84

I am in shock and horrified. I have a close family member that has looked into euthanasia for mental health issues and the idea that this is coming so close to the US is terrifying to me. I love this person and do not want them to commit suicide.

In March 2023, Canada is apparently approving euthanasia (Medical Assistance in Dying - MAID) for those whose sole illness is MENTAL ILLNESS:

After March 17, 2023, people with a mental illness as their sole underlying medical condition will have access to MAID if they meet all of the eligibility requirements and the practitioners fulfill the safeguards that are put in place for this group of people.If you have a mental illness along with other medical conditions, you may be eligible to seek MAID.

https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/medical-assistance-dying.html#b11

Under the criteria section they also say this:

be at least 18 years old and mentally competent. This means being capable of making health care decisions for yourself.

So those who suffer severe mental illness enough to request euthanasia can somehow be mentally competent at the same time.

This reminds me a lot of trans medicine where instead of opting for therapy and mental health treatment, we instead butcher and medicalize the body instead. what is wrong with with the medical system and Canada to allow this to happen?? Isn't being suicidal literally a symptom of 90% of mental health disorders? so we're now treating mental illness symptoms by killing people???

here's another article on this fucking travesty:

https://www.spiked-online.com/2022/11/17/canadas-euthanasia-laws-are-a-moral-outrage/

I am in shock and horrified. I have a close family member that has looked into euthanasia for mental health issues and the idea that this is coming so close to the US is terrifying to me. I love this person and do not want them to commit suicide. In March 2023, Canada is apparently approving euthanasia (Medical Assistance in Dying - MAID) for those whose sole illness is MENTAL ILLNESS: > After March 17, 2023, people with a mental illness as their sole underlying medical condition will have access to MAID if they meet all of the eligibility requirements and the practitioners fulfill the safeguards that are put in place for this group of people.If you have a mental illness along with other medical conditions, you may be eligible to seek MAID. https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/medical-assistance-dying.html#b11 Under the criteria section they also say this: > be at least 18 years old and **mentally competent**. This means being capable of making health care decisions for yourself. So those who suffer severe mental illness enough to request euthanasia can somehow be mentally competent at the same time. This reminds me a lot of trans medicine where instead of opting for therapy and mental health treatment, we instead butcher and medicalize the body instead. what is wrong with with the medical system and Canada to allow this to happen?? Isn't being suicidal literally a symptom of 90% of mental health disorders? so we're now treating mental illness symptoms by killing people??? here's another article on this fucking travesty: https://www.spiked-online.com/2022/11/17/canadas-euthanasia-laws-are-a-moral-outrage/

167 comments

Imagine sitting opposite a doctor and they’re laying out treatment options and one of those is like “also we could just kill you”

[–] emissch [OP] 35 points Edited

It's starting to feel like modern medicine is just "let the patient take the wheel and give them whatever they want" approach. Inmates running the literal asylum. Modern medicine is just a validation station for patients instead of actual care.

We'll probably see anorexics/bulimics being treated for ano-affirming care soon.

[–] CharieC 21 points Edited

I enjoyed the recent(ish?) "Gender: A Wider Lens" episode where the hosts conclude exactly this while picking apart WPATH "standards of care" version 8. Consumer-based medicine: whatever the patient wants — so long as they can pay — they get. They mention pro-ana too I think, and the way being non-judgemental is held above all sense or virtues these days even among the supposed healthcare professionals.

Haven't seen the podcast, but off the top of my head I can think of two times a doctor being the opposite of non-judgmental has been what I needed. Once when I was very young and had just learnt about suicide and thought I should manipulate my parents with it, got a pretty snarky response from him that was basically "stop being a little shit, yeah?" and second, when I had scored for 'gender dysphoria' on a standard differential diagnosis survey and the doctor was just like "nah you don't have that" and moved on.

Those psychologists would not fit in well today lul

We'll probably see anorexics/bulimics being treated for ano-affirming care soon.

