yes which is how the kinder euthanasia program initially got off the ground. To start with it was about people who were chronically ill requesting to die, then the parents of chronically ill children could request it, then people could decide for people deemed mentally disabled on their behalf that they should die, then things snowballed rapidly and disabled people started being sent to gas chambers.
I am deeply uncomfortable with advocacy asking for that first step because death is then often seen as a cheaper alternative to treatment. Like that Canadian woman who was euthanised because she couldn't afford disabled accessible housing.
As a disabled person I have deep concerns that the begining of such policies could ultimately result in a threat to my life which the history of their adoption bears out
I agree that those possibilities are horrible, but this slippery slope argument just doesn’t really work. It just doesn’t address that initial point of, what do you do then with those terminally ill suffering people? There is no treatment, and any treatment you can use will only prolong the suffering. Many people incur over 70% of the medical costs over the course of their entire life in their final month alive, all to die a humiliating horrible death because doctors are legally not allowed to let the person request to be humanely put out of their misery.
I never said anything about the person paying for the healthcare. But that healthcare still has costs, it’s not free, if a person does not desire pointless, humiliating, and often times dangerous “treatments” to try and extend their life by a few days, why should they be forced to?
Again, the person cannot be “killed” because the doctors so desire. The person should have the ability to request that, of their own free will. Because ok, let’s say you’ve sedated them, what’s the difference? They’re not going to spring to life magically, and their family still had to watch them wither away and die and horrible death.
As the cases in Canada prove, it is incredibly easy to coerce desperate people into suicide. That's why, despite completely agreeing with you in theory of the euthanasia, i am absolutely opposed to any implementation of it in practice in capitalism.
I agree, however this is a topic that capitalism has corrupted to almost no fault of euthanasia itself. I’m mostly approaching this from a socialist lens without the pressure of a capitalist profit motive, or supremacist eugenics pressure.
Ok, but we live under capitalism right now. We aren't in the socialist utopia where only people suffering painful terminal diseases choose to end their lives. We have people that choose death because their disability payments aren't enough to cover a halfway decent place to live, let alone all of their other (often higher) expenses. Stop being naive and living in theoryland, you cannot have a program like MAID without the pressures of capitalism, the profit motive, or supremacist eugenics pressures.
I’ll respond when you stop strawmanning my argument. Why do you keep putting words in my mouth about how I love MAID or Canada? Where did I ever bring up the Canadian system or praise it? You’re the only one who brought it up.
If your entire argument revolves around “Canada and capitalist corruption bad therefore insert thing bad”, then you are not engaging in good faith.
Do you think subsidized housing is bad and shouldn’t be advocated for because bad faith actors and capitalists have used it to take advantage of destitute people while getting guaranteed paychecks from the government?
Also theoryland? What the hell do you think theory is?
I agree in theory that terminally ill people should be allowed to end their lives with dignity, but seeing how it's being implemented in Canada has made me a staunch opponent of it under the current system. On top of MAID being open to those that are essentially just suffering from poverty, they're aiming to open it up to the mentally ill in 2024, and there are groups pushing for it to be open to "mature minors" as well. I don't think we should be focusing on expanding the MAID program until we're able to provide a decent life (food, housing, medical care, accommodations for disabilities, education, etc) to our neglected people before offering suicide.
I'm going to be a little Anecdote Andy here, but as someone who suffers from depression and has had suicidal thoughts in the past, the idea that I would qualify for euthanasia and that it would be an option terrifies me. In my darkest moments in the past I very well may have taken that option, at a time when I was not in my right mind and it would have been at the very least irresponsible to allow me to make a life-ending decision in that state of mind. This would be a huge barrier to having an open and honest discussion with my healthcare providers if I have it in the back of my mind that suicide through them is an option.
I agree the Canadian system is extremely disgusting, and that is not what I’m advocating for here at all.
And while I don’t want to demean you, but depression is not a terminal illness and should not qualify for euthanasia. There are treatments that work, and meaningful ways to make change. Someone with terminal AIDS, cancer, or someone simply at the end of their lives doesn’t have those options.
Please read the section on eligibility of people suffering solely from mental illness and get back to me thx. This is what people mean when they say MAID is going to be applied to people that it in no way should be.
My bad, meant “should not”, thanks for catching that.
But again, why do you think that I for some reason love MAID. How is that at all relevant to the conversation. Why do you think MAID defines the euthanasia advocacy argument? Most advocates were disgusted when Canada rolled it out.
yes which is how the kinder euthanasia program initially got off the ground. To start with it was about people who were chronically ill requesting to die, then the parents of chronically ill children could request it, then people could decide for people deemed mentally disabled on their behalf that they should die, then things snowballed rapidly and disabled people started being sent to gas chambers.
