physician assisted suicide
The student union is now being sued because it continues to insist on banning the peaceful expression of pro-life opinion at Brandon University. BUSU claims that the pro-life message makes some students feel "uncomfortable."
At least 31 Canadians have reached out to their doctor asking for help to die since mid-January. But the number may actually
My friend Chuck wants to kill himself. He is hoping if Bill C-14 does not pass in the Senate by June 6th, he will be able to legally commit suicide with the help of a doctor, thereby ending his constant, debilitating and painful battle with mental illness. Chuck is part of a group of patients who, despite being included in the Supreme Court of Canada's ground-breaking decision in Carter vs. Canada, have been cut out of the Liberal's Bill C-14. Here's why.
The life you have received, the breath that sustains you, the personality that characterizes you are imprinted with beauty, nobility and greatness. The love you have received, the love you have given are always present and make you -- like all of us -- people that are vested with great dignity in all circumstances.
Our elected leaders are hopefully digging deep and trying to figure out what the right path is for Canada on Bill C-14: the Liberal's legislation on medically assisted dying. It's not an easy task. It may be the most important piece of legislation some of these MPs ever vote on. It's remarkable that our country has even gotten to this point in the first place, but we need to take it slow.
Members of Parliament will vote on the federal government's physician-assisted dying legislation when Parliament resumes
One would hope that every patient whose angst expresses itself as a wish to die would have access to palliative care expertise, including a thorough and detailed evaluation of the physical, psychosocial, existential and spiritual drivers motivating their request for hastened death.
If physician-hastened death is part of the continuum of medicine, then we must treat it as such. Like any other new treatment or clinical innovation, it demands careful evaluation and methodological rigor, including fixed eligibility criteria, detailed data collection, objective monitoring of outcomes and tracking of adverse effects; the ability to analyze cumulative data, with incremental ramping up entirely based on preceding trial outcomes. We would insist on no less stringency for anything else.
With the advent of physician-hastened death, there has never been a more pressing moment in history demanding we get our approach to human suffering and palliative care right. Fewer than two per cent of patients will likely choose to have their lives ended; most will want to live out the length of their days in care and comfort. That should not be asking too much. One thing is for certain: the dying are too ill to speak, and the dead will never complain.
The Parliament's Special Joint Committee on Physician-Assisted Death, nevertheless, urged the federal government not to exclude individuals with psychiatric conditions from being considered eligible. Their reasoning comes down to this: Mental suffering is no less profound than physical suffering, so denying individuals with mental illness access to physician hastened death would be discriminatory and a violation of their Charter rights. It's an excellent point, and one worth seriously discussing.