Breaking News and Updates
- Abolition Of Work
- Alternative Medicine
- Artificial Intelligence
- Atlas Shrugged
- Ayn Rand
- Basic Income Guarantee
- Cbd Oil
- Chess Engines
- Cloud Computing
- Conscious Evolution
- Cosmic Heaven
- Designer Babies
- Donald Trump
- Ethical Egoism
- Fifth Amendment
- Fifth Amendment
- Financial Independence
- First Amendment
- Fiscal Freedom
- Food Supplements
- Fourth Amendment
- Fourth Amendment
- Free Speech
- Freedom of Speech
- Gene Medicine
- Genetic Engineering
- Germ Warfare
- Golden Rule
- Government Oppression
- High Seas
- Hubble Telescope
- Human Genetic Engineering
- Human Genetics
- Human Longevity
- Immortality Medicine
- Intentional Communities
- Jordan Peterson
- Life Extension
- Mars Colonization
- Mind Uploading
- Minerva Reefs
- Modern Satanism
- Moon Colonization
- National Vanguard
- New Utopia
- Online Casino
- Personal Empowerment
- Political Correctness
- Politically Incorrect
- Post Human
- Post Humanism
- Private Islands
- Quantum Computing
- Quantum Physics
- Resource Based Economy
- Ron Paul
- Second Amendment
- Second Amendment
- Socio-economic Collapse
- Space Exploration
- Space Station
- Space Travel
- Teilhard De Charden
- The Singularity
- Tor Browser
- Transhuman News
- Victimless Crimes
- Virtual Reality
- Wage Slavery
- War On Drugs
- Zeitgeist Movement
The Evolutionary Perspective
Category Archives: Euthanasia
Posted: January 15, 2020 at 5:42 am
To save this word, you'll need to log in.
: the act or practice of killing or permitting the death of hopelessly sick or injured individuals (such as persons or domestic animals) in a relatively painless way for reasons of mercy
Euthanasia is a mass noun (or noncount noun), that is, a noun used only in the singular form.
The word comes from the Greek euthanatos, which means easy death. In English, euthanasia has been used in exactly this sense since the early seventeenth century, when Francis Bacon described the phenomenon as after the fashion and semblance of a kindly & pleasant sleepe. Nowadays, the word usually refers to the means of attaining such a death.
a physician who refuses to practice euthanasia
These example sentences are selected automatically from various online news sources to reflect current usage of the word 'euthanasia.' Views expressed in the examples do not represent the opinion of Merriam-Webster or its editors. Send us feedback.
1605, in the meaning defined above
Greek, easy death, from euthanatos, from eu- + thanatos death more at thanatos
Cite this Entry
Euthanasia. The Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary, Merriam-Webster Inc., https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/euthanasia. Accessed 15 January 2020.
More Definitions for euthanasia
called also mercy killing
called also mercy killing
Other Words from euthanasia
Comments on euthanasia
What made you want to look up euthanasia? Please tell us where you read or heard it (including the quote, if possible).
See the original post here:
Posted: at 5:42 am
The philosophical argument many physicians use to reject euthanasia contains false logic, according to a recent paper on palliative opioid use by UNSW alumnus Dr Thomas Riisfeldt.
The paper questions the ethical distinction between euthanasia, palliative opioid use and palliative sedation and was published in the prestigious Journal of Medical Ethics. It generated such outrage thata deluge of counter-arguments flooded in from across the world, with Dr Riisfeldt subsequently invited to respond to his critics.
Theyre still very different practices so Im not saying that euthanasia is the same as palliative opioid and sedative use, Dr Riisfeldt says.
But it may be the case that euthanasia is ethical for the same reasons (pain relief) that palliative opioid and sedative use is ethical.
Today Dr Riisfeldt works as a Basic Physician Trainee at the Prince of Wales Hospital in Sydneys east, and says that hes had a number of patients ask him for euthanasia in the last three years.
But I and my medical colleagues have cut the conversation off immediately and have said, I am sorry its just not an option, it is illegal here (in NSW), Dr Riisfeldt says.
And that's the end of the conversation."
UNSW alumnus Dr Thomas Riisfeldt.
The Philosophy/Medicine graduates paper examines two key areas: whether palliative opioid and sedatives shorten survival time; and what he calls the flawed logic of the Doctrine of Double Effect concerning palliative opioid and sedative treatment.
