Canada Legalizes Physician-Assisted Dying

[hockey.modern]

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-w...ntent=20160618

The Canadian government introduced the bill in April and it passed a final Senate vote Friday. It includes strict criteria that patients must meet to obtain a doctor's help in dying. As we have reported, a patient must:

"Be eligible for government-funded health care (a requirement limiting assisted suicides to Canadians and permanent residents, to prevent suicide tourism)."

"Be a mentally competent adult 18 or older."

"Have a serious and incurable disease, illness or disability."

"Be in an 'advanced state of irreversible decline,' with enduring and intolerable suffering."

As a safeguard, the law also requires that two independent witnesses be present when the patient signs a request for a doctor-assisted death.

[Thor]

Hoping this passes soon in Iceland, my sister is in very bad shape struggling to live and it would be her wish to pass peacefully, instead she has to wait for the agonizing death as her ability to swallow goes and she chokes to death.

My father who passed last year also wished for the same as his alzheimers worsened, he did not want to live past a point where he lived for a few years more becoming less and less of who he was, its time societies give those we love the right to pass peacefully under their own terms.

I know its a difficult issue, and we have to be careful, but there is no question this will become a law in all modern societies, and I am very proud of Canada for doing this.

[T@T]

Sorry to hear that Thor, nobody should suffer. Are the trying to pass this act in Iceland now or is it just talk?

[Thor]

Well our humanist group has been lobbying hard, but the current government which is mostly conservatives have had no interest in tackling it. A recent poll showed about 70% support for such a law, and we have elections soon which parties which are supportive of it are likely to bring it up for legislation, or at least get the ball rolling.

Its just a matter of time, hopefully sooner than later for the countless people who would take this option, our elderly homes are full of people suffering badly.

[Trojan97]

Originally Posted by Thor

Hoping this passes soon in Iceland, my sister is in very bad shape struggling to live and it would be her wish to pass peacefully, instead she has to wait for the agonizing death as her ability to swallow goes and she chokes to death.

My father who passed last year also wished for the same as his alzheimers worsened, he did not want to live past a point where he lived for a few years more becoming less and less of who he was, its time societies give those we love the right to pass peacefully under their own terms.

I know its a difficult issue, and we have to be careful, but there is no question this will become a law in all modern societies, and I am very proud of Canada for doing this.

My sympathies to you Thor on the state of your sister.

One of the issues with the current bill as it stands is that the wording does not allow for those with Alzheimers/dementia to do much about it. In the early stages, you wouldn't meet the current criteria for assisted suicide as there is no immediate threat of death or suffering. By the point it gets to that point, the person is no longer of a sound mind to make the call.

As with anything else, I assume we will see many alterations and amendments in the coming years. The ability to establish directives in the early stages of diagnosis is no doubt something that will come in the years ahead. Sad for those who will no doubt needlessly suffer in the meantime prior to these inevitable changes being made.

[calgarygeologist]

I'm disappointed that the Senate caved to the recent amendment making access more restrictive (I believe it was the "reasonably foreseeable" part.) The Senate wanted access much more open which is what I would have preferred as well. I think this is a great step though. I'm sure there will be much legal debate about it though.

[CliffFletcher]

I think most Canadians agree that people should be able to end their own lives if their health is in terminal decline. The problem is that we need to ensure our laws cannot be exploited by the self-serving and malicious. Not all children love their aging parents, and not everyone loves their sick spouses - especially when money is involved.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

The only two questions I have are, what constitutes a "serious" and incurable disease (that is, what qualifies as "serious"); and second, what does an 'advanced state of irreversible decline' mean?

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

The only two questions I have are, what constitutes a "serious" and incurable disease (that is, what qualifies as "serious"); and second, what does an 'advanced state of irreversible decline' mean?

These will always be nebulous and grey. It's less slippery slope and more finding the place on the spectrum for "do less harm".

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

You need some definition or the Courts will make one for you. If that's what you want, fine, but who knows what it'll end up being. Technically, half the country could end up being eligible.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

You need some definition or the Courts will make one for you. If that's what you want, fine, but who knows what it'll end up being. Technically, half the country could end up being eligible.

I'm sure they expect the courts to make one for them.


I support this generally as long as it's not exploited. I think Cliff nailed it.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I think most Canadians agree that people should be able to end their own lives if their health is in terminal decline. The problem is that we need to ensure our laws cannot be exploited by the self-serving and malicious. Not all children love their aging parents, and not everyone loves their sick spouses - especially when money is involved.

This. I'm a proponent of this type of legislation but with a strict, close eye on it.

In my line of work I have learned irrefutably that inheritances make people batcrap crazy and they really should not be the ones that any say in this.

[CroFlames]

What if someone is of totally sound mind and body - no disease - and they still want to go through with it. Is there a provision in there for them?

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

What if someone is of totally sound mind and body - no disease - and they still want to go through with it. Is there a provision in there for them?

No. They have to pursue a conventional method of suicide.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

What if someone is of totally sound mind and body - no disease - and they still want to go through with it. Is there a provision in there for them?

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

No. They have to pursue a conventional method of suicide.

[Thor]

Originally Posted by Trojan97

My sympathies to you Thor on the state of your sister.

One of the issues with the current bill as it stands is that the wording does not allow for those with Alzheimers/dementia to do much about it. In the early stages, you wouldn't meet the current criteria for assisted suicide as there is no immediate threat of death or suffering. By the point it gets to that point, the person is no longer of a sound mind to make the call.

As with anything else, I assume we will see many alterations and amendments in the coming years. The ability to establish directives in the early stages of diagnosis is no doubt something that will come in the years ahead. Sad for those who will no doubt needlessly suffer in the meantime prior to these inevitable changes being made.

Yeah we are specifically lobbying for people of sound mind to have their wishes with Alzheimers to when they are early on ask for a point where they would no longer wish to continue. That is not an easy thing to pinpoint with the disease but our father for example stated he did not want to live if he was unable to read books, the paper, hold conversations with people, and in his most ardent point, be at a point where he could no longer recognize family or being confused and needing extra care beyond what a normal old folks home person required.

He reached that point about 12 months before his death, and was put in a part of the home which was for people very far gone, he was miserable, confused, even started some fires in the elevator because he was convinced people were stealing things from his room. It was a rough time for him.

My sister is now skin and bones, can not eat food that is not soup, or liquid, barely ever leaves her bed and that is just to smoke which she has dramatically decreased, and her only pleasure is drinking some vodka which the doctors and her children don't want her doing, but at this point with all that she is suffering its hard to take that away from her too. She can't speak, hasn't been able to for 3 years now, can barely move, needs help getting in and out of bed in to her electric wheelchair.

We siblings talked about if we were in her situation we would have ended our life a year or two ago, and its heartbreaking knowing she wants to go in peace but no one can do anything about it without breaking the law. The suffering on her children having to see her waste away like that is devastating.

[Jacks]

Well that didnt take long.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle30623211/
Supreme Court will overturn the law. Personally I think if you are badly suffering with no cure you shouldn't have to endure decades of pain and anguish.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Jacks

Well that didnt take long.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle30623211/
Supreme Court will overturn the law. Personally I think if you are badly suffering with no cure you shouldn't have to endure decades of pain and anguish.

That's not at all what that article says.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by Jacks

Well that didnt take long.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle30623211/
Supreme Court will overturn the law. Personally I think if you are badly suffering with no cure you shouldn't have to endure decades of pain and anguish.

Did you post the wrong article? Don't see anything about the Supreme Court over turning the law.