My phrasing provides an accurate description of the situation. Perhaps you think it’s skimming over some nuance. But I’m phrasing it that way to draw attention to what kind of decision it is. I’m not sure if it’s a decision anyone should really be making outside of a wartime triage situation.
I never said it was a decision for just anyone or an easy one. I said it’s a decision that requires context and nuance.
It’s like deciding who gets donated organs, when does a doctor declare brain death, when do you shut off the machines or give a large morphine dose, etc.
They’re hard decisions. They need to be made with care.
This implies that we need to make these decisions. The other decisions you listed are decisions that we need to make. But who receives medical decision in dying is not a decision we need to make. That’s a decision we choose to make.
You can choose a ready guide
In some celestial voice
If you choose not to decide
You still have made a choice
You can choose from phantom fears
And kindness that can kill
I will choose a path that’s clear
I will choose free will.
Deciding not to allow MAID is also deciding who lives and dies, and how. But denying people the right to die can be a cruelty all on its own. This is a decision we need to make. It’s healthcare, it’s quality of life, it’s managing suffering and pain with consent and thoughtfulness.
Deciding not to kill people is not deciding who dies. If this is really a decision we needed to make then it seems odd that nearly every other country in the would gets on fine without making it.
I can see you making a case that it’s merciful, but we also need to acknowledge the potential for abuse that does occur. Like the case article mentioned: the woman who applied for MAiD because she couldnt afford affordable housing accommodations that met her needs. Would this really a mercy killing, or just killing off our most vulnerable because we can’t be bothered to help them?
If you read my other comment in this thread it should be clear that I think MAID due to being poor is not acceptable at all. That’s a whole lot of failures all stacking up. It’s wrong and horrible.
Other countries do make these decisions. Usually they leave it to doctors to do in a sort of shadow and pretend it doesn’t happen and look the other way. There are other countries with MAID too.
Yes I know. I said nearly every other country does without it, but it is true that some countries do have similar programs.
If you read my other comment in this thread it should be clear that I think MAID due to being poor is not acceptable at all
In some ways then, you and I have very similar views. I guess one of our main differences is how much confidence we have in the current system to make it so that the poor are not disproportionately suffering as a consequence of MAiD. I don’t trust our current system to do that. Our current healthcare system is already so broken, especially for the mentally ill, so there’s a real danger that MAiD will be seen as a real alternative to proper healthcare. If we were in a place where we already had adequate care for people suffering from mental illnesses, then maybe we would be having a different discussion. But we are not there yet.
except it doesn’t just because maid has been authorized it automatically happens. that decision is as it has always been placed with the one asking for it.
That’s true, but it doesn’t contradict what I’m saying. The person making the decision is the patient, but someone does need to authorize it. And in authorizing it/not authorizing it, that physician is quite literally making a decision about who lives and dies.
I’m not really in the mood to keep going in circles about this.
then lets not circle back around to who is involved and look at the results of not allowing it. the alternative is failed suicide attempts and long term suffering. assuming we can treat or make people jump through hoops or find some kind of grand arbiter just prolongs suffering and helps us look the other way as we force people poorly trained or in immense pain to figure it out themselves or put themselves/others in legal jeopardy in addition to suffering. If I have the right to life as long as it is not at the expense of others than i have the right to end it.
This kind of seems like a better outcome to me though? Like, that’s better than a successful suicide attempt, no?
. . . and long term suffering
It’s not necessarily the case that someone with a mental illness is doomed to a life of extreme suffering. That’s an ablest mindset, and it does disservice to that community. When someone is in their darkest moment and unsure if things are going to get better, we should be giving them hope, not saying “you’re right, you’re doomed, but don’t worry you can kill yourself”.
I’m not entirely sure what you mean about the legal stuff.
Mental Health Illnesses aren’t just “oh I’m depressed, I should kill myself, humph!”.
You’re either very young, or very ill informed of mental health issues. Either way you should take time to learn about some of the different mental health disorders out there and what kind of hell living with some of them can be before speaking with such absolute conviction on a topic you know little to nothing about.
