Alberta Politics & Government Thread 4.0

[Captain Otto]

Originally Posted by DJones

From my perspective MAID isn't for terminal illnesses. MAID is for when you aren't going to die but your quality of life is in the ####ter.

Do not like that change.

I'd guess you've never had a loved one suffer from a terminal illness.

As a guy who has and having seen the benefits of MAID first hand, it's none of your god damn business!

[Harry Lime]

Pretty much every argument against maid is driven by religious ...people. Christian, Islam, Hindu, ...all have serious after life issues to deal with. As far as I know, shinto is cool.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

What I don’t understand is why you can’t pre approve your power of attorney to make the decision or list deceases you would want Maid to be enacted when you are competent

Power of Attorney relates to your property.

Personal Directives in Alberta do not currently allow a person to say they want MAID in the future.

[DJones]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

I'd guess you've never had a loved one suffer from a terminal illness.

As a guy who has and having seen the benefits of MAID first hand, it's none of your god damn business!

Dead either way though. Just hastening it.

Removing the option from people that are looking at decades of suffering is worse.

[woob]

Originally Posted by DJones

From my perspective MAID isn't for terminal illnesses. MAID is for when you aren't going to die but your quality of life is in the ####ter.

Do not like that change.

Ideally, MAID is for both. But I suspect you know this.

I also think MAID should be for mental illness. Who are we to decide if a person should be able to shuffle off this mortal coil in a dignified manner, instead of hanging themselves from their basement rafters.

BUT - We should also be doing a MUCH better job on the mental health front in the way of health supports, income supports, etc.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

I'd guess you've never had a loved one suffer from a terminal illness.

As a guy who has and having seen the benefits of MAID first hand, it's none of your god damn business!

I was pretty surprised the day a nurse called me and told me that my aunt had decided to go ahead with MAID as I really didn't know a lot about it or think it was a possibility. She probably could have lived for a few more months in the hospice but her condition was getting worse and worse as the cancer spread and she was having a miserable time of it. I held her hand as she received the injections right up to being pronounced dead and was happy to see her go out on her own terms. That last day she truly was at piece and ready to go and I don't think it's anyone else's business to interfere and make her suffer more than she had to.

[Otto-matic]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I was pretty surprised the day a nurse called me and told me that my aunt had decided to go ahead with MAID as I really didn't know a lot about it or think it was a possibility. She probably could have lived for a few more months in the hospice but her condition was getting worse and worse as the cancer spread and she was having a miserable time of it. I held her hand as she received the injections right up to being pronounced dead and was happy to see her go out on her own terms. That last day she truly was at piece and ready to go and I don't think it's anyone else's business to interfere and make her suffer more than she had to.

I wish my dad had that option to get MAID when his condition got to the point his quality of life was gone. Seeing him suffer at the end wasn't the way he'd want us to remember him by.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by DJones

From my perspective MAID isn't for terminal illnesses. MAID is for when you aren't going to die but your quality of life is in the ####ter.

Do not like that change.

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

I'd guess you've never had a loved one suffer from a terminal illness.

As a guy who has and having seen the benefits of MAID first hand, it's none of your god damn business!

Originally Posted by DJones

Dead either way though. Just hastening it.

Removing the option from people that are looking at decades of suffering is worse.

Originally Posted by woob

Ideally, MAID is for both. But I suspect you know this.

I also think MAID should be for mental illness. Who are we to decide if a person should be able to shuffle off this mortal coil in a dignified manner, instead of hanging themselves from their basement rafters.

BUT - We should also be doing a MUCH better job on the mental health front in the way of health supports, income supports, etc.

I suspect -- based off of DJones' response to Captain Otto -- you're all actually in agreement with each other, but DJones' neglecting to include the word 'just' in the first sentence in his first post is doing a lot of heavy lifting (to say nothing of his being generally disagreeable in this thread).

"From my perspective MAID isn't just for terminal illnesses" probably aligns way closer. I'm with woob; if people don't want to use Track 2 MAiD, they don't have to, and removing the option for them to choose for themselves feels like a step in the wrong direction. And at the same time, better mental health supports should also be prioritized.

As an aside, anyone else automatically ignore something the moment they break out the phrase "Do better" in isolation, like in a title? Like "prepare to be condescended to!".

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by troutman

Power of Attorney relates to your property.

Personal Directives in Alberta do not currently allow a person to say they want MAID in the future.

Sorry I know legally why - I mean “why” as in it’s stupid 😏

[terryclancy]

I suspect Smith’s sudden interest in denying people the right to make MAID decisions relates to David Parker screaming “jump” and Marlaina saying “how high?”

[BigThief]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

That last day she truly was at piece and ready to go and I don't think it's anyone else's business to interfere and make her suffer more than she had to.

You're absolutely right and I'm glad she got to go out how she wanted. A little concerned of the process however, I hope she wasn't in too many peices.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Slava

This was the experience for my mother. I know that when she was competent she wouldn't have chosen MAID, and that idea would be too hard for her to contemplate. But, when things went downhill for her, I have no doubt that she would've wanted MAID if she had been able to make that decision.

I don't know what the solution is there. It might be more humane, but at the same time you have people who would try to take advantage of this, if it were too readily available.

Those who have only the best intentions for their family may be frustrated at the legal challenges involved in these sorts of issues. But once money is involved (ie inheritance), some people have different motivations. And our laws have to take that into account. If it was easy to secure MAID for parents/grandparents who suffer from dementia, there would absolutely be people who used it to get their hands on homes and savings.

