henric
03-24-2012, 12:54 PM
23/03/2012 11:41:00 AM
by Monica Bugajski
A report given to the Quebec legislature is recommending that doctor-assisted suicides be allowed in extreme cases.
Currently under the Canadian criminal code, euthanasia and assisted suicide are illegal, but a multi-partisan group of nine MNAs called Dying With Dignity Committee recently gave a report to the Quebec legislature recommending that doctors be allowed to help terminally ill patients end their lives in exceptional circumstances.
Canadians may be familiar with the issue from a 1992 Supreme Court of Canada case in which a B.C. woman with Lou Gehrig's disease fought for her right to die but lost by a 5-4 vote. Like so many others who've petitioned for their right, she ended up killing herself anyway in 1994 with the help of an anonymous physician.
The committee's 180-page report has 24 recommendations including making palliative care a basic right so that it's accessible to people with all diseases. It also urges that doctors who help terminally ill patients end their lives not be tried in court.
In regards to assisted suicide, the committee states that the person would have to be an adult, suffering for an incurable disease, and unable to withstand the physical or psychological pain. Two doctors would have to certify that the patient made the request to die.
So that the issue isn't shelved and forgotten, the committee wants the law to be adopted by June 2013, and I certainly think that since it pertains to people's pain, the sooner a decision is made the better. Our society does not condone suffering and our medical community does whatever is possible to alleviate it. For terminally ill patients in constant agony, the only thing to do is help ease their anguish, and sometimes, there is only one way to do so.
Before anyone takes my argument out of context, I'd like to first say that I believe I do not have the right to tell a person how he can live his life, and as part of that, I do not have the right to tell a person how he can end his life. As long as that person's actions aren't hurting anyone else, then they have the right to do what they want. The issue of euthanasia and assisted suicide has to do with an individual's autonomy. The ability to make decisions over our own bodies and lives is one of our essential rights.
You can undoubtedly argue that assisted suicide will affect more than just that individual's life because a person does not live in isolation. People have families and friends who care about them. But as much as those people would hate to see a loved one pass on, I think they would have a harder time seeing a loved one, who has an incurable disease, have to live each and every day in extreme pain. Also, when euthanasia with a physician's help is not an option for those wanting it, the burden of helping with an assisted suicide often falls on the family members themselves, who then have to deal with the criminal fallout of having helped a loved one commit a crime.
This debate relies heavily on what constitutes life and what constitutes death. Is a life over when a brain gives out? What about a heart? It's different for each and every person, and that decision should come from the individual. Through living wills people choose not to be resuscitated when their heart gives out or choose to remain in a vegetative state for years after their brain no longer functions as it should. If we allow people to make these kinds of decisions, I think it's only natural that we give terminally ill people the right to end their lives by their own terms.
What do you think?
by Monica Bugajski
A report given to the Quebec legislature is recommending that doctor-assisted suicides be allowed in extreme cases.
Currently under the Canadian criminal code, euthanasia and assisted suicide are illegal, but a multi-partisan group of nine MNAs called Dying With Dignity Committee recently gave a report to the Quebec legislature recommending that doctors be allowed to help terminally ill patients end their lives in exceptional circumstances.
Canadians may be familiar with the issue from a 1992 Supreme Court of Canada case in which a B.C. woman with Lou Gehrig's disease fought for her right to die but lost by a 5-4 vote. Like so many others who've petitioned for their right, she ended up killing herself anyway in 1994 with the help of an anonymous physician.
The committee's 180-page report has 24 recommendations including making palliative care a basic right so that it's accessible to people with all diseases. It also urges that doctors who help terminally ill patients end their lives not be tried in court.
In regards to assisted suicide, the committee states that the person would have to be an adult, suffering for an incurable disease, and unable to withstand the physical or psychological pain. Two doctors would have to certify that the patient made the request to die.
So that the issue isn't shelved and forgotten, the committee wants the law to be adopted by June 2013, and I certainly think that since it pertains to people's pain, the sooner a decision is made the better. Our society does not condone suffering and our medical community does whatever is possible to alleviate it. For terminally ill patients in constant agony, the only thing to do is help ease their anguish, and sometimes, there is only one way to do so.
Before anyone takes my argument out of context, I'd like to first say that I believe I do not have the right to tell a person how he can live his life, and as part of that, I do not have the right to tell a person how he can end his life. As long as that person's actions aren't hurting anyone else, then they have the right to do what they want. The issue of euthanasia and assisted suicide has to do with an individual's autonomy. The ability to make decisions over our own bodies and lives is one of our essential rights.
You can undoubtedly argue that assisted suicide will affect more than just that individual's life because a person does not live in isolation. People have families and friends who care about them. But as much as those people would hate to see a loved one pass on, I think they would have a harder time seeing a loved one, who has an incurable disease, have to live each and every day in extreme pain. Also, when euthanasia with a physician's help is not an option for those wanting it, the burden of helping with an assisted suicide often falls on the family members themselves, who then have to deal with the criminal fallout of having helped a loved one commit a crime.
This debate relies heavily on what constitutes life and what constitutes death. Is a life over when a brain gives out? What about a heart? It's different for each and every person, and that decision should come from the individual. Through living wills people choose not to be resuscitated when their heart gives out or choose to remain in a vegetative state for years after their brain no longer functions as it should. If we allow people to make these kinds of decisions, I think it's only natural that we give terminally ill people the right to end their lives by their own terms.
What do you think?