The problem isn't maid per se. It's the utter failure of the welfare state from catching people sinking that's to blame.
You can blame policies and programs, but in reality the issue has always been the value of human life.
If human life isn't valuable then ending it is easy.
Forcing people to die in pain, misery, and utterly debased is a misplacement of values in my opinion.
And this is often than not a symptom of capitalist valuation. The value of a life is too often viewed as economic [1].
[1] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354671644_VAluing_L...
I think this is because we often see pain and misery as "bad things" that must be avoided at all cost. This tends to lead to the assumption that people who have pain and misery in their lives don't have "good lives" and that the only real option then is to end it.
Pain and misery have purpose and meaning. It can cause people to look beyond themselves. Some very beautiful things have come from people who were in deep pain.
Permanent never ending deep pain and you're old and just waiting to die, that's different.
Or Alzheimers.
> we often see pain and misery as "bad things" that must be avoided at all cost ... only real option then is to end it.
I never heard anyone say anything remotely like that. I believe you're mistaken?
Did you hear someone say that or you're hypothesizing
With that said, the doctors in the article seem crazy, and this: “MAiD is the new society safety net”
It requires, if he is a doctor, that he gives approval to your choice, and in compassion's name try to relieve you from the burdens of guilt and doubt you might have from your choice.
It doesn't just mean accepting that you say "my life is not worth living", it requires them to say, "Yes, your life is not worth living".
Opponents said this was a can of worms, and it seems harder and harder to deny from what's happening in Canada.
(And to repeat, terminal sedation, treatment that hastens death as an unfortunate side effect of trying to relieve pain, as well as refusal of life-prolonging care, is defended even by hardline opponents to euthanasia laws).
An old person had late stage skeleton cancer, extreme pain, drugs didn't help. He wanted to die. The health care system kept him alive against his will for as long as they could
In that case I suppose the reason was instead covering one's own back.
I'm not trying to opine on the Canadian health care system, as I've never experienced it nor given it much thought, but arguendo, if a part of the calculus for wellness is "is it cheaper to kill them?" that would be a deal-breaker.
(Again, not saying that's what is happening, but I am always skeptical of the payor's ability to dictate the treatment for reasons you can infer)
There's such a sliding scale of what is good and right here, and I think reasonable people can draw their lines at different places. Plot these as points on a line, and I think everyone will draw a line somewhere:
* suicide should be allowed
* medically assisted deaths are different from suicide and should be allowed
* people assisting in death should be prosecuted
* if it is hard for law enforcement to distinguish assisted suicide from murder, prosecutions are allowed
* it is okay for your doctor to prescribe death
* it is okay for the state to encourage death as the most cost efficient means of care
* it is okay for the state to withhold care if it is too costly to administer
* it is okay for the state to kill anyone they deem burdensome
Also, suicide hasn't been illegal in Canada for 50 years!
I can't think of anything more shameful than encouraging a non-terminal person to kill themselves.
Similarly, I meant welfare. I think it goes much beyond just healthcare. Unemployment insurance, state help to access the job market, disability help, etc.
So if someone chooses to die, don't always look at that as a problem that could have been fixed with enough resources. Sometimes it's not fixable and we all need to compassionately accept that.
There are different forms of acceptance. Yes, accept that some cases are not fixable. On the other hand, we should also be looking at what led to it being not fixable. There is a huge difference between seeking assisted suicide due to deteriorating physical and mental health from medical causes and seeking assisted suicide due to a lack of medical, psychological, and financial support from the outset.
Your point doesn't refute what I said, or answer a point I made -- I never said it was always a problem. At best I said it very much was now.
First child: $10.00 Second child: $10.00 Third child: $2.50
These were the parking fees for 24 hours (there were no complications necessitating longer stays) in the two different cities she gave birth (the third child was born in a much more rural area with cheaper parking). I cannot stress enough that it cost us $0.00 beyond these amounts.
These costs include the use of a midwife in all three instances, with around 12 visits in advance of birth, then 2 midwives or 1 midwife and 2 nurses for the actual delivery, then 4-6 visits with the midwife post-birth, several of which were in our home.
I would say that’s a positive experience.
Any country that does free childbirth and ambulance rides and appointments with doctors and specialists, I would suggest has an excellent healthcare system, even if not perfect.
Births to illegal immigrants accounts for about 5% of child births in the US. These are not covered by Medicaid, but are covered by some state health systems. To my knowledge, Canada does not extend healthcare to illegal immigrants either. https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/illegal-immigrants-have...