Unanimous ruling by Supreme Court on doctor assisted suicide

[SLM]

Anyone with knowledge how your SCOC weighs on this. I read in the article it is allowing Parliament 12 month to enact laws. Isn't it already law since the SCOC voted on it? What further action needs to be taken?

And if Parliament does nothing, then there will be no laws regulating anything to do with doctor assisted suicide, much the same as what has happened with abortion. (And no, I don't want to open up an abortion debate, that's just an example.)

The court ruled that an outright ban is unconstitutional but there is a lot of room in between an outright ban and having no regulations in place. I don't think anybody, including myself and I'm a big proponent of choice in end of life care, really wants everybody to just make up their own rules as they go. There is a definite grey area where exploitation can run rampant, no one wants to see that happening. Not doctors, not patients.

 

[skookumchuck]

"Ever watched a relative slowly die in agony? I have. My grandmother went out that way and she wanted this option. If it were legal I would have done it myself. Instead it was a long, drawn out and painful affair for her and everybody else around her. If people dont want to be the 'helpers', fine, dont. Those who are willing should be able to without risking losing their career and freedom. You can call it murder if you like. When its the dying person's choice I dont care what its called - its helping them."

Was she denied pain reducing drugs? My mother died of cancer in 1974. Over the last while she was so drugged up she had no pain, so do not try to BS me about what happens.
People want to wait until they cannot, then have someone do it for them. There is an occasional patient who requires assistance, it should not be a right but a doctors decision.

 

[MHz]

How hard is it to open some tuna and go for a walk in cougar country, just don't get saved that might be like a lot worse.

 

[SLM]

Anyone with knowledge how your SCOC weighs on this. I read in the article it is allowing Parliament 12 month to enact laws. Isn't it already law since the SCOC voted on it? What further action needs to be taken?

And if Parliament does nothing, then there will be no laws regulating anything to do with doctor assisted suicide, much the same as what has happened with abortion. (And no, I don't want to open up an abortion debate, that's just an example.)

The court ruled that an outright ban is unconstitutional but there is a lot of room in between an outright ban and having no regulations in place. I don't think anybody, including myself and I'm a big proponent of choice in end of life care, really wants everybody to just make up their own rules as they go. There is a definite grey area where exploitation can run rampant, no one wants to see that happening. Not doctors, not patients.

Just came across this pertinent article that illustrates my point.

Canadian MDs assessing SCC ruling on assisted death | CTV News

 

[WLDB]

Was she denied pain reducing drugs?

No, it was reduced but it was not eliminated. She was also just lying there waiting for death. A rather sad existence. She would have rather have just gotten it over with. In that position i probably would have too.

My mother died of cancer in 1974. Over the last while she was so drugged up she had no pain, so do not try to BS me about what happens.

Its not BS, it is what happens.

People want to wait until they cannot, then have someone do it for them.

If they are able to do it themselves chances are their life is still worth living for them. Also, you cant really guarantee success. People f*ck up suicide attempts all the time. Even shooting yourself in the head can fail. Succeed or fail it would be a rather traumatic thing for a friend or relative to walk in and find with moth methods. With a doctor who knows exactly what it takes and a simple injection or pill can make things go a lot smoother both for the dying person and their family.

There is an occasional patient who requires assistance, it should not be a right but a doctors decision.

Sure, I do not think doctors who do not want to participate should be forced to. Many wont want to, but there will be a fair number ready and willing. Let those ones do so.

 

[MHz]

The standard is still suicide via two shots to the back of the head, yes? Any particular window work for you, a broken vessel gives a **** if there are 2 or 22 pieces.

 

[JLM]

I think there is good reason for cautious optimism here. Regulated properly many people will benefit. However we have to be aware that there will be cases of untimely deaths, just as we hear of screwups in strictly regulated hospitals on a fairly regular basis. Each person will have to be vigilant in protecting themselves, I just hope I don't get to the point of having an unsound mind. (Worse than what it is)

 

[WLDB]

The standard is still suicide via two shots to the back of the head, yes? Any particular window work for you, a broken vessel gives a **** if there are 2 or 22 pieces.

