So apparently Canada has a bit of a problem right now with its euthanasia program which is leading to it being one of the leading causes of death in the country. Any thoughts on this?
Okay, I'm going to come from some personal experience here.So apparently Canada has a bit of a problem right now with its euthanasia program which is leading to it being one of the leading causes of death in the country. Any thoughts on this?
Because when your life is in the hands of your family, it can come down to "I know your very existence is hell, but I'm too selfish to endure the pain of letting you go".So why are we keeping them alive, unhappy and undignified?
On the flipside, it seems that the cart is being put before the horse in cases where it's more like "Your very existence is a burden on the family wallet so please kill yourself for the good of the family."Because when your life is in the hands of your family, it can come down to "I know your very existence is hell, but I'm too selfish to endure the pain of letting you go".
Surely. But the economics are an issue, at individual, family and societal levels.I repeat, it's not the euthanasia as a means to help people that are physically suffering that worries me. It's the monetary "inconvenience" as the reason that has me concerned.
My dad died of cancer almost 20 years ago. It was 6ish mths between first being diagnosed and dying. He seemed to have gone into remission at about 4mths but the cancer was completely back by month 5Because when your life is in the hands of your family, it can come down to "I know your very existence is hell, but I'm too selfish to endure the pain of letting you go".
My heart really goes out.So why are we keeping them alive, unhappy and undignified? In ways it's almost a blessing when their dementia gets sufficiently severe they do become mostly oblivious. And yet even then, there they are year after year, unable to feed and dress themselves, with relatives occasionally popping into to say comforting things to people who can't even understand them. Some of them will live 5-10 years, more even, in this state. What is the purpose? What is the advantage to them or anyone else?
That is a terrible thing to have to hear as an eight year old.One side of my family has a history of very severe dementia. Two of my grandparents ultimately died after a decision was made not to feed them any more, which was a slow and humiliating death. Of course, they were gone by that stage so they didn't really suffer in any kind of comprehensible way, but I will never forget the effect it had on my parents, especially my mother who very much felt she was seeing her own future. I remember one day she told me that when she started to go we should just take her to the beach and let her walk into the sea. I was about eight, but I think she was so upset and just didn't have anyone else she could say that to without judgement.
+1Fortunately, treatment has come a long way and I think she'll enjoy a much longer quality of life than her parents did. It always bothers me when media fixates on stories of family members trying to keep their loved ones alive at all costs. It plays on this really false and unhelpful sense of empathy (wouldn't you hate it if doctors wanted to kill your relatives). The reality is, I think most people don't want to see their relatives suffer or linger in a humiliating half-life, and those who do are typically motivated by religious objections.
I am so angry about the inadequacy of care. The cost is incredible - and I don't necessarily object, because looking after people is going to be expensive. But it's how it's spread across society, and how inadequate a lot of the support systems are. How long does it take for power of attorney if it's not been set up? Months and fucking months, whilst nexts-of-kin are trying to work out how to get everything done when everyone comes back and tells them they don't have authority, potentially paying out of their own pockets. The bewildering complexity of all the forms, documents. The sheer bureaucratic disinterest of the government and companies to empower relatives to sort things out for the best. To me, it's felt like the national care system is not designed to provide care, it's designed to obstruct it: or more specifically, obstruct access to state support in the hope they pay for it themselves. A whole, massive network of penny-pinching and profit.Disability care is inadequate. It's inadequate everywhere, we all know it's inadequate. It's inadequate because people, often the same people wringing their hands over euthanasia laws, vote for governments which cut it, often in pointless and deliberately cruel ways. I was working voluntarily in social care during the Cameron "austerity" period, and I knew people who literally died as a result. My feeling, both as a disabled person myself and based on that experience, is that if you care about disabled people and want to make clear that you value their lives, pay for their social care. Don't create a financial burden and act surprised when the people on whom you've inflicted it choose to take the obvious way out.
It's almost like slippery slope arguments aren't inherently invalid.Do people here really not fucking see the kind of direction something like this can go?! Really?! What the fuck?!
Which will be poor people... Wealthy people will be able to afford medical care and pain relievers while poor people decide to commit suicide.... Hello? Is this the same fucking forum that had AND IS STILL HAVING all those debates about Covid and lock downs and safety and how conditions affect people of certain wealth more than others? Yet this is just okey dokey?No system is perfect, everything has down side, the important point is that the upside outweight the downside. There not being a lot of resource for people with serious disability was always going to be the case (frankly I don't think there could ever be enough resource), the availability of MAD hasn't made things worse, it just given the people a new option that they can chose if they want to.
More importantly, MAD will probably save money in the long term because keeping people alive when their live is just constant agony and they'd rather die is not only immoral but its also incredibly expensive. Some of that money saved could make its way to increasing resource.