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

Pretty much every argument against maid is driven by religious ...people. Christian, Islam, Hindu...

Not true. There are legitimate ethical and health care issues involved. Not just the inheritance-greed I mentioned above, but how to handle mental health and capacity to make decisions, or reach medical consensus on whether a condition is treatable or not. A case involving an 80 year old with terminal cancer is easy. A case involving a 20 year old suffering from depression or the side-effects of medication is not so easy.

There's also the issue how easy it can be to get around safeguards. Some countries limit the number of doctor referrals you can seek, while Canada doesn't. Which creates problems like the one cited in this story. A woman suffering from side-effects from medication was turned down for MAID by several doctors who judged her condition would resolve itself. So she sought out a MAID advocate who rarely says no, and only court intervention by her desperate husband prevented the procedure.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...h-judge-ruling

[woob]

Wow. So her common law partner requests an injunction to prevent her from accessing MAID and utilizing a doctor who will grant her MAID request.

"Coval acknowledged the injunction “is a severe intrusion” into the woman’s personal and medical autonomy."

Yeah, no kidding. Sure her condition may be remediable "relatively quickly" but it could also be MONTHS of her having to live with whatever terrors she's living with.

This goes back to my point about who are we to choose whether a person wants to use MAID instead of other less diginified means. Really, we should just approve MAID capsules.

Also lol at desparate husband. Is that true love? Making your partner suffer because her condition may get better?

[TheIronMaiden]

UCP the champions of bodily autonomy.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by woob

Really, we should just approve MAID capsules.

To anyone? Really?

Suicide is not illegal. What's at issue is to what extent the state and our health care system should facilitate suicide.

Some context: For every suicide death, there are an estimated 25-30 unsuccessful attempts. Fewer than 10 per cent of people who make an unsuccessful suicide attempt go on to die by suicide.

If we make it easy for anyone to reliably and painlessly kill themself, the number of Canadians who die of suicide would increase dramatically, perhaps 10-fold. Would that be a good outcome, in your mind?

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Those who have only the best intentions for their family may be frustrated at the legal challenges involved in these sorts of issues. But once money is involved (ie inheritance), some people have different motivations. And our laws have to take that into account. If it was easy to secure MAID for parents/grandparents who suffer from dementia, there would absolutely be people who used it to get their hands on homes and savings.



Not true. There are legitimate ethical and health care issues involved. Not just the inheritance-greed I mentioned above, but how to handle mental health and capacity to make decisions, or reach medical consensus on whether a condition is treatable or not. A case involving an 80 year old with terminal cancer is easy. A case involving a 20 year old suffering from depression or the side-effects of medication is not so easy.

There's also the issue how easy it can be to get around safeguards. Some countries limit the number of doctor referrals you can seek, while Canada doesn't. Which creates problems like the one cited in this story. A woman suffering from side-effects from medication was turned down for MAID by several doctors who judged her condition would resolve itself. So she sought out a MAID advocate who rarely says no, and only court intervention by her desperate husband prevented the procedure.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...h-judge-ruling

Thing is, the MAID process is not easy and has plenty of safeguards. This government action removes the choice entirely, rather than making incremental improvements, if those improvements can be identified. Dementia seems to me to be the clearest case of a mental condition that destroys quality of life and isn’t going to get better. I feel those suffering should have that option while they are still capable of choosing. This is the choice my dad made, and I am thankful to the system and the doctors that helped make that happen.

[DJones]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

I suspect -- based off of DJones' response to Captain Otto -- you're all actually in agreement with each other, but DJones' neglecting to include the word 'just' in the first sentence in his first post is doing a lot of heavy lifting (to say nothing of his being generally disagreeable in this thread).

"From my perspective MAID isn't just for terminal illnesses" probably aligns way closer. I'm with woob; if people don't want to use Track 2 MAiD, they don't have to, and removing the option for them to choose for themselves feels like a step in the wrong direction. And at the same time, better mental health supports should also be prioritized.

As an aside, anyone else automatically ignore something the moment they break out the phrase "Do better" in isolation, like in a title? Like "prepare to be condescended to!".

If I'm terminal, just give me the drugs and I'll figure it out. Don't need a government form for that haha. If I only had 12 months I could deal with a lot of pain.

MAIDs value is when you are in chronic pain/brain damage/ASL/paralyzed and you just know its going to get worse for decades. Official opt out form becomes more useful. Especially if you could sign it pre-emptively like a DNR.

[woob]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

To anyone? Really?

Suicide is not illegal. What's at issue is to what extent the state and our health care system should facilitate suicide.

Some context: For every suicide death, there are an estimated 25-30 unsuccessful attempts. Fewer than 10 per cent of people who make an unsuccessful suicide attempt go on to die by suicide.

If we make it easy for anyone to reliably and painlessly kill themself, the number of Canadians who die of suicide would increase dramatically, perhaps 10-fold. Would that be a good outcome, in your mind?

I think it's safe to say that a high percentage of people who get to the point of attempting suicide, aren't doing so in a haphazard choice of the day manner.

Perhaps, if it did increase 10 fold, then that would be a catalyst to make significant changes to support structures for people enduring relentless mental health issues and the like. But in typical fashion we're focusing on "this will make it too easy to die" rather than why are these people choosing this option?

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by DJones

If I'm terminal, just give me the drugs and I'll figure it out. Don't need a government form for that haha. If I only had 12 months I could deal with a lot of pain.

[woob]

Is that a "just pull yourself up by the bootstraps" response to terminal diagnosis?