The vessel doesnt. Those who have to clean up the mess tend to.

 

[MHz]

Who?

 

[JLM]

The standard is still suicide via two shots to the back of the head, yes? Any particular window work for you, a broken vessel gives a **** if there are 2 or 22 pieces.

Are you following the correct "chapter" here?

 

[WLDB]

I just hope I don't get to the point of having an unsound mind. (Worse than what it is)

That is something Id fear moreso than physical illnesses. Not because someone might want to take me out, but the opposite. Living like that for years does not appeal to me. Id rather go out with my mind more or less intact.

 

[MHz]

I think there is good reason for cautious optimism here. Regulated properly many people will benefit. However we have to be aware that there will be cases of untimely deaths, just as we hear of screwups in strictly regulated hospitals on a fairly regular basis. Each person will have to be vigilant in protecting themselves, I just hope I don't get to the point of having an unsound mind. (Worse than what it is)

I'm on board, where do I but the sign that says 'Welcome to the swamp, road may end at anytime, drive safely.' We do such stipid things as throwing a 4x4 into low range if it has such a lever when the road does **** like that on you. The mission is 'don't spill your drink'. Even town cars benefit from taking off traction control when the roads are bad. (opposite of the ad) When you step on the gas a lot you want the car to go ahead a lot, with traction control on the engines idles down instead of speeding up, welcome to being stuck101.

 

[Northboy]

Look at the Netherlands. Doctor Assisted Suicide will INEVITABLY lead to intentional murder of the comatose, the aged, the seriously disabled... those that expensive to maintain, inconvenient and without a voice. In Belgium now they murder children.. whose life lacks 'quality'

This is my concern as well. Give it a generation and then the public is debating the benefits of economic euthanasia, killing off the unproductive et al becomes vogue. We already bow to the "god" known as money too much.

 

[DaSleeper]

Are you following the correct "chapter" here?

I don't think he's even on the same planet right now...

 

[mentalfloss]

Canada Supreme Court Death With Dignity Ruling Could Spur U.S. Action

 

[Walter]

Above all, do no harm. Most doctors won't touch this. Clinics will be set up I guess, just like they do for abortions. A walk-in clinic but not a walk-out clinic.

We could have 'Suicide Games' similar to 'Hunger Games' except the winner gets killed, too. CBC would broadcast it and it could replace HNIC.

 

[waldo]

This is my concern as well. Give it a generation and then the public is debating the benefits of economic euthanasia, killing off the unproductive et al becomes vogue. We already bow to the "god" known as money too much.

related Netherlands/Belgium information is highly suspect. In an earlier post I made reference to a paper that acts as a source for much of the false/misinformation concerning Netherlands/Belgium... and I linked to a paper that debunks that source. I asked the member you're replying to if he was aware of any other or more current information/data, and if so, it would be useful to realize the source(s).

 

[taxslave]

Worthless opinion? And your opinion is what? Liberal perhaps. I actually thought you had some sense.

The alternative is to be forced to become a science experiment. Had the court ruled the other way it would probably have made DNR orders illegal.

 

[Liberalman]

Anyone with knowledge how your SCOC weighs on this. I read in the article it is allowing Parliament 12 month to enact laws. Isn't it already law since the SCOC voted on it? What further action needs to be taken?

The province of Quebec has it and the Supreme Court of Canada supports it but in the Canadian constitution has a "Notwithstanding Clause" that would allow a province to opt out of it and keep the doctor assisted suicide illegal.

 

[MHz]

Are you following the correct "chapter" here?

If suicide is still the topic I am, not all suicides reported in the news are suicides, that is the only point that comment was supporting. (and nobody investigates those cases)
I have to assume 'dr assisted, means painless and no recovery as a gimp. (which happens in a failed attempt) I'm quite sure you could find enough material to write a book on how to do yourself in if you really wanted to.
Granted being messed up before you have a living will in place is where the battle line is drawn.