Dr Riisfeldt claims that it cannot be proven if palliative opioid and sedative use hastens death because there have been no randomised placebo-controlled trials.
It would be highly unethical to get someone who is dying with bad pain, or with other symptoms that are hard to control, and to randomly and blindly allocate them a sugar pill, Dr Riisfeldt says.
And because none of these top-level tests have been done, then I think we need to recognise the fact that we just dont know whether or not they shorten survival time, he says.
Doctrine of Double Effect
He also claims that the Doctrine of Double Effect (DDE) is a flawed principle when used in relation to palliative opioid treatment.
The DDE was originally invented by theologian Thomas Aquinas to address the ethics for killing in the name of self-defence. The doctrine states that an action is morally acceptable if the bad side-effect (death) is counter-weighed by the good (self-defence). Today, its sometimes used in the palliative setting to justify administering opioids and sedatives to relieve pain, even if that might mean it shortens the patients life.
People who are opponents of euthanasia often saypalliative opioid and sedative use is okay and justified whereas euthanasia is not because euthanasia doesnt meet the DDEs criteria, Dr Riisfeldt says.
But he acknowledges that if it turns out that palliative opioids and sedatives dont shorten survival time, then the DDE would not be required to justify their use.
Dr Riisfeldt examines the ethical question by mapping Immanuel Kants Categorical Imperative and John Stuart Mills Classical Utilitarianismonto the DDE.
Kants Categorical Imperative looks at whether the action itself is good or bad rather than the result, and Mills Classical Utilitarianism is about the greater good and net benefits.
His exploration results in an unfavourable conclusion for the DDE.
The doctrine is not a good ethical principle because those two lenses are quite contrary to each other, he argues. I think the DDE attempts to marry two contradictory ethical systems, and I think that was doomed to fail from the get-go."
Dr Rodney Syme
High-profile Australian doctor and outspoken advocate of euthanasia Rodney Syme led the cause for change to the laws in Victoria (2017) and recently in Western Australia (2019) with the Voluntary Assisted Dying Acts.
Dr Syme categorically agrees with Dr Riisfeldts stance that euthanasia is ethical and that it does not need the DDE to be justified.
There are extreme circumstances where the level of suffering is so appalling that to relieve that pain is a benefit to the patient, Dr Syme says.
During the span of his career, Dr Syme who was the focus of an ABC Australian Story in 2016 says he has counselled about 2,000 people at the end of their lives and has handed out the life ending drug, Nembutal, to about 300 for oral self-administration.
I do not believe nor support lethal injection unless the patient is physically incapable of taking the medication themselves, Dr Syme says.
The highly qualified doctor faced the Medical Board for his actions in 2016, and was acquitted by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal.
The grief families suffer when their loved one has died well is infinitely less than when they die badly, Dr Syme says.
They look back on it with some sense of comfort when a loved one has died in a manner that they wanted."
Originally posted here:
Morning Break: Euthanasia Murder Trial; Trial Reporting Violations; The Kratom Debate – MedPage Today
Posted: at 5:42 am
Note that some links may require subscriptions.
Three Belgian physicians will stand trial on murder charges stemming from their participation in a patient's 2010 euthanasia, which is legal in the country but only under strict conditions that prosecutors say weren't fully satisfied in this case. (Reuters)
If and when a Novartis cholesterol-lowering drug called inclisiran is approved in Great Britain, the country's health services will provide it to patients under a deal struck Monday. (CNBC)
Doctors spend more than 16 minutes per patient on electronic health records, mostly reviewing charts. (Annals of Internal Medicine)
World Health Organization officials walked back previous declarations that human-to-human transmission is not occurring with the Wuhan pneumonia coronavirus. (Reuters)
New Jersey follows New York's lead in banning the sale of flavored vaping products. (CBS News)
Eli Lilly announced new lower-priced insulin options.
And a Roche official said the company will seek to undercut its competitors' astronomical prices for spinal muscular atrophy therapies when its own drug hits the market. (Reuters)
A Science investigation found widespread flouting of requirements to post trial results on Clinicaltrials.gov.
The proportion of Americans who believe it's important to vaccinate their children was 84% in 2019, down from 94% in 2001. (Gallup)
AstraZeneca will halt STRENGTH, its phase III trial of a fish-oil drug for mixed dyslipidemia, after interim results indicated it would fail.
