.