[BeaverFever]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

I'm not trying to run other peoples lives, I'm pro euthanasia but I'm anti gov't regulating euthanasia which is a big fucking difference. What was once a personal decision is quietly being taken out of the clients hands.

What the hell are you talking about???

$1:

So, If you want to off yourself it's your prerogative and as the matter of fact I'd applaud your decision just don't start demanding that someone "has to bake your cake" just because they don't agree with your beliefs and demands.

Huh?

$1:

The problem with euthanasia is, when it becomes gov't run, it slowly goes from a personal choice to a bureaucratic decision.

It’s not “government run” where are you getting this?

$1:

As the matter of fact we've already had gov'ts running medical murder facilities and they got to that point by taking the step from Eugenics to mandatory euthanasia.

. Eugenics and MAID have nothing to do with each other. One doesn’t lead to the other

$1:

So let's be honest here. When a gov't becomes involved in pretty much any personal choices it always goes to shit and as you know or should know gov'ts will always take the easy and cheap way out rather than trying to fix the problems.

MAID isn’t not government run and the decision to die is not the government’s decision. Do you even know what you’re talking about?

So if that problem is a depressed 12 year old girl, or a patient who made a not well thought out decision about suicide but can't change their mind because of a medical condition, someone else is now in charge no matter what these people want at the present moment.[/quote]
As it says in the article depression alone doesn’t qualify someone for MAID. And to the second point you wouldn’t let someone opt in if they were no longer Mentally capable of making that decision how can you trust them to opt out? I don’t know the answer to that one but we just have to let the patients decide for themselves how they want that kind of scenario to play out

[Sunnyways]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

So, If you want to off yourself it's your prerogative and as the matter of fact I'd applaud your decision just don't start demanding that someone "has to bake your cake" just because they don't agree with your beliefs and demands.

So if that problem is a depressed 12 year old girl, or a patient who made a not well thought out decision about suicide but can't change their mind because of a medical condition, someone else is now in charge no matter what these people want at the present moment.

It’s a tricky area. A few years ago, I attended a lecture on MAID given by a cheerful young doctor and was surprised to find it a little chilling. Although I certainly would like the option to die as painlessly as possible under my own steam in Canada if I got a diagnosis of, say, dementia or Lou Gehrig’s disease (despite the fact that I was rather looking forward to seeing Switzerland again - the lower budget alternative we discussed at home was a tube from the tail pipe which is apparently sometimes not as quick as one would like), let’s hope we never get to the stage where depressed teenagers are killed off by the state, or any young adult with a psychiatric problem for that matter. As we have seen with overly liberal OxyContin prescribing by doctors, state approval of something can have big and unexpected effects on behaviour. I would also be concerned about the welfare of people with disabilities. We have good intentions here but we don’t want a situation to arise where somebody might feel that, as a ‘burden’, exiting early is the decent thing to do for themselves, their family or society. Understandably, patients with spinal injuries often experience deep depression before seeing value in their lives again and there have been some dramatic therapeutic advances in that area recently. In the case of psychiatric patients or those with disabilities, I would like even more Canadian forms, counselling and general delay than usual before anything irreversible happens.

[Freakinoldguy]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

I'm not trying to run other peoples lives, I'm pro euthanasia but I'm anti gov't regulating euthanasia which is a big fucking difference. What was once a personal decision is quietly being taken out of the clients hands.

What the hell are you talking about???

$1:

So, If you want to off yourself it's your prerogative and as the matter of fact I'd applaud your decision just don't start demanding that someone "has to bake your cake" just because they don't agree with your beliefs and demands.

Huh?

$1:

The problem with euthanasia is, when it becomes gov't run, it slowly goes from a personal choice to a bureaucratic decision.

It’s not “government run” where are you getting this?

$1:

As the matter of fact we've already had gov'ts running medical murder facilities and they got to that point by taking the step from Eugenics to mandatory euthanasia.

. Eugenics and MAID have nothing to do with each other. One doesn’t lead to the other

$1:

So let's be honest here. When a gov't becomes involved in pretty much any personal choices it always goes to shit and as you know or should know gov'ts will always take the easy and cheap way out rather than trying to fix the problems.