As for your
It’s not necessarily the case that someone with a mental illness is doomed to a life of extreme suffering. That’s an ablest mindset, and it does disservice to that community. When someone is in their darkest moment and unsure if things are going to get better, we should be giving them hope, not saying “you’re right, you’re doomed, but don’t worry you can kill yourself”.
That’s what the medical team is for. They don’t just tell you to kill yourself because you had a bad day. Have you ever interacted with a medical team for a long term health issue for any length of time? It is a slow meticulous process of tests and treatments and elimination of options that can take years. Get your head out of your ass and use your brain for fuck sakes.
That’s what the medical team is for. They don’t just tell you to kill yourself because you had a bad day.
Never suggested they did. But in the end they do end up killing people solely because they have a mental illness (assuming the expansion of MAiD goes through). There’s a reason why the UN considers this state sponsored eugenics. Very few other democratically run countries have done this since eugenics went out of fashion.
failed suicide attempts are rarely clean or lead to deep reflection if they have already gone through the maid process. maid is not some kind of instant approval we do it in an hour situation. failed suicide attempts at this level are messy and tend to involve mutilation and even deeper suffering. You seem to assume i am ableist and completely ignore the fact that there are people who have and will suffer to the very end and want assistance in doing something that is inherently undignified with some dignity while not having to worry about a doctor or a family member being charged with manslaughter for being with them in their last moments. maid gives those people a pathway to self reflect before they make a rash decision. please familiarize yourself with maid and the process before misrepresenting how it works.
failed suicide attempts are rarely clean or lead to deep reflection
So instead of focusing on suicide prevention we should just get our doctors to finish the job for them?
edit: that probably wasn’t the best wording. things have been getting a bit feisty in this thread and i feel the opposition coming in hot so i got defensive. i know you think ive misrepresented how maid works but i dont think i have. granted i havent gone into detail about the vetting and how its a long process etc but i assumed thats because we are all on the same page. there is one thing i havent misrepresented though and thats this: if this expansion goes forward, people will receive medical assistance in dying solely because they have a mental illness. i think this is a dangerous system and ripe for abuse; you dont, and you think its the merciful thing to do. thats fine, clearly we disagree. but if were to keep discussing this here, lets reign it in and keep it from getting nasty (im not saying im innocent in this department; i know im not).
My phrasing provides an accurate description of the situation. Perhaps you think it’s skimming over some nuance. But I’m phrasing it that way to draw attention to what kind of decision it is. I’m not sure if it’s a decision anyone should really be making outside of a wartime triage situation.
I never said it was a decision for just anyone or an easy one. I said it’s a decision that requires context and nuance.
It’s like deciding who gets donated organs, when does a doctor declare brain death, when do you shut off the machines or give a large morphine dose, etc.
They’re hard decisions. They need to be made with care.
This implies that we need to make these decisions. The other decisions you listed are decisions that we need to make. But who receives medical decision in dying is not a decision we need to make. That’s a decision we choose to make.
Deciding not to allow MAID is also deciding who lives and dies, and how. But denying people the right to die can be a cruelty all on its own. This is a decision we need to make. It’s healthcare, it’s quality of life, it’s managing suffering and pain with consent and thoughtfulness.
Deciding not to kill people is not deciding who dies. If this is really a decision we needed to make then it seems odd that nearly every other country in the would gets on fine without making it.
I can see you making a case that it’s merciful, but we also need to acknowledge the potential for abuse that does occur. Like the case article mentioned: the woman who applied for MAiD because she couldnt afford affordable housing accommodations that met her needs. Would this really a mercy killing, or just killing off our most vulnerable because we can’t be bothered to help them?
If you read my other comment in this thread it should be clear that I think MAID due to being poor is not acceptable at all. That’s a whole lot of failures all stacking up. It’s wrong and horrible.
Other countries do make these decisions. Usually they leave it to doctors to do in a sort of shadow and pretend it doesn’t happen and look the other way. There are other countries with MAID too.
Yes I know. I said nearly every other country does without it, but it is true that some countries do have similar programs.