Two in five patients with multiple sclerosis don't take their medications properly due to high costs. (STAT)
What separates kratom, the herbal supplement that functions similarly to opioids, from other addictive pain relievers? (NPR)
Increased risk for leukemia, thyroid cancer, and prostate cancer detected among 9/11 responders, nearly two decades after exposure. (The Wall Street Journal)
Morning Break is a daily guide to what's new and interesting on the Web for healthcare professionals, powered by the MedPage Today community. Got a tip? Send it to us: MPT_editorial@everydayhealthinc.com
Posted: at 5:42 am
The case of the Aruna Shaunbagh is a classic example of how many Indian laws need strong amendments. Aruna was a 25-year-old nurse in King Edward Memorial Hospital, Mumbai who was raped and strangled brutally with a dog chain by a floor cleaner. She survived the attack but her brain suffered severe damage due to the lack of oxygen.
She remained in a vegetative state for 42 years before she died in the year 2015.
Representational image. Reuters.
In the year 2011, Pinky Virani, activist and journalist, filed a euthanasia petition in the court to free her from her pain. Though the court rejected the plea at the time, it sparked a debate about Indian euthanasia laws.
Later in the year 2018, Indias Supreme Court permitted passive euthanasia under certain guidelines.
Euthanasia is the act of ending the life of an extremely sick person to relieve their suffering. Euthanasia is only performed on people who are completely bedridden, terminally ill and show no signs of health improvement.
Euthanasia can be categorized into two: active euthanasia and passive euthanasia.
In the case of active euthanasia, life is terminated with the help of a physician who gives a lethal dose of a toxic drug to end the agony of a terminally-ill patient.
Passive euthanasia involves the omission of treatment or daily care which is required for survival. It involves both withdrawing the current treatment (like turning off the ventilator) and withholding the treatment (like not performing any required surgeries).
Rabies is an infectious viral disease that is usually transmitted from a dog bite.
If bitten by an animal, whose medical history youre unaware of, you should seek medical help and get all the vaccinations your doctor recommends. This is the only treatment option available - and is specifically for people who dont show any symptoms of rabies. This article does not deal with those patients.
Once the symptoms start to appear, rabies has a 95% fatality rate. There is no cure for it once the symptoms show up. The initial symptoms of rabies include a fever with pain and abnormal tingling or burning sensation at the wound site. If not treated, the virus spreads to the central nervous system which progressively causes inflammation of the brain and spinal cord.
A person with full-blown rabies would present with hyperactivity and excitability and extreme fear of water (hydrophobia) and fresh air (aerophobia). Once the virus invades the brain, the condition of the person deteriorates rapidly. Death usually occurs either due to painful cardiorespiratory arrest (simultaneous shut down of lungs and heart) or after slow paralysis followed by a comatose state.
Recently an NGO filed a PIL (Public Interest Litigation) questioning a judgement passed by the Apex Court in 2018: while the judgement by the five-judge Constitution bench allowed passive euthanasia, it excluded rabies patients from their judgement.
According to a senior advocate, Sonia Mathur, the jury legalised passive euthanasia for those who have been suffering for a long time due to an incurable illness and to the ones who happen to be in a persistent vegetative state with no hope of recovery. She further added that the law does not give the right to die with dignity to the people suffering from rabies.
The advocate pointed out the fact that rabies has a nearly 100% fatality rate despite all the medical assistance, unlike other diseases like cancer where almost all forms carry a certain amount of survival rate. The petitioner asserted that due to the violent nature of rabies and the absence of a cure for it, the victims shouldnt be made to suffer throughout their painful cycle of death.
This petition has spiked the debate on whether we should have the right to die with dignity or not, once again.
For more on this topic, please read our article onRabies: Causes, Symptoms, Prevention and Treatment.
Health articles in Firstpost are written by myUpchar.com, Indias first and biggest resource for verified medical information. At myUpchar, researchers and journalists work with doctors to bring you information on all things health.
Updated Date: Jan 10, 2020 20:02:59 IST
Tags : Active Euthanasia, Animal Bite, Aruna Shaunbagh, Euthanasia, Euthanasia In India, NewsTracker, Passive Euthanasia, Physician Assisted Suicide, Rabid Animals, Rabies, Rabies Prevention
See the original post here:
Posted: at 5:42 am
Rodger Mullen Staff writer @RodgerMullen
Cumberland County had its lowest euthanasia rate in four years in 2019, according to the Animal Control Department.