Don't give them ideas....

I suspect it already exists on some level. If a patient is not at immediate risk of death from their disorder then offering ways to manage your disordered eating, control issues and body image - or whatever else lies behind the ED - would probably be best practice.

[–] juleep 14 points Edited

I have a hard time understanding how euthanizing a patient falls under the scope of practice for a doctor. Willingly killing someone is the opposite of what doctors are supposed to do.

Edit: I want to add I think widespread legalization of this will only further cause ppl to distrust the medical field.

maybe thats what they want, don't encourage your mentally ill relative to seek help, they will just encourage them to top themselves.

ca-ching a fortune saved to the national health services who hate having to pay out for years of expensive therapy, many of these people are seen as a burden on society, I don't know how Canada does it it but in the UK you can claim disability payments for being too mentally ill to work.

quite often suicide attempts are a cry for help so how does it being an option play out in the psyche of someone looking for help?

Yeah, this is one slippery slope that is a really, really fast ride to the bottom . . . Next step is to paint you as a "health scrounger" if you are ill or old and don't want to be euthanized. Then later it will be that if you are obese, you'll be nudged in this direction, also.

Some fences have been erected for very good reasons, in my view.

https://twitter.com/backtolife_2023/status/1591506506536882177 Canada: A St. Catharines man says he will choose medically assisted death over homelessness. CityNews explores the ethics of MAiD amid concerns some feel they have no other choice. Source: CityNews (Youtube)

He needs two MD's to sign. He already has one.

This is already happening in Canada, apparently healthcare workers are allowed to bring up euthanasia. Pretty disgusting

apparently healthcare workers are allowed to bring up euthanasia

This bothers me more than the mere existence of MAID.

Who are these people to suggest suicide to patients? If the patients already know about it and ask, that's one thing, but suggesting it goes against basic best practice when dealing with suicide -- you don't put the idea in someone else's head.

Yes, it should never ever be advertised and definitely not suggested or thrown out there. If someone truly wants to die they will bring it up on their own. This is the only ethical way

What happens now in Canada with mental health sectioning? In the UK if you are a legitimate suicide risk, you will most likely be sectioned against your will to keep you alive. With MAID in place, do they now just hand you the sign off sheet for euthanasia?

I recently saw a video about how fucked the assisted suicide program is in Canada. They essentially already did suicide for mental illness. A lot of non-terminal disabled people complained that assisted suicide was pushed on them when they complained about their subpar quality of care and/or their financial status. Now Canada has simply made it official that they're choosing eugenics against the mentally ill (except for trans people, of course) instead of helping them

This is why I never approved of government assisted suicide. It NEVER stops at just helping the terminally ill die peacefully on their own terms. It always branches out to people who are difficult to treat that the government and/or insurance companies would rather not pay for

And now people who need mental health treatment in Canada will have a valid reason to be scared to get it. If you go in and cry about how your abusive past wrecked you, the shrink might funnel you into a suicide booth instead of helping you see that it gets better and giving you tools to cope

Oh my fucking God. This is awful. It's bad enough that countries in Europe straight up murder people. Switzerland just fucking killed author Norah Vincent a few months ago, and she didn't have any physical illness.

Honestly it feels like our society is slipping into total moral degeneracy at an alarming rate. It seems like progressives and liberals are competing to see who can throw out morality the fastest. If you have a society with no moral constraints, then you wind up with shit like pedophilia and murder of healthy people being normalized. I mean, what's fucking next? Infanticide?

This reminds me of the case of 23 year old Shanti de Corte in Belgium. She asked to be euthanised in May this year because she could no longer bear the mental anguish after watching Islamic terrorists blow up most of her classmates on the Metro in 2016.

She asked the Belgian state for permission to be euthanised and it was granted, on the basis that it was logical.

