Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Canada’s MAiD law currently allows suicide facilitation for persons with disabilities and is on track to expand in March 2023 to those living with mental illness.
This is the topic of the discussion.
You write a lot, but manage to avoid saying anything about the topic.
You write a lot, but manage to avoid saying anything about the topic.
Again Post No. 2 seems sufficient. What I have had to say is refute your attempts, for whatever hidden reason you may have, since you claim it is not political, at trying to make people believe that this is some dastardly government plot to euthanize the mentally ill when in fact it is exactly the opposite.
You want me to say something about the actual topic? OK. Good. I am glad Canada is taking all this time and study to try to determine what would qualify a mentally ill person to be considered competent to make the decision to proceed with MAID. It protects the mentally ill who are suicidal but who could be treated from themselves.
You want me to say something about the actual topic? OK. Good. I am glad Canada is taking all this time and study to try to determine what would qualify a mentally ill person to be considered competent to make the decision to proceed with MAID. It protects the mentally ill who are suicidal but who could be treated from themselves.
Finally, after all your off-topic output of the last pages, you have something to say to the actual topic. Never too late...
I will tell you my opinion on what qualifies a mentally ill person to decide on life and death matters. You know what? Nothing. Those unpatriotic Canadians explain very well why:
Quote:
Canadian bioethicist Udo Schuklenk dismisses concerns that suffering caused by societal injustice could lead to choosing death. Schuklenk claims that limiting MAiD for psycho-social suffering “would translate into removing the agency of [decision-capable] patients without offering them a way out of their predicament.”
Schuklenk speaks of agency but shows no consideration for how societal structures, such as governments, create and sustain the predicaments that can make death an attractive choice for those who would have instead benefitted from greater resources and care.
Dr. Jeff Kirby, a member of the expert panel on MAiD for mental illness, writes that he had to resign before the report was published as the recommendations were “soft” and “inadequate.” He also states there were procedural issues, including the discouragement of members bringing forward relevant matters for deliberation and a lack of reporting transparency.
Ellen Cohen, representing a national mental health advocacy organization, also resigned giving equal concerns. Canada should be extremely cautious about recommendations that come from an expert panel where two of twelve appointed members resigned in good conscience.
Finally, after all your off-topic output of the last pages, you have something to say to the actual topic. Never too late...
I will tell you my opinion on what qualifies a mentally ill person to decide on life and death matters. You know what? Nothing. Those unpatriotic Canadians explain very well why:
Well in this case, you can put your "nasty gubmn't" concerns to rest as it is the PEOPLE demanding those who have cause also having the personal "agency" or right to choose. That is the "agency" (action or intervention, especially such as to produce a particular effect). referred to and spoken of by bioethicist Udo Shucklenk. The word "agency" was then seized upon by the author to indicate some faceless government entity.
One needs to read the discussion minutes before a parliament committee, before one can take a mere contributing writer for The American Thinker at face value.
In respect of your particular concern please refer to 3.3 Vulnerabilities: Incapacity, Structural Vulnerability, Involuntariness, and Suicidality. AND 4.0 Issues Requiring Further Consideration
Well in this case, you can put your "nasty gubmn't" concerns to rest as it is the PEOPLE demanding those who have cause also having the personal "agency" or right to choose. That is the "agency" (action or intervention, especially such as to produce a particular effect). referred to and spoken of by bioethicist Udo Shucklenk. The word "agency" was then seized upon by the author to indicate some faceless government entity.
One needs to read the discussion minutes before a parliament committee, before one can take a mere contributing writer for The American Thinker at face value.
In respect of your particular concern please refer to 3.3 Vulnerabilities: Incapacity, Structural Vulnerability, Involuntariness, and Suicidality. AND 4.0 Issues Requiring Further Consideration
I'm not sure why you think that the links you posted somehow invalidate, or minimize, the initial point of this whole discussion... They actually confirm that the point made by the dastardly right-wingers is accurate.
A mentally ill person doesn't have the capacity to decide rationally over matters of life and death. That some of them want to take their own lives is well-known. For the government to jump in and say "we'll do it and we'll make you feel better about it", it is unconscionable.
I'm not sure why you think that the links you posted somehow invalidate, or minimize, the initial point of this whole discussion... They actually confirm that the point made by the dastardly right-wingers is accurate.
A mentally ill person doesn't have the capacity to decide rationally over matters of life and death. That some of them want to take their own lives is well-known. For the government to jump in and say "we'll do it and we'll make you feel better about it", it is unconscionable.
The links do not serve your agenda. They serve instead to confirm the care and consideration taken crafting every one of the guidelines, especially those concerned with mental illness.
