Michael Cook has a Mercatornet piece on the Canadian enthusiasm for euthanasia.
Canada keeps a tight grip on its world record for euthanasia deaths
A parliamentary committee recommends liberalising an already liberal “right to die” law
Canadians are famed for their unfailing, even relentless, politeness. This seems inconsistent with another reason for their fame, or infamy: – Canada is the world leader in euthanasia deaths. Since “medical assistance in dying” (MAiD) became legal in 2016 until the end of 2021, 31,664 people died. The official figures have not been published for 2022, but they will show that another 11,000 or more have been added to that total.
The government believes that there is something wrong with these figures. They are too low – the safeguards need to be relaxed even further. Has someone been spiking the maple syrup?
The whole article is well worth reading as another piece in the euthanasia jigsaw. When one step is taken, the next seems more reasonable.
Canada is a paradigm of the ruthless logic of voluntary euthanasia. As soon as the principle takes hold that people have a right to die, or rather, a right to be killed, within carefully defined boundaries, the work of demolition begins. That right expands from people with a terminally ill condition, to people who are tired of life, to people who are demented, to children, and to infants. The second last step in this logic is a right to universal suicide.
And the last step? Don’t be surprised to hear “right to die” activists arguing that no right exists without a corresponding duty.
Canadians are famed for their unfailing, even relentless, politeness. This seems inconsistent with another reason for their fame, or infamy: – Canada is the world leader in euthanasia deaths. Since “medical assistance in dying” (MAiD) became legal in 2016 until the end of 2021, 31,664 people died. The official figures have not been published for 2022, but they will show that another 11,000 or more have been added to that total.
The government believes that there is something wrong with these figures. They are too low – the safeguards need to be relaxed even further. Has someone been spiking the maple syrup?
The whole article is well worth reading as another piece in the euthanasia jigsaw. When one step is taken, the next seems more reasonable.
Canada is a paradigm of the ruthless logic of voluntary euthanasia. As soon as the principle takes hold that people have a right to die, or rather, a right to be killed, within carefully defined boundaries, the work of demolition begins. That right expands from people with a terminally ill condition, to people who are tired of life, to people who are demented, to children, and to infants. The second last step in this logic is a right to universal suicide.
And the last step? Don’t be surprised to hear “right to die” activists arguing that no right exists without a corresponding duty.
Yet I sometimes wonder if my mother would have opted for a quietly dignified exit rather than the torment of dementia in her final years. Impossible question, but I still think the answer is 'yes'.
4 comments:
We put animals down to release them from their suffering. Why should people be obliged to suffer when, with suitable safeguards, there are ways to end things with dignity?
There do seem to be a couple of subjects that some people are irrevocably opposed to - reduction in population and assisted dying. I've no great desire to change their minds, I just wish they didn't want to impose their views on others.
DJ - I agree, I think the option should be available. I've seen too much end of life suffering to view it any other way.
@Discovered Joys: the problem is the “Suitable Safeguards”. It turns out that, in practice, there aren’t any. Which is the point the OP is making.
Peter - safeguards would be easy enough to devise, but I think the real problem is that too many people wouldn't trust them whatever they were.
Post a Comment