Douglas Murray points out:

But it would be impossible, of course, for Belgium to put any of the perpetrators to death. Belgian law, indeed European law, forbids any such thing. In certain states in the US the death penalty exists – also by lethal drugging – but this is scorned by most Europeans, for we are beyond such barbarism. Executing a criminal would be illegal under the European Convention, the European Court of Justice and a whole slew of related laws and protocols. That’s because in the 21st century, Europe is so sophisticated that it is unacceptable to execute criminals. Executing their victims, by contrast, is not just acceptable but ‘logical’.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-wests-uncivilised-euthanasia-policy/

I could see many people today feeling like this over how crazy life has become. I wake up every day and feel like I'm living in a nightmare that doesn't end. Very rarely, I wake up still half asleep and forget it's 2022. I feel like it's 2008 and like life still has promise. I'm sure I'm not alone in that.

That’s because in the 21st century, Europe is so sophisticated that it is unacceptable to execute criminals. Executing their victims, by contrast, is not just acceptable but ‘logical’.

This is such a sobering point. The terrorists who traumatized her are protected. The Belgian population would be outraged if they started executing rapists and murderers. But they're cool with a traumatized young girl being killed for the "crime" of being a depressed buzzkill!?

What if one of the terrorists requested assisted suicide? Would they grant it? It would figure if they didn't.

[–] emissch [OP] 22 points Edited

Yep, and I do feel like "informed consent" has been grotesquely twisted as a sort of blank check to do all sorts of harm to the patient and get off scott-free. It's just incredibly disturbing. And where is the consideration of the suicidal individual's family in all this? We're just supposed to sit back and let loved ones opt for death instead of help? fucking twisted.

I am not finding anything sensible about Norah Vincent's death. Some articles dare to suggest she died after discovering how hard it is to be a man - conveniently forgetting there were 16 years between the book and her death!

Was the reason for her death depression or other mental illness?

TRAs are beyond evil. Norah Vincent took care to point out in her obituary that she was not transgender, and yet still these vultures are trying to claim her as one of their own.

Ms. Vincent was a lesbian. She was not transgender, or gender fluid. She was, however, interested in gender and identity.

You know she put that in there to stop the TRAs from trying to claim her, but these people have no fucking respect for the dead.

As far as I've been able to tell, she had no physical illness. If she had terminal cancer or something, it would have been mentioned.

Previous thread on her death:

https://ovarit.com/o/GenderCritical/141842/norah-vincent-who-chronicled-passing-as-a-man-is-dead-at-53-the-new-york-times-s

Wait I believe she was suffering from MS. It's a brutal disease so I can empathize with her decision but I am not for euthanasia given I see the horror if it gets widespread legalization.

I don’t think this is an accident. Our federal and provincial governments really hate the disabled and do as little for us as they possibly can.

There’s a major shortage of psychiatrists and psychologists, the cost of living is astronomical, there’s a pension crisis….MAID used to be my pension plan before I successfully sobered up from benzo and alcohol addiction.

The government promised this wouldn’t happen but it is and I think they’re deliberately pushing MAID as a solution to poverty.

I think they’re deliberately pushing MAID as a solution to poverty.

So do I. I bet no wealthy person will be pushed into MAID at the first sign of sadness. And killing off the homeless, disabled, etc is easier than finding a solution for the costs of housing and the shortage of medical resources

Depends on how greedy their heirs are/how unscrupulous are the heir's lawyers. Already wealthy people are at risk for "guardianship", or so the articles I read on 'senior guardianship abuses' a few years ago suggested.

Some of these responses are so dismissive of how this might affect the suicidal person's loved ones and really lack nuance. Most people haven't had to deal with the horrible pain of someone close to you not only dying, but CHOOSING that for themselves, and it really shows.

When you choose to end your life due to mental anguish you're feeling, you pass the pain on. You might be gone but you're pain isn't-- its just displaced on to those around you.