The department also said Wednesday it was able to adopt out 183 more dogs and cats last year than in 2018.
Animal Control Director Elaine Smith welcomed the trend.
"There is an awareness and a willingness to help these animals, and we are confident that we can make an even bigger difference in the lives of these animals in the coming years as well," Smith said in a news release. "Our ultimate goal is to never have to euthanize an adoptable animal, and we appreciate all the help from our community partners, the Fayetteville Animal Protection Society, numerous rescue groups, our volunteers and our foster parents who make our task much lighter."
Animal Control said 3,012 dogs and cats were adopted in 2019, compared with 2,829 in 2018.
The number of dogs and cats euthanized in the county dropped from 3,790 in 2018 to 3,241 in 2019, a difference of 549. Smith said the county hopes to continue the trend this year.
In August, Cumberland County Animal Control participated in the nationwide "Clear the Shelters" program to adopt out as many animals as possible on a Saturday. A total of 162 animals were adopted during the event, which is a partnership with WRAL TV-5 and Mix 101.5 radio.
For information on animal adoption, call Animal Control at 910-321-6856.
Staff writer Rodger Mullen can be reached at email@example.com or 910-486-3561.
Posted: at 5:42 am
OTTAWA, Ontario, January 9, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) News that organ harvesting from Canadians killed by lethal injection is on the rise in Ontario has euthanasia opponents warning more horrors and assaults on human life are to come.
Everybody says, Well, it cant get any lower than it is, but well get lower than it is, because every time you break a new ethical barrier, it opens up a new question, Alex Schadenberg, executive director of the Canada-based Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, told LifeSiteNews.
There is growing evidence that coercion plays a substantial role for many vulnerable people with regards to so called physician-assisted death. Conflating this decision with organ donation further complicates the issue of coercion, echoed John Smeaton, chief executive of the U.K.-based Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC).
We need to acknowledge the unsettling reality that many vulnerable people who have been euthanized without consent, may also have had their organs harvested without explicit consent, Smeaton added in a Wednesday statement.
Trillium Gift For Life Network, which administers organ and tissue donation in Ontario, harvested 18 organs and 95 tissue donations from 113 people euthanized in the first 11 months of 2019 (December figures were not available), the Ottawa Citizen reported this week.
Thats a 14 percent increase from 2018, but not as steep a jump as the 109 percent increase in organs and tissue harvested from euthanized individuals between 2018 and 2017 in the province.
Euthanasia deaths also accounted for five percent of all the provinces overall organ and tissue donations in 2019, up from 3.6 percent in 2018, and 2.1 percent in 2017, the Citizen reported.
Canadas most populous province, Ontario has the distinction of being the first jurisdiction in the world to proactively ask people approved for euthanasia if they want to donate their organs.
After initially allowing only patient-initiated organ donation, Quebec has now followed suit, and permits Transplant Qubec to initiate discussions about organ and tissue harvesting with patients scheduled to be euthanized, the Citizen reported.
Under the Trillium Gift of Life Network Act, designated facilities are required to notify Trillium Gift of Life Network of imminent death in an effort to ensure the opportunity to donate organs and tissue is offered to every medically-eligible Ontarian as part of high quality end-of-life care, Trillium spokesperson Margaret Barng told LifeSiteNews.
That includes telling Trillium when an individual has been approved for euthanasia, Barng said. After this decision is made, the discussion of organ and tissue donation occurs.
Currently, there are more than 1,600 Ontarians waiting for a lifesaving organ, she said.
While potential recipients can refuse an organ if they have a moral objection to euthanasia, revealing donor information is not required, Barng told LifeSiteNews.
The decision to share information about the donor background is up to each clinician, she wrote in an email.
Most do share the information, but it is not specified that it should be shared. The potential recipient is able to decline the organ if they choose and they would then remain on the waitlist.
Justin Trudeaus Liberal government legalized euthanasia, or Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD), in June 2016, following a February 2015 Supreme Court decision striking down the law prohibiting euthanasia and assisted suicide as unconstitutional.
Canada thus joined Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Columbia as the only countries so far to allow euthanasia death by lethal injection.
The other jurisdictions, such as Belgium and the Netherlands, currently allow only patient-initiated organ donation, reported the Citizen.