MAID isn’t not government run and the decision to die is not the government’s decision. Do you even know what you’re talking about?

So if that problem is a depressed 12 year old girl, or a patient who made a not well thought out decision about suicide but can't change their mind because of a medical condition, someone else is now in charge no matter what these people want at the present moment.

$1:

As it says in the article depression alone doesn’t qualify someone for MAID. And to the second point you wouldn’t let someone opt in if they were no longer Mentally capable of making that decision how can you trust them to opt out? I don’t know the answer to that one but we just have to let the patients decide for themselves how they want that kind of scenario to play out

[/quote]

I'm talking about the gov't setting the regulations about who can receive assisted suicide and the guidelines for who qualifies and if that isn't taking it out of the hands of people who need it what is?

TBH this whole topic should have been sent to a referendum rather than being rammed through Parliament by a gov't who couldn't find it's own ass on a dark night with both hands. Because, I'm sure that it would have passed but i'm also pretty sure that people would have wanted extremely stringent binding requirements before allowing the gov't to start carrying out a euthanasia program. Especially after watching the way the Netherlands has slowly started allowing gov't funded euthanasia for alot more of the population than the public was ever told it would be.

But, since it wasn't we're now starting to see our gov'ts start down the same slippery slope with legislation to make it easier for people not at end of life, terminally ill and extreme pain to use the system to commit suicide.

And since I, like every other taxpayer is paying for the people receiving the gov't funded euthanasia, I'm not taking away anyone's right to kill themselves which, i'm sure they can do on their own if they so desire. What I'm doing is simply expressing my displeasure with the gov't for using my money to expand the euthanasia parameters making it easier for people not in extreme pain and not terminally ill to kill themselves. Things which were were assured would never happen.

So long story short. If you want to kill yourself and you don't meet the previous stringent criteria, feel free but don't expect me or the other taxpayers who disagree with your decision to pay for it. Go out and buy a bunch of fentanyl and do it right.

[Prof_Chomsky]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

So long story short. If you want to kill yourself and you don't meet the previous stringent criteria, feel free but don't expect me or the other taxpayers who disagree with your decision to pay for it. Go out and buy a bunch of fentanyl and do it right.

I don't understand what you're fighting? You aren't against euthanasia. You aren't against suicide. You're just against the cost of suicide for certain people being paid for by tax payers? If that's the case, you're getting a deal. It's likely less than 200$ for the appointment and drugs, vs supporting these people who are in serious enough medical condition to not want to live. Think about that. You either pay 200$ to let them end the suffering, or, you pay tens thousands of dollars every year to keep them alive - wishing they would die.

[BartSimpson]

Thanos Thanos:

I thought we were pals.

PS: Punisher: Soviet #4 came out today online. wOOt!

We are pals!

My comment was of the rhetorical 'we'.

[BeaverFever]

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

So long story short. If you want to kill yourself and you don't meet the previous stringent criteria, feel free but don't expect me or the other taxpayers who disagree with your decision to pay for it. Go out and buy a bunch of fentanyl and do it right.

I don't understand what you're fighting? You aren't against euthanasia. You aren't against suicide. You're just against the cost of suicide for certain people being paid for by tax payers? If that's the case, you're getting a deal. It's likely less than 200$ for the appointment and drugs, vs supporting these people who are in serious enough medical condition to not want to live. Think about that. You either pay 200$ to let them end the suffering, or, you pay tens thousands of dollars every year to keep them alive - wishing they would die.

He is against Justin Trudeau though. That’s what he’s fighting. So he has to invent some reason to complain

[Freakinoldguy]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

So long story short. If you want to kill yourself and you don't meet the previous stringent criteria, feel free but don't expect me or the other taxpayers who disagree with your decision to pay for it. Go out and buy a bunch of fentanyl and do it right.

I don't understand what you're fighting? You aren't against euthanasia. You aren't against suicide. You're just against the cost of suicide for certain people being paid for by tax payers? If that's the case, you're getting a deal. It's likely less than 200$ for the appointment and drugs, vs supporting these people who are in serious enough medical condition to not want to live. Think about that. You either pay 200$ to let them end the suffering, or, you pay tens thousands of dollars every year to keep them alive - wishing they would die.