Contrary to your ignorant opinion, the mentally ill comprise a far more cognizant spectrum than you are giving them credit for.
The links show a great deal of thought and care going into assuring that those within the category you choose to suggest incapable of lucid and cognitive decisions are indeed given a great deal of scrutiny and consideration by any number of qualified specialist caregivers - none of whom are "agents" of the government.
Your other supposition of the "government jumping in" is just more of that inaccurate, agenda driven bumph you've been accused of in previous posts.
The Canadian Government has been loath to even discuss this topic with a view to taking an active part. In point of fact, hey would have been very happy had the issue of MAID not arisen - EVER. The Canadian people are driving this bus, as they should be whereupon government and compassion for others are involved to any great measure.
I'm not sure why you think that the links you posted somehow invalidate, or minimize, the initial point of this whole discussion... They actually confirm that the point made by the dastardly right-wingers is accurate.
A mentally ill person doesn't have the capacity to decide rationally over matters of life and death. That some of them want to take their own lives is well-known. For the government to jump in and say "we'll do it and we'll make you feel better about it", it is unconscionable.
It certainly would be, but since that's not what's happening here, it's irrelevant to this issue.
See the section entitled "Suicidality" where that is clearly stated in the opening paragraph:
Quote:
Suicidality
Parliament, in legalizing MAiD, affirmed that, in certain cases, a desire to bring about one’s death is rational, understandable, and can be assisted without violating the Criminal Code. The set of cases where this applies are described by the eligibility criteria. However, in considering MAiD requests for persons who have mental disorders, it must be recognized that thoughts, plans and actions to bring about one’s death may also be a symptom of the very condition for which MAiD is being requested.
From there it goes into great detail of the difficulties, nuances, and factors involved in assessing with the requestor whether or not their illness meets all of the qualifications required for MAiD. It becomes quite obvious that there is never going to be one size fits all checklist and that each individual case will take careful assessment and could result in coerced treatment rather than assisted suicide.
One of the problems addressed is the falsehood of your first sentence in the bolded. How do you know? As we read in the article, not every person with a mental illness is suicidal, and even within a specific mental illness in which many people have a much higher chance of dying by suicide, every person with that same illness cannot be said to be suicidal. Out of curiosity, I just Googled to see if there is any record of the schizophrenic mathematician John Nash ever being suicidal, and I could not find any reference to him being suicidal whatsoever (unless you consider the fact that he died at 86 because he neglected to use a seat belt as suicidal), even though he took no medication after 1970. Yet schizophrenics as a group have a 20 times higher risk of dying by suicide.
But imagine that you are a schizophrenic who is not inventing game theory and winning Nobel and Abel prizes and allowed to wander through Princeton, crazy or not. You hear the voices of the aliens and believe the conspiracies and can't discern between what is reality and what is psychosis and no medication alleviates this mental pain. You cannot hold a job or maintain normal social relationships. You don't want to kill yourself, but you want your life to end because you can no longer bear living with madness and request that it be done medically. Is this a candidate for MAiD? That is the type of case an assessment panel would have to evaluate and determine on an individual basis following the criteria established.
"My ilk" has "ignorant opinions", nothing but "agenda driven bumph". You've gotta love the cogent argumentation.
Yes, the "government is jumping in". That's exactly what it's doing. Of course, only after "a great deal of scrutiny and consideration", with tears in their eyes but hearts full of warmth and understanding.
This was in the news just a few days ago: a new national suicide prevention hotline – 988 - has been introduced in the US (link).
This should come up soon: a new national suicide encouragement hotline – 989 - will be introduced. Callers are advised to make sure they dial the correct number, since 989 will yield a different outcome than 988. (sarcasm)
There are people like me who believe life is sacrosanct, and there are people like you who believe life is eventually expandable (after "a great deal of scrutiny and consideration").
I wish I could convince you otherwise, but I know better.
I know. It's the first question that came to my mind too. Asking consent of someone whose judgement is impaired.
I know personally a few people who have been helped tremendously by a strict keto diet to stabilize their mood.
All the best!
Hi
Yes for some people a better diet could help but what about those who for them nothing works not even medication. Clinical depression isn't just a sad mood to work through. It's an extremely dangerous disease and route to suicide.
Yes, I know. If I could answer now with a solution, I would be a genius on this planet.
Psychotherapy, working out, diet, meditation, positive affirmations, a very strict regimen no stimulants, keeping the mind clean of violent, negative music/images/news/people etc etc. All of them, not just some of them. All the time, every time, every day for the rest of your life.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
