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.
My Canadian partner's aunt took advantage of this about two years ago. In her 80s, terminal cancer with constant pain, no hope of recovery.
Died on her own terms out in BC with her last view that of the mountains she loved.
I can see wanting to have control over my own life if I were her, since it really is the only thing you can have control over when you are terminally ill.
Wondering what you guys here think of this. As you can see, I've had some back and forth with a poster that I considered reporting as a troll, but instead I (perhaps unwisely) engaged her. The incredible stupidity and blatant right-wing American politics of the article, however, with its tiresome misrepresentations of Canada, made it hard not to respond.
Talking to someone in Ron's position brings clarity to a murky topic fraught with emotion, religious bigotry, political agenda, and just plain old dumbazzery!
He has made many public presentations while lobbying the government to improve MAID, with the biggest being to have the facility for people to "pre-choose" upon early diagnosis BEFORE they become mentally incapacitated or non compos mentis.
Previous iterations of MAID required the patient to be near end of life before being eligible to make the request and in the case of some debilitating diseases such as Alzheimer's that would also render them ineligible due to at that time being mentally incapacitated to make such a choice cognitively - the veritable catch 22 if you will that Ron was looking with forethought at not allowing himself to be a victim of.
Talking to someone in Ron's position brings clarity to a murky topic fraught with emotion, religious bigotry, political agenda, and just plain old dumbazzery!
He has made many public presentations while lobbying the government to improve MAID, with the biggest being to have the facility for people to "pre-choose" upon early diagnosis BEFORE they become mentally incapacitated or non compos mentis.
Previous iterations of MAID required the patient to be near end of life before being eligible to make the request and in the case of some debilitating diseases such as Alzheimer's that would also render them ineligible due to at that time being mentally incapacitated to make such a choice cognitively - the veritable catch 22 if you will that Ron was looking with forethought at not allowing himself to be a victim of.
Thanks for sharing that.
In the thread that I linked, I posted a story of a woman who was dx'd at 55 with early-onset Alzheimer's and died via MAID at 62--without letting her family know she was going to do so. That was her choice for whatever reason, but her family could not be told her cause of death due to privacy laws. It took some digging on their part. Just another twist on the story.
The conflict with mental illness is, in part, over whether a depressed and suicidal person is competent to make that decision, and of course whether the condition is truly irreversible.
The annoyance was that the person starting the thread posted an article implying that Canada was looking to euthanize the mentally ill, complete with the President of China's name crossed out and Justin's inserted next to it.
In the thread that I linked, I posted a story of a woman who was dx'd at 55 with early-onset Alzheimer's and died via MAID at 62--without letting her family know she was going to do so. That was her choice for whatever reason, but her family could not be told her cause of death due to privacy laws. It took some digging on their part. Just another twist on the story.
The conflict with mental illness is, in part, over whether a depressed and suicidal person is competent to make that decision, and of course whether the condition is truly irreversible.
The annoyance was that the person starting the thread posted an article implying that Canada was looking to euthanize the mentally ill, complete with the President of China's name crossed out and Justin's inserted next to it.
Agenda driven folks abound in the political scene all over the planet now. They're able to find their fellow travelers so much easier now with the internet giving them instant gratification from like minded boobs.
Completely ignored by them is the fact that Canadians at large are driving the demand for this legislation dating back decades to the Sue Rodriquez debacle and even prior.
Her struggle to achieve her desire and the ensuing legal travails of Svend Robinson for assisting her galvanized a lot of us to demand change through our MPP's and MP's.
That person you're attempting to rationally discuss this issue with over there is lacking the ability to set aside her irrational nonsense for just one second, to the same extent some of them would force a raped 10 year old mentally challenged girl to carry the resultant pregnancy to full term. Dumbazzery knows no boundaries when it comes to any staunch, rigid, "supposedly" religious belief structure.
Someone I've known for decades was recently diagnosed with metastasized stage 4 throat cancer. I mentioned that euthanasia might be a good choice - put on some Leonard Cohen, invite some friends, have a toast, get an injection, go to sleep. That is so much better than a ruptured neck artery bleeding into the lungs. If the timing is more or less the same, I choose the calm option.
I'm 100% for it, particularly when people who are of sound mind make the rational decision that they'd like to make the exit more pleasant than what they're facing. I think that dementia and cancer should qualify as terminal because the slow loss of quality of life doesn't make it easier. Perhaps euthanasia wishes should be included in the Personal Directive portion of the Will (regarding dementia). That way, no one can be accused of being incompetent for making the euthanasia choice at the time of dementia diagnosis.
I'm disappointed when I hear that an old friend or a neighbour did not let people know, but privacy matters.
When people hear about euthanizing mentally ill people or sterilizing Indigenous women, it sounds like a slippery slope. Legislation has to be very clear. Euthanasia was first authorized in the Netherlands in 2001. If Canada can't figure it out, look to a leader that has spend more than 20 years figuring it out.
Agenda driven folks abound in the political scene all over the planet now. They're able to find their fellow travelers so much easier now with the internet giving them instant gratification from like minded boobs.
Completely ignored by them is the fact that Canadians at large are driving the demand for this legislation dating back decades to the Sue Rodriquez debacle and even prior.
Her struggle to achieve her desire and the ensuing legal travails of Svend Robinson for assisting her galvanized a lot of us to demand change through our MPP's and MP's.
That person you're attempting to rationally discuss this issue with over there is lacking the ability to set aside her irrational nonsense for just one second, to the same extent some of them would force a raped 10 year old mentally challenged girl to carry the resultant pregnancy to full term. Dumbazzery knows no boundaries when it comes to any staunch, rigid, "supposedly" religious belief structure.
Thanks for the story of Sue Rodriguez. We do this for our pets. It is humane to do it for ourselves.
Someone I've known for decades was recently diagnosed with metastasized stage 4 throat cancer. I mentioned that euthanasia might be a good choice - put on some Leonard Cohen, invite some friends, have a toast, get an injection, go to sleep. That is so much better than a ruptured neck artery bleeding into the lungs. If the timing is more or less the same, I choose the calm option.
I'm 100% for it, particularly when people who are of sound mind make the rational decision that they'd like to make the exit more pleasant than what they're facing. I think that dementia and cancer should qualify as terminal because the slow loss of quality of life doesn't make it easier. Perhaps euthanasia wishes should be included in the Personal Directive portion of the Will (regarding dementia). That way, no one can be accused of being incompetent for making the euthanasia choice at the time of dementia diagnosis.
I'm disappointed when I hear that an old friend or a neighbour did not let people know, but privacy matters.
When people hear about euthanizing mentally ill people or sterilizing Indigenous women, it sounds like a slippery slope. Legislation has to be very clear. Euthanasia was first authorized in the Netherlands in 2001. If Canada can't figure it out, look to a leader that has spend more than 20 years figuring it out.
Having so recently, Thursday, watched my SIL in agonizing pain on her second last day alive it was so unbearable to witness. Forcing anyone to go through that for weeks or months in time is the cruelest abuse I could imagine. Fortunately for her and the family the drugs kicked in for Friday and she spent the day sleeping until she stopped breathing on her own. One day was hard and I cannot understand why if faced with that amount of pain for long not to allow her to choose ending her pain/life.
I see Susan Rodriguez as a Canadian hero.
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.