He is against Justin Trudeau though. That’s what he’s fighting. So he has to invent some reason to complain

I am against Trudeau and that's no surprise although that's not what I see to be the issue. But then again, I don't expect you to see the real problem with lowering the bar for assisted suicides nor the potential for future abuses which is likely because you see anything that Trudeau says as a proclamation from the mount.

[Freakinoldguy]

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

So long story short. If you want to kill yourself and you don't meet the previous stringent criteria, feel free but don't expect me or the other taxpayers who disagree with your decision to pay for it. Go out and buy a bunch of fentanyl and do it right.

I don't understand what you're fighting? You aren't against euthanasia. You aren't against suicide. You're just against the cost of suicide for certain people being paid for by tax payers? If that's the case, you're getting a deal. It's likely less than 200$ for the appointment and drugs, vs supporting these people who are in serious enough medical condition to not want to live. Think about that. You either pay 200$ to let them end the suffering, or, you pay tens thousands of dollars every year to keep them alive - wishing they would die.

The problem isn't with euthanasia it's the fact that the "thousands of dollars" to keep people alive and in pain without stringent guidelines has the potential to eventually morph into the "well he/she's costing to much money so we can save our overburdened and collapsing health care system thousands of dollars by euthanizing him or her".

So, i'm pro euthanasia for people suffering without hope and people who can make the decision to end their unbearable suffering. But what I'm not is a fan of is the gov't moving the goal posts to make it easier to get gov't funded suicide if you don't meet the original criteria. The criteria we were told was going to remain in place.

Here's what it was originally.

$1:

OTTAWA — The government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau introduced legislation on Thursday to legalize physician-assisted suicide for Canadians with a “serious and incurable illness,” which has brought them “enduring physical or psychological suffering.”

$1:

The bill would allow consenting adults “capable of making decisions with respect to their health” to choose to end their own lives or seek assistance in doing so from their doctors. A physician must decide that “natural death has become reasonably foreseeable, taking into account all of their medical circumstances.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/15/worl ... icide.html

And this is what it became in less than 4 years.

$1:

On Monday, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's Liberal government brought forward the assisted death bill.

It would create a two-track system for determining a person's eligibility. One track for people who are terminally ill, and one track for people who are not.

Patients in both tracks must prove they are facing "intolerable" suffering.

The bill would explicitly exclude eligibility for individuals suffering solely from mental illness.

Who gets to quantify "intolerable" suffering for people wishing to end their lives. I can assure you that despite recent advances the medical establishment has no magic machine to quantify personal pain which means they'll have to rely on the descriptions of suffering from the person, and anecdotes from friends and family about how much pain the person is in. None of which can be considered scientifically reliable.

I'll reiterate my position. I'm not opposed to gov't assisted suicide but I am opposed to funding gov't assisted suicides for people who aren't in terrible pain or aren't terminally ill just because they want to stop the world and get off. Because if they want to do that they can do it the old fashioned way.

[Tricks]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

I'm not opposed to gov't assisted suicide but I am opposed to funding gov't assisted suicides for people who aren't in terrible pain or aren't terminally ill just because they want to stop the world and get off. Because if they want to do that they can do it the old fashioned way.

Ah yes, so empathetic. Unless you're in terrible pain, we won't help you end it, you gotta go eat the barrel of that shotgun.

[BeaverFever]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

I'm talking about the gov't setting the regulations about who can receive assisted suicide and the guidelines for who qualifies and if that isn't taking it out of the hands of people who need it what is?

Wel for starters considering that it was previously completely illegal it hasn’t been “taken out of anyone’s hands”. You act as if people used to be able to get no-questions-asked MAID at the local McSuicide’s drive-thru window and now evil Trudeau has deprived them of it with his big government rules

Of course when you make it legal for someone to intentionally kill another person -a sick and helpless one at that - it will have to be regulated. How could it possibly be any other way?