In some ways then, you and I have very similar views. I guess one of our main differences is how much confidence we have in the current system to make it so that the poor are not disproportionately suffering as a consequence of MAiD. I don’t trust our current system to do that. Our current healthcare system is already so broken, especially for the mentally ill, so there’s a real danger that MAiD will be seen as a real alternative to proper healthcare. If we were in a place where we already had adequate care for people suffering from mental illnesses, then maybe we would be having a different discussion. But we are not there yet.
Yeah I agree with you.
We need to fix the issues and we’ve massively widened the gaps in the system.
except it doesn’t just because maid has been authorized it automatically happens. that decision is as it has always been placed with the one asking for it.
That’s true, but it doesn’t contradict what I’m saying. The person making the decision is the patient, but someone does need to authorize it. And in authorizing it/not authorizing it, that physician is quite literally making a decision about who lives and dies.
I’m not really in the mood to keep going in circles about this.
then lets not circle back around to who is involved and look at the results of not allowing it. the alternative is failed suicide attempts and long term suffering. assuming we can treat or make people jump through hoops or find some kind of grand arbiter just prolongs suffering and helps us look the other way as we force people poorly trained or in immense pain to figure it out themselves or put themselves/others in legal jeopardy in addition to suffering. If I have the right to life as long as it is not at the expense of others than i have the right to end it.
This kind of seems like a better outcome to me though? Like, that’s better than a successful suicide attempt, no?
It’s not necessarily the case that someone with a mental illness is doomed to a life of extreme suffering. That’s an ablest mindset, and it does disservice to that community. When someone is in their darkest moment and unsure if things are going to get better, we should be giving them hope, not saying “you’re right, you’re doomed, but don’t worry you can kill yourself”.
I’m not entirely sure what you mean about the legal stuff.
Mental Health Illnesses aren’t just “oh I’m depressed, I should kill myself, humph!”.
You’re either very young, or very ill informed of mental health issues. Either way you should take time to learn about some of the different mental health disorders out there and what kind of hell living with some of them can be before speaking with such absolute conviction on a topic you know little to nothing about.
As for your
That’s what the medical team is for. They don’t just tell you to kill yourself because you had a bad day. Have you ever interacted with a medical team for a long term health issue for any length of time? It is a slow meticulous process of tests and treatments and elimination of options that can take years. Get your head out of your ass and use your brain for fuck sakes.
Never suggested they did. But in the end they do end up killing people solely because they have a mental illness (assuming the expansion of MAiD goes through). There’s a reason why the UN considers this state sponsored eugenics. Very few other democratically run countries have done this since eugenics went out of fashion.
Have you even watched the Genvia session?
Have you even read the article were discussing?
failed suicide attempts are rarely clean or lead to deep reflection if they have already gone through the maid process. maid is not some kind of instant approval we do it in an hour situation. failed suicide attempts at this level are messy and tend to involve mutilation and even deeper suffering. You seem to assume i am ableist and completely ignore the fact that there are people who have and will suffer to the very end and want assistance in doing something that is inherently undignified with some dignity while not having to worry about a doctor or a family member being charged with manslaughter for being with them in their last moments. maid gives those people a pathway to self reflect before they make a rash decision. please familiarize yourself with maid and the process before misrepresenting how it works.
So instead of focusing on suicide prevention we should just get our doctors to finish the job for them?
edit: that probably wasn’t the best wording. things have been getting a bit feisty in this thread and i feel the opposition coming in hot so i got defensive. i know you think ive misrepresented how maid works but i dont think i have. granted i havent gone into detail about the vetting and how its a long process etc but i assumed thats because we are all on the same page. there is one thing i havent misrepresented though and thats this: if this expansion goes forward, people will receive medical assistance in dying solely because they have a mental illness. i think this is a dangerous system and ripe for abuse; you dont, and you think its the merciful thing to do. thats fine, clearly we disagree. but if were to keep discussing this here, lets reign it in and keep it from getting nasty (im not saying im innocent in this department; i know im not).