I am deeply uncomfortable with advocacy asking for that first step because death is then often seen as a cheaper alternative to treatment. Like that Canadian woman who was euthanised because she couldn't afford disabled accessible housing.
As a disabled person I have deep concerns that the begining of such policies could ultimately result in a threat to my life which the history of their adoption bears out
I agree that those possibilities are horrible, but this slippery slope argument just doesn’t really work. It just doesn’t address that initial point of, what do you do then with those terminally ill suffering people? There is no treatment, and any treatment you can use will only prolong the suffering. Many people incur over 70% of the medical costs over the course of their entire life in their final month alive, all to die a humiliating horrible death because doctors are legally not allowed to let the person request to be humanely put out of their misery.
Well for starters we should have single payer healthcare so dying is free
I don't have an easy answer about them living in pain, heavy sedation might help but I have no trust in a medical system that would kill them
I never said anything about the person paying for the healthcare. But that healthcare still has costs, it’s not free, if a person does not desire pointless, humiliating, and often times dangerous “treatments” to try and extend their life by a few days, why should they be forced to?
Again, the person cannot be “killed” because the doctors so desire. The person should have the ability to request that, of their own free will. Because ok, let’s say you’ve sedated them, what’s the difference? They’re not going to spring to life magically, and their family still had to watch them wither away and die and horrible death.
As the cases in Canada prove, it is incredibly easy to coerce desperate people into suicide. That's why, despite completely agreeing with you in theory of the euthanasia, i am absolutely opposed to any implementation of it in practice in capitalism.
I agree, however this is a topic that capitalism has corrupted to almost no fault of euthanasia itself. I’m mostly approaching this from a socialist lens without the pressure of a capitalist profit motive, or supremacist eugenics pressure.
Ok, but we live under capitalism right now. We aren't in the socialist utopia where only people suffering painful terminal diseases choose to end their lives. We have people that choose death because their disability payments aren't enough to cover a halfway decent place to live, let alone all of their other (often higher) expenses. Stop being naive and living in theoryland, you cannot have a program like MAID without the pressures of capitalism, the profit motive, or supremacist eugenics pressures.
For fucks sake, Canada has been forcibly sterilizing indigenous women for decades, with the most recent case I can find with a cursory search in 2019. Is this a country you would trust with euthanasia?
I’ll respond when you stop strawmanning my argument. Why do you keep putting words in my mouth about how I love MAID or Canada? Where did I ever bring up the Canadian system or praise it? You’re the only one who brought it up.
If your entire argument revolves around “Canada and capitalist corruption bad therefore insert thing bad”, then you are not engaging in good faith.
Do you think subsidized housing is bad and shouldn’t be advocated for because bad faith actors and capitalists have used it to take advantage of destitute people while getting guaranteed paychecks from the government?
Also theoryland? What the hell do you think theory is?
I agree in theory that terminally ill people should be allowed to end their lives with dignity, but seeing how it's being implemented in Canada has made me a staunch opponent of it under the current system. On top of MAID being open to those that are essentially just suffering from poverty, they're aiming to open it up to the mentally ill in 2024, and there are groups pushing for it to be open to "mature minors" as well. I don't think we should be focusing on expanding the MAID program until we're able to provide a decent life (food, housing, medical care, accommodations for disabilities, education, etc) to our neglected people before offering suicide.
I'm going to be a little Anecdote Andy here, but as someone who suffers from depression and has had suicidal thoughts in the past, the idea that I would qualify for euthanasia and that it would be an option terrifies me. In my darkest moments in the past I very well may have taken that option, at a time when I was not in my right mind and it would have been at the very least irresponsible to allow me to make a life-ending decision in that state of mind. This would be a huge barrier to having an open and honest discussion with my healthcare providers if I have it in the back of my mind that suicide through them is an option.
I agree the Canadian system is extremely disgusting, and that is not what I’m advocating for here at all.
And while I don’t want to demean you, but depression is not a terminal illness and should not qualify for euthanasia. There are treatments that work, and meaningful ways to make change. Someone with terminal AIDS, cancer, or someone simply at the end of their lives doesn’t have those options.
Just going to assume this is a typo and you meant to say "should not qualify for euthanasia"
Yea, mental illness shouldn't qualify, but that doesn't stop the government from wanting to expand maid to include it
Please read the section on eligibility of people suffering solely from mental illness and get back to me thx. This is what people mean when they say MAID is going to be applied to people that it in no way should be.
My bad, meant “should not”, thanks for catching that.
But again, why do you think that I for some reason love MAID. How is that at all relevant to the conversation. Why do you think MAID defines the euthanasia advocacy argument? Most advocates were disgusted when Canada rolled it out.
Again, you’re moving the conversation.