Canada also allows assisted suicide, which is now legal in nine American states and Switzerland, but which doesnt allow for organ harvesting because the individual typically dies by self-administered drugs. In Switzerland's infamous death clinics, people kill themselves by taking a drug cocktail.
Canada is now on track to expand euthanasia to non-terminal cases.
In September, Quebec Superior Court Justice Christine Baudouin struck down the eligibility criterion for euthanasia that death be imminent.
The ruling nullifies both the federal Criminal Code requirement in Bill C-14 that an individuals death be reasonably foreseeable, and the Quebec Bill 52 requirement that an individual be at the end of life to be eligible for euthanasia.
Baudouin gave the governments of Quebec and Canada six months to change their laws, and neither government is appealing her decision.
Moreover, Quebec has opened up consultations on whether or not to allow prior consent for euthanasia, in which a person suffering from a degenerative illness gives an advance directive to be euthanized at a future date, thus opening the door for people to be killed by lethal injection without their active consent.
All this will inevitably increase attacks on human life, Schadenberg warns.
Linking organ donation to euthanasia changes the perception of death by lethal injection to a good in which people who are sick can get better because you had your life ended, he told LifeSiteNews.
And with imminent death no longer an eligibility requirement for euthanasia, vulnerable people, particularly those with depression or psychiatric illnesses, or mental or physical degenerative decline, or who see their lives as worthless, could find the perceived good of organ donation irresistible, Schadenberg said.
There are a lot of people who are not even sick. They may have ALS, or a neurological condition such as Parkinsons. Their organs are perfectly good. So they become the great organ donors, he said.
If you open up euthanasia for psychiatric reasons, those are even better donors because they have no physical health problems, he added.
Indeed, euthanasia lobbyist Dr. James Downar, who co-chaired the Canadian Blood Services committee that developed guidelines for euthanasia organ donation, told the National Postin 2017 that euthanasia where the heart stops beating two to three minutes after lethal injection is a prime source of organs.
If somebody has organs that would be appropriate to donate, youll never get better organs than you would by this process, said Downar, who now has a pivotal role in palliative care at Ottawas Catholic Elisabeth Bruyre Hospital.
But a more grisly possibility is already under discussion, says Schadenberg.
This is the ethical next question, because obviously, if youve said yes to euthanasia and youve said yes to organ donation by doing euthanasia first, why would you do euthanasia and then organ donation, when you could be doing euthanasia by organ donation? he pointed out.
Death by lethal injection shuts down the heart, and therefore, it denies the ability of a heart transplant, Schadenberg said.
So euthanasia by organ donation has become the next question.
And the danger of coercive organ donation is very real, stressed SPUCs Smeaton.
It is true that organ donation is good, but only insofar as it does not bring about harm, namely the death of the donor, and, worse still, where that is coupled with lack of explicit consent, he pointed out.
The removal of explicit consent which is possible through state-regulated opt-out policies, undermines the ethical basis of donation and intensifies concerns around some aspects of organ donation, such as removing vital organs from beating heart patients.
Here is the original post:
Posted: at 5:42 am
If passed, this would go into effect on July 1.
(Indianapolis, Ind.) - Indiana lawmakers are considering voluntary euthanasiafor the terminally ill.
Democratic Representative, Matt Pierce, introduced this bill last week.
The bill refers to a terminal illness as"an incurable and irreversible illness that will, within reasonable medical judgment, result in death within sixmonths."
To be considered for this, a patient must be:
After a written request is submitted, the individual will have a 15 day waiting period before being administered the medication. This medication must be self-administered.
Medical professionals would be required to meet with the patient requesting voluntary euthanasia to ensure they are of sound mind.
Insurance companies would not be able to deny payment of benefits due to the "suicide clause."
If passed, the introduced bill will go into effect on July 1, 2020.
Seefull details on the bill, visit iga.in.gov.
Posted: at 5:42 am
Kerri Hand became a chicken owner for the eggs, but then she fell in love. A retired cop who lives in rural southern California, Hand and her children came to view their flock as part of the family.
In late 2018, Hand returned home to find a notice stuck on her door from the California Department of Food and Agriculture stating that there was an outbreak of a highly deadly avian virus in her neighborhood, which can wipe out massive flocks. State and federal health officials had ordered all birds across several counties under immediate quarantine, including Hand's.