$1:

TBH this whole topic should have been sent to a referendum rather than being rammed through Parliament by a gov't who couldn't find it's own ass on a dark night with both hands. Because, I'm sure that it would have passed but i'm also pretty sure that people would have wanted extremely stringent binding requirements before allowing the gov't to start carrying out a euthanasia program. Especially after watching the way the Netherlands has slowly started allowing gov't funded euthanasia for alot more of the population than the public was ever told it would be.

So you’re complaining that it’s regulated but at the same time also complaining that there aren’t “extremely stringent binding requirements “? Makes absolutely no sense

AND FOR THE THIRD TIME the government is not “carrying out a euthanasia program “. The government is not carrying out anything and MAID is not “euthanasia “. People who want to end their lives are doing so with the help of their doctors. The government is not involved AT ALL Euthanasia means putting someone fo death without their consent. MAID is assisting someone who has asked to end their life early. Get? Read this part a few times so I don’t have to say it for a fourth time.

$1:

paying for the people receiving the gov't funded euthanasia, I'm not taking away anyone's right to kill themselves which, i'm sure they can do on their own if they so desire. What I'm doing is simply expressing my displeasure with the gov't for using my money to expand the euthanasia parameters making it easier for people not in extreme pain and not terminally ill to kill themselves. Things which were were assured would never happen.

No, you were never assured that. In fact they quite openly said right from the start these options could be on the table in the future , just not right in the first few years. FYI since you bring up your concerns “As a taxpayer”, you’re saving far more than if these people were kept alive and in long term treatment.

[Freakinoldguy]

Tricks Tricks:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

I'm not opposed to gov't assisted suicide but I am opposed to funding gov't assisted suicides for people who aren't in terrible pain or aren't terminally ill just because they want to stop the world and get off. Because if they want to do that they can do it the old fashioned way.

Ah yes, so empathetic. Unless you're in terrible pain, we won't help you end it, you gotta go eat the barrel of that shotgun.

So, you're saying that anyone who wants to kill themselves should be given a gov't funded suicide? Okay fair enough but, by allowing that all it will do is remove the stigma of suicide and make it sound much more acceptable especially since euthanasia is a much nicer term than suicide.

Unfortunately the result is still the same. I'm sure the veteran who's suffering from PTSD and can't get help from the current gov't because as the PM says, "they're asking for more than we can give right now" or that high school kid who's confused about his or her gender will be happy to hear that their thoughts of committing suicide can be put aside because they won't have to contemplate killing themselves anymore since the gov't will pay to have someone in the health care system to do it for them.

But, since we're on the topic, of everyone having access to euthanasia, are you also in favour of the gov't mandating doctors and hospitals to carry out this procedure on request or lose funding, even if it violates a personal religious or ethical position?

Oh and for the record, you can look up the other threads from 5+ years ago and see that my position on the subject hasn't changed with the election of Trudeau. For me it's always been a very last resort to eliminate unbearable pain or suffering and it's application shouldn't be a one size fits all type of procedure by gov'ts or individuals.

[Tricks]

Ever think that involving the medical system might get them more help than they would have had if they're forced to do it themselves? And maybe some of these can be prevented?

[BeaverFever]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

But, since we're on the topic, of everyone having access to euthanasia, are you also in favour of the gov't mandating doctors and hospitals to carry out this procedure on request or lose funding, even if it violates a personal religious or ethical position?

Another ridiculous lie! GET THE FACTS

NOBODY is being mandated by government to carry out the procedure

[stratos]

Tricks Tricks:

Ever think that involving the medical system might get them more help than they would have had if they're forced to do it themselves? And maybe some of these can be prevented?

Is that something that is offered everyone seeking assisted suicide?

[DrCaleb]

stratos stratos:

Tricks Tricks:

Ever think that involving the medical system might get them more help than they would have had if they're forced to do it themselves? And maybe some of these can be prevented?

Is that something that is offered everyone seeking assisted suicide?

Yes. MAID is carried out by Doctors, and Doctors swore an oath to do no harm. Before they help a person die, they make sure it is the best thing for that person. That includes other treatments.

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thesundayediti ... -1.5335025

Click on the 'listen' button. It's a long program, but it will show you the care and attention that goes into these decisions.