Thank you for your kindness and empathy, this actually made me tear up. the people here have no fucking clue honestly. I am one of these people and the amount of heartbreak I experienced when my loved one was researching and contacting Dignitas....it's insane. I was out of my mind with panic and grief, and it's given me PTSD. Luckily my loved one is no longer actively researching this but it's still in the background as a potential outcome and so it's just a constant lowkey nightmare even though things have calmed down.

I completely understand and im sorry to hear that. A very close friend of mine shot herself 6 years ago and I've found that one doesn't ever really "get over" something like that. And it has also most definitely given me trauma. I hope she's happy wherever she ended up but she didn't have to die. And now me, her parents, many other friends and siblings and family and her old boyfriend will forever carry this with us for the rest of our lives.

Not to mention that I guatentee I understand mental anguish. But it's just not the same as when someone has terminal cancer, for example, KNOWS they have very little time left and that time is nothing short of miserable. It's just not the same or comparable and these things have a massive effect on many, many people besides just the individual that's about to die.

Jesus, i am so sorry about your friend. And I agree on all points. You absolutely cannot compare terminal illness deaths with suicide. you just can't.

Thank you for this.

Its funny that many of the same people who are cool with this wept when people like Robin Williams, Kate Spade, and Anthony Bourdain committed suicide. Like, they can see the tragedy in a rich celebrity leaving their families to deal with this crushing grief. But they don't see the tragedy of some nobody with far less resources putting their family through the same thing

I've lost people to suicide and its horrible. I know someone who lost her husband to it and not knowing why (he didn't leave a note) still haunts her.

Another problem is that suicide can be contagious. This is why the military used to have stringent mental health requirements. One suicide in a closely knit group can cause others to consider it as well. And I'll bet money that nobody in charge of this MAID program considered that when rolling this idea out

I think this policy is horrific, but are you seriously arguing that severely depressed individuals should just continue to suffer because their families don’t want them to die?

I have a family member who is in his 50s who has been basically catatonically depressed for his whole life. He doesn’t kill himself because his parents are still alive but I’m not sure if he will once they die. He never experiences happiness, he’s a shell of a man. He’s also tried basically every therapy and medication available. I think it’s selfish to tell deeply suffering people they can’t kill themselves.

If it's all about "Listen To Marginalized Voices" then they need to fucking listen to disabled activists who have already addressed this.

Like surrogacy and newborn adoption, the majority of "assisted suicide" for non-terminal illness opens the door to coercion. It's not about the person in question, but the surrounding people considering their own interests.

[–] pennygadget 13 points Edited

If it's all about "Listen To Marginalized Voices" then they need to fucking listen to disabled activists who have already addressed this.

The only "disabled" folks they listen to are lazy SJWs who claim that their self-diagnosed anxiety and gender dysphoria makes them too disabled to get a job

It's not about the person in question, but the surrounding people considering their own interests.

Thats the big concern. Will this MAID board even try to suss out if, say, an elderly person is being pushed into suicide because his greedy relatives want his inheritance? Or if a mentally disabled adult is being pushed into it because her relatives don't want to care for her anymore? Will they offer MAID to people with intellectual disabilities like Down Syndrome or severe autism? I doubt they care enough to answer these questions because nobody in power gives a fuck about the disabled

What about listening to the disabled who want the option of MAID? Activists do not speak for all disabled, just a portion of them.

What about listening to the disabled who want the option of MAID? Activists do not speak for all disabled, just a portion of them.

This is like asking us to consider the opinions of Happy Hookers and Happy Surrogates. The fact that a few people are cool with it doesn't erase the MASSIVE risk of exploitation and abuse involved in the practice

"What about women who WANT to be sex workers?"

There is a power imbalance between the abled and disabled. It's even worse for people cognitively impaired, including mentally ill people.

This will be used to benefit the people surrounding the person dying. I know it, you know it.