To date, officials have searched thousands of homes and farms and identified just under 500 infections. After determining that quarantine wasn't enough, they ordered the mandatory euthanasia of over 1.2 million birds in high-risk areas surrounding the infections, including healthy birds. The euthanasia campaign may be necessary to prevent the spread of the Newcastle disease, but according to the bird owners who spoke with Reason, health officials have carried out their duties in a cruel manner, leaving bird-owning families with lasting emotional scars.
Hand complied with the state's quarantine orders for months, and paid to have her birds tested by a veterinariantests that came back negative for Virulent Newcastle Disease. But as she and her family were preparing to celebrate Good Friday, a team of police and state workers dressed in biohazard suits unexpectedly arrived at her house, with a search warrant and an order to kill her family's flock. Hand's children watched their pets die.
Workers kill birds by breaking their necks, shooting them with firearms, or suffocating them with CO2 gasmethods that officials maintain are humane. But Hand disagrees. She recalls that workers placed her birds in a trash can with no viewing window, forcing them to lift the lid to check if the birds had died. Each time, oxygen leaked in, prolonging the process.
Hand recorded and shared live video of the slaughter in a Facebook group she created called Save Our Birds, and it went viral. The group gained thousands of members, and Hand began organizing volunteers to show up at kills and film on their phones. She alleges they've documented scores of abuses by state workers and police.
Produced, written, shot, and edited by Justin Monticello
Camera by John Osterhoudt
Music: "White Hats" by Wayne Jones; "I've Just Had an Apostrophe!" by Spazz Cardigan; "Butchers" by Silent Partner; "Versace Beat" by Yung Logos; "Gaia in Fog" by Dan Bodan; "Grasshopper" by Quincas Moreira; "Pinckney" by The 126ers
Go here to read the rest:
Pro-hikers see a hasty assessment as part of the slippery slope of euthanasia – The BC Catholic – magviral
Posted: at 5:42 am
Opponents of assisted suicide call on Canadians to participate in the bi-weekly consultation of the federal government on the expansion of euthanasia, while a prominent B.C. pro-life voice says the assessment is being rushed unnecessarily.
The public consultation was launched by the government on January 13 and is mainly conducted through an online public survey at Justice.gc.ca/eng/cons/ad-am. Canadians can give their opinion by the end of day 27 January on the laws applicable to state sanctioned suicide.
But that deadline is too short for such an important consultation, said John Hof, former president of United for Life B.C.
I see no reason to speed up this process, he told The B.C. Catholic. Decisions of this government will be part of our legislation for a long time, and that is why we must take all the time to ensure that we do not do it wrong.
Court and other pro-life voices urge Canadians to participate in the consultation, saying that any movement to expand euthanasia is evidence of the slippery slope they have long predicted.
After receiving countless guarantees during the discussion about assisted suicide legislation that access would not be extended, we now see immediate challenges for that legislation.
The rush to make changes to assisted death legislation in Canada is a response to a decision by the Quebec court in September 2019 that sets the criteria for reasonable foreseeability of natural death in federal law and the end criteria of life in the provincial province of Quebec. Medical Death Assistance Act (MAID) was unconstitutional because those rules are too restrictive.
The ruling of the Court will take effect on March 11, 2020, unless an extension is granted by the Court. Although this ruling only applies to the province of Quebec, the Canadian government accepted the ruling and promised MEID law for the entire country, said a federal justice statement.
When the federal government first introduced regulations regarding death assistance in 2016, after five years, Ottawa promised a larger revision of the MAID system, focusing on three complex issues, including applications for MAID by adult minors, advance requests and requests for people where mental illness is the only reason to apply for MAID.
The Department of Justice said that updating Canadas MAID legislation will extend the suitability for MAID beyond people approaching the end of their lives and may lead to other changes once the assessment is complete.
Federal Minister for Justice David Lametti, who voted against the original MAID regulations of his own government because he thought these were too restrictive a point that the decision of the Quebec court agreed with said in a statement that he understands medical death assistance is a very complex and personal issue for many Canadians.
Thanks to the consultations we are starting today, we can hear directly from Canadians and the way forward, said Lametti.
Court said that warnings about an inevitable extension of assisted suicide were clearly not followed. The vulnerable and helpless people in our country run a greater risk of being bullied to death with the expansion of MAID. A society that abandons their most dependent citizens late is a road to self-destruction.
