- cross-posted to:
- canada@lemmygrad.ml
- globalnews@lemmy.zip
- canada@lemmy.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
The median age of this group was more than 77. The vast majority – around 96% - had a death deemed "reasonably foreseeable", due to severe medical conditions such as cancer.
This seems like an important detail, there seems to be this narrative that all these depressed 20 somethings are now committing legal s*icide, but the majority of these cases are elderly people with painful terminal conditions.
If the amount share of deaths attributable to say, sepsis, cancer, liver/kidney failure, etc. Are down, then that's actually a good thing.
Elderly folks being able to go out on their own terms when their only other option is extended agony is a correct use of euthanasia
You are right that vast majority of cases are people who are terminal and just want to die with dignity. There's absolutely nothing with that. However, I don't think there is an acceptable percentage of people choosing to end their life because they were suffering due to lack of a social safety net.
No that's true, but I think we should be pointing out that in reality these programs are mostly used by the terminally ill.
CHUDs seem to have this narrative that Commie-anada is killing people as part of some judeo-Bolsheviks plot or something.
We're seeing the same happen in Belgium, the euthanasia laws are pretty open (which is good imo) but it means some people receive euthanasia because they are not getting the treatment they need, not because they fully choose so. Euthanasia is a good thing to have, but in a continuously degrading healthcare system it will turn in a "cost saving policy" like so many other things.
Anyway, access to euthanasia good, liberals bad
It was voted on in the U.K. recently and all the right wing numpty commentators were saying “doctors want to kill people” or something.
You shouldn't use the median figure to come to that conclusion, here is the actual distribution
Show
In terms of what conditions death is "reasonably foreseeable" in, there are some concerning categories. Frailty for instance contributes to a huge number of deaths and there is a lack of research or investment in treatment (only recently even being considered a medical condition as opposed to a normal part of ageing).
It's not clear to me whether diabetes is classified as track 1 (death reasonably foreseeable) or not
I mean, in both these the percentage of people under 55 opting for euthanasia is under 12%. Yes I wouldn't classify someone who's 55 as "elderly", but they're not young either and I can imagine someone with a really painful, likely terminal condition at that age opting for a dignified death. Heck I'm 35 and if I got diagnosed with a type of cancer that has a really low survivability I think I'd opt for spending a year smoking weed on the beach and getting blowjobs then dying dignifiedly.
under 55 opting for euthanasia is under 12%.
Which is a ~1000 people if you have ten thousand applicants, and would make it one of the leading causes of death among younger people
I can imagine someone with a really painful, likely terminal condition at that age opting for a dignified death
Yes, it's very easy to imagine appropriate conditions for euthanasia. The problem is the inappropriate conditions, overlaid by an economic and political system that found it easier to help people kill themselves (in a nice and more robust way to be sure) than expand care and services.
Even if I buy the 4% quote here with 0 questions as to how "reasonably forseeable" is filtered through a medical and a bureaucratic system that still lands you pretty squarely at "We're running a light eugenics program".
While the number of assisted deaths in Canada is growing, the country still falls behind the Netherlands, where euthanasia accounted for around 5% of total deaths last year.
we must close the euthanasia gap
fuckfaces
The third element of the "grievous and irremediable medical condition" eligibility criterion is that the person is experiencing "enduring physical or psychological suffering that is intolerable to them and that cannot be relieved under conditions that they consider acceptable."
Show
Not convinced of the validity of the last one on the list (there are more categories in the report, I've snipped for convenience)
CW: suicide
I'm pretty sure I've ticked one or more of these boxes when I've been at my most suicidal, and I don't even suffer from chronic pain or some other really difficult condition. I got mental care though, instead of being recommended to just die (a proposal I would've gladly taken).
Whoever recommends euthanasia to someone who feels they're a burden or they're in emotional distress that could be treated differently is a monster.