I disagree. Most people will discourage those around them from accessing MAID and you don’t address the power imbalance by taking choices away from the disabled. The fact that a law can be abused doesn’t mean it shouldn’t exist. People pressure others to have an abortions and abortion can be misused in cases of sex selection or disability, but no one would suggest we stop allowing women to have abortions.

In one recording obtained by the AP, the hospital’s director of ethics told Foley that for him to remain in the hospital, it would cost “north of $1,500 a day.” Foley replied that mentioning fees felt like coercion and asked what plan there was for his long-term care.

“Roger, this is not my show,” the ethicist responded. “My piece of this was to talk to you, (to see) if you had an interest in assisted dying.”

https://ovarit.com/test/o/WomensHealthLounge/175897/disturbing-experts-troubled-by-canadas-euthanasia-laws-coeur-d-alene-press

Here is another article about it, it's pretty bad: https://www.commonsense.news/p/scheduled-to-die-the-rise-of-canadas

Victoria, 21, was a third-year engineering student from LaSalle, Ontario, on the other side of the river from Detroit. She suffered from epilepsy—including frequent seizures—and she had anemia, and she was getting three or four iron infusions intravenously every week. She also took care of her mother, Joan, 53, who was battling ovarian cancer and had been confined to a wheelchair by Guillain-Barré syndrome, a neuromuscular disease.

Both women received disability support from the provincial government, in Toronto—that brought in $1,361 every month. After paying rent and utilities, they usually had a little more than $70 to pay for food. 

Sometimes, people would send them groceries or other essentials via Amazon Wishlist; sometimes, they’d get some canned goods at local food banks. Often, they’d get by on only one meal a day.

In May, Victoria took a hard look at their budget. They couldn’t go on like this for long. “Mom,” Joan recalled Victoria telling her, “I don’t think we can survive. We have to apply for MAiD.”

Its strait up eugenics against the disabled. They're being made to choose between abject poverty or death

Excuse me, but what the fuck:

Next March, the government is scheduled to expand the pool of eligible suicide-seekers to include the mentally ill and “mature minors.” According to Canada’s Department of Justice, parents are generally “entitled to make treatment decisions on their children’s behalf. The mature minor doctrine, however, allows children deemed sufficiently mature to make their own treatment decisions.” (The federal government does not define “mature,” nor does it specify who determines whether one is mature. On top of that, the doctrine varies from one province to another.)

So Canada is writing into law language that contains "mature minor" which is an oxymoron unto itself? Even if they did attempt to make a definition, the idea itself is fucked up. Yeah I don't see any potential for abuse there for pedophiles with consent to sex arguments, nope, no cause for concern whatsoever. /s

Next March, the government is scheduled to expand the pool of eligible suicide-seekers to include the mentally ill and “mature minors.”

Holy shit!!!

I guess we shouldn't be surprised considering how minors in Tranada can get castrated without their parents' consent. But still...Holy shit....

I knew kids in high school who claimed to be suicidal because their boyfriend dumped them. Kids are mental messes because their brains are undeveloped! This is insane!

For fuck's sake, they shouldn't even be offering it to anyone under 25 given how much the brain changes up to that age.

My first concern reading that would be parents gaining the right to kill their "non-mature" children. Because if parents are generally entitled to make treatment decisions...

Or the courts awarding guardianship to the government to make that decision.

Here we go!! How many of us have said that this treating kids like adults who can make their own decisions about mutilating their bodies will lead to getting rid of age of consent??? Ugh. This is terrifying.

I immediately thought of this article. It all so horrific, people applying for suicide because they are poor. There was a young man in the article who had been approved because he had diabetes! Canada reeks more and more of eugenics. I hope normal Canadians can end this. So awful.

It was more he got approved because he was blind in one eye and losing sight in the other, being profoundly blind sounds horrific.

I cannot imagine having this conversation with my daughter. This is horrifying....

Jesus. Looks like those suicide booths from Futurama started in Canada.

For real, though. These ultra liberal countries is how you scare people back to stone age conservatism. Why seek professional help when doctors can push to get your kids sterilized or euthanized as mental health care?

These ultra liberal countries is how you scare people back to stone age conservatism.

This Canadian euthanasia plan is horrifying.

I am finding so much genuine horror in liberalism (after spending my whole life as a liberal), I kind of don't know what to do with myself.

Between things like the story of Gabriel Mac (https://thepostmillennial.com/new-york-magazine-celebrates-trans-journalist-who-once-staged-her-own-rape), the gleeful mutilation of children, the creeping push towards pedophilia acceptance, and things like this euthanasia topic...I can see how a romanticized 1950s would look downright heavenly to folks.

I'm with you 100%. I'm still a liberal on economic issues and women's rights, but so much of what they are pushing in the last few years just sounds crazy to me.

I certainly never thought I'd think the same as you, but I do. It's absolutely insanity how we've reached this point.

For real, though. These ultra liberal countries is how you scare people back to stone age conservatism. Why seek professional help when doctors can push to get your kids sterilized or euthanized as mental health care?

I'm guessing the Death Panels will once again be a Republican talking point against universal health care

In this case, I don't blame them. At least in a for-profit system, doctors have an incentive to keep you alive.

These ultra liberal countries is how you scare people back to stone age conservatism.

Social conservatism exists across the political spectrum though. I’m in many online circles of anti-liberal leftists (socialists, communists, social democrats) who abhor prostitution, gender ideology, surrogacy, etc. Materialism can lead you to a place of rejecting corporate-sponsored, market-driven social movements. Also, leftists have long been arguing that families are being destroyed by the liberal economic system by way of increased working hours, geographical atomization, and high cost of living.

Right-wing social conservatism is just oppressive, and usually religiously based. I can’t see many people re-subscribing to an ideology that forces women into restrictive gender roles or abuse, just to get away from euthanasia bills.

I've learned that when people making legislation accuse critics of relying on fallacious "slippery slope" arguments, those arguments are not fallacious. same with trans laws where critics like Meghan Murphy spoke out against self-ID laws and were told that men using self-ID to access women would never happen, yet here we are.

[–] emissch [OP] 25 points Edited

Yes, exactly. not all slippery slope arguments are fallacious. Scope creep is a real thing. Not sure if you read the article i linked but they actually mention this:

In my 2013 book, Assisted Suicide: The Liberal, Humanist Case Against Legalisation, I warned that even allowing euthanasia in cases of terminal illness could open ‘a Pandora’s box’. If assisted dying is justified on the basis of ‘alleviating suffering’, then we should expect ‘more and more categories’ of people to ‘seek recognition of their suffering by demanding assisted suicide for themselves. The categories have a tendency to expand and those who insist that it should only be those with terminal illnesses had better be ready to answer these demands from those who, on good grounds, can demonstrate their own suffering.’ This is precisely what has happened.

I didn't read the article, but am familiar with the issues (and slippery slopes). I had a mentor whose husband chose MAID for terminal lung cancer and she writes and talks about how important it was for him. I am supportive of the concept but we need to be honest about the repercussions, not pretend that things like choosing MAID for disability or mental illness aren't going to happen.

Slippery slope is a real thing and it's never fallacious.

No, a slippery slope fallacy exists when the slippery slope being identified is false--but as you say, slippery slopes do exist. The second fallacy that now exists, is believing that a slippery slope is ITSELF a fallacy.

Much like the exception that proves the rule--that is to say, when you have an apparent exception, but it turns out to fit the rule after all, it proves it. Not that a rule is proved by the existence of a single exception as commonly believed (which is also quite stupid if you think about it at all). If you have an exception that does not fit the rule, it means the rule must be revised to encompass the exception as well.

It is sometimes fallacious, there were enough conservatives claiming that we couldn't legalize gay marriage because that would lead us to legalize zoophilia and pedophilia.

Load more (30 comments)