Court said that parish-based responses are scheduled in the next two weeks to encourage parishioners to answer the survey after Mass.
What are we going to allow? Said Alex Schadenberg, the executive director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, and adds that his organization is concerned that minors and people with intellectual disabilities will ultimately be eligible for assisted death, as has happened in other jurisdictions where legally sanctioned suicide is permitted.
Opponents of assisted suicide, such as churches and pro-life groups, claim that much more support is needed for palliative care and hospice options to help people at the end of life without committing suicide as a way of their natural death to speed up.
Schadenberg of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition said that Canadian hospices are concerned that end-of-life care will become entangled in the MAID debate.
In Ladner, the Delta Hospice Society is under pressure from the Fraser Health Authority to offer assisted suicide to its patients, as opposed to the constitution of society.
The Canadian Association for Hospice Palliative Care and the Canadian Association for Palliative Care Doctors have recently made a statement in which organizations for palliative care in hospices have agreed that assisted suicide is not part of hospice and palliative care.
Court said the urge to expand suicide assistance demonstrates the wisdom of the saying hard cases make bad legislation.
Exceptional cases such as those in Quebec will lead to an MAID open door policy being available to anyone who asks for it, and even those who do not, but are taken into account by others without prior permission, Court said.
With files from Canadian Catholic News
Posted: at 5:42 am
January 13, 2019 (National Review) My very first anti-euthanasia column,published inNewsweek, warned that societal acceptance of assisted suicide/euthanasia would eventually include organ harvesting as a plum to society. I was called an alarmist and a fear-monger, but alas, I was right. In Belgium and the Netherlands, mentally ill and disabled people are killed in hospitals at their request, and then, their bodies are harvested with the success of the procedures written up with all due respect in organ-transplant medical journals.
Our closest cultural cousins in Canada are enthusiastically following the same utilitarian path, not only allowing organ harvesting to be conjoined with euthanasia, but medically assisted death is being boosted increasingly as a boon. Note the celebratory ledein thisOttawa Citizenstory:
Ontarians who opt for medically assisted deaths (MAiD) are increasingly saving or improving other peoples lives by also including organ and tissue donation as part of their final wishes.
In the first 11 months of 2019, MAiD patients in the province accounted for 18 organ and 95 tissue donors, a 14 per cent increase over 2018 and a 109 per cent increase over 2017. (Figures for December 2019 are not yet available.)
According to Trillium Gift of Life Network, which oversees organ and tissue donation in Ontario, the 113 MAiD-related donations in 2019 accounted for five per cent of overall donations in Ontario, a share that has also been increasing. In 2018, MAiD-related donations made up 3.6 per cent of the provinces total donations[.]
Many of these killed organ donorswill not have been imminently dying. They will alsogenerally not have been provided suicide-prevention servicesas the suicidal ill and disabled who ask for euthanasia are increasingly abandoned to the death with dignity mindset in Canada.
It doesnt even have to be the patients idea. Trillium Gift of Life Network, Ontarios donation organization,actively solicitsthe organs of those soon to be killed by doctors!
Canada decriminalized medically assisted death in 2016, and Ontario, through Trillium, immediately moved to the forefront of organ and tissue donation through MAiD, becoming the first jurisdiction in the world to proactively reach out to those who had been approved for assisted death to discuss donation. When a death is imminent, whether through a hospital or MAiD, Trillium must by law be notified.
And, as part of high-quality end-of life care, we make sure that all patients and families are provided with the information they need and the opportunity to make a decision on whether they wish to make a donation, [Trillium CEO Ronnie] Gavsie says. That just follows the logical protocol under the law and the humane approach for those who are undergoing medical assistance in dying. And its the right thing to do for those on the wait list.
The clear message being sent to suicidal ill and disabled Canadians with the active support of the organ transplant community is thattheir deaths can have greater value to Canada than their lives. In other words, organ donation as an offshoot of euthanasia has indeed been defined as a plum to society.
Someday, Canada will probably dispense with the euthanasia part altogether and go straight to killingbyorgan harvesting already being proposed inbioethics and medical journals. That would make for more viable organs, dont you know. Once one gets past what bioethicists denigrate as the yuck factor, there is indisputable logic to that idea, which we could call fruit from a legally poisonous tree.
Those with eyes to see, let them see.
Published with permission from the National Review.
Read more here: