540
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 163 points 1 year ago

If you're wondering how fun this could get, here's an article from the National Post arguing that poverty should be a qualifier for assisted suicide

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/canada-medical-aid-in-dying

Here's another where a woman with sensitivities to various chemical smells chose to die because she couldn't find an apartment that was affordable and didn't reek of noxious chemicals

https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/woman-with-chemical-sensitivities-chose-medically-assisted-death-after-failed-bid-to-get-better-housing-1.5860579

The people who are worried about this aren't worried about people who genuinely want to die committing suicide. It was always nearly impossible to stop them anyway, and there's no way to change that. What we're worried about is people being pushed toward MAID because they've been systemically denied things they need to live that are absolutely available. We're worried about mentally ill people being told "do the right thing, don't be a burden" when they want to live. We're worried about suicide becoming the answer to problems that are caused by social and legislative conditions. We're worried about becoming the kind of society where, rather than help one another, it's expected that anyone who needs help just off themselves.

This is all coming from someone who tried twice and will be eternally grateful that I managed to fuck it up both times.

[-] nucleative@lemmy.world 37 points 1 year ago

Your comment brings up the most relevant point against MAID and it's clear we can be a better society than one which pushes people over the edge, or let's them fall despite their pleas.

I too am glad that you managed to fuck it up and that you're here with us.

[-] ParsnipWitch@feddit.de 18 points 1 year ago

Glad you pushed through this.

As someone with a disability, this is one of my biggest fears: Social pressure to seek assisted suicide.

load more comments (12 replies)
[-] Arcanus@lemmy.world 126 points 1 year ago

This just sounds like a convenient way to get rid of homeless people

[-] Tylerdurdon@lemmy.world 53 points 1 year ago

"Addicted to drugs? Sounds like you want to die. Here, we'll help."

WCGW?

[-] pimento64@sopuli.xyz 41 points 1 year ago

2024: "Canada has approved medically assisted death for people who are late on their rent"
2025: "Canada has approved medically assisted death for unhoused persons"
2026: "Canada has approved medically assisted death for ~~social parasites~~ the disabled"
2027: "Canada has approved medically assisted death for adults and children with autism"
2028: "Canada has approved medically assisted death for those suffering from the effects of institutionalized racism"
2029: "Canada has approved medically assisted death for any First Nations, black, non-land-owning, or poor people who aren't already dead yet, and it's optional through 2030"

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

Yeah I support the right to a comfortable death, but there’s a hard line here of only for people who will die in the near future with or without intervention of a disease they’re suffering from a sufficiently advanced case of. And it needs strict controls including oversight by disabled people.

I’ve watched a person slowly and painfully waste away to a disease. But I’ve also seen people say my life isn’t worth living.

Choices still matter in drug addiction and it shouldn’t receive the final mercy we may choose to offer to the terminally ill who are unable to even end their own life. If they want to die then they should have to do it themselves without help.

load more comments (23 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (24 replies)

Wow that’s… actually kinda fucked.

[-] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 53 points 1 year ago

It's Canada. We aren't the smiling plucky canucks that the international community thinks we are. We're tired, boss. We have some of the worst incidence rates for opioid addiction in the world, the most expensive real estate, politicians that actually don't do anything except self-deal and play culture war games, a massive overpopulation crisis, a jobs crisis, a grocery cost crisis (all told, they call it a cost of living crisis). They literally invented MAID so that people with terminal cancer can take the painless path out, but now it's being discussed for literally anyone who is feeling mentally unwell.

[-] elscallr@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago

They literally invented MAID so that people with terminal cancer can take the painless path out, but now it’s being discussed for literally anyone who is feeling mentally unwell.

The people opposed to medically assisted death used this as an argument against it. I disagreed with them, didn't expect that to really happen.

I still don't disagree with its use here. If a person's life is not their own to take then they have no autonomy at all, but still.. it's jarring to see it actually being used this way.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] kandoh@reddthat.com 71 points 1 year ago

will be expanded next March to give access to people whose sole medical condition is mental illness, which can include substance use disorders.

So not drug use, but mental health conditions which the government considers drug addiction to be.

This will never be used by a drug addict. It will be used by people with untreatable and severe schizophrenia or similar afflictions. If you don't want to live in a nightmare world with no hope I think it should be your right to end it peacefully.

I get suicide makes people uncomfortable, but you're uncomfortable with it in a cozy apartment and good health. You think your protecting vulnerable people from a big scary government, but you're just forcing them to suffer needlessly.

[-] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 25 points 1 year ago

Given that the intent here is to make assisted suicide legal for people who by definition are not of sound mind what protections are in place for people who would qualify for assisted suicide by way of mental health issues but also might not be fully competent to make this decision themselves? Who can step in and say that the patient actually is competent, and by what standards is that judged? Who can step in and say a patient that wants assisted suicide is not competent, or has been manipulated? I'm not worried about people who are genuinely suffering, the fact is we've never been able to stop them from killing themselves and we never will be. I'm worried about someone putting poison in the ear of someone with a treatable disorder, convincing them to "do the right thing and not be a burden".

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] zaphod@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Good to see at least someone around here has some fucking clue regarding the purpose of this law...

  1. Just "feeling mentally unwell", as another commenter put it, is not enough to qualify. The law specifically requires the applicant "experience unbearable physical or mental suffering from your illness, disease, disability or state of decline that cannot be relieved under conditions that you consider acceptable" and "be in an advanced state of decline that cannot be reversed"
  2. If someone makes a "request for medical assistance in dying, 2 independent medical practitioners (physicians or nurse practitioners) must assess it."

From: https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/health-services-benefits/medical-assistance-dying.html

And that's just a couple of the high bars one must clear to qualify.

But, I can say this about Lemmy: given the quality of the discussion on this post, this place really has turned into an excellent replacement for Reddit!

load more comments (10 replies)
[-] polygon6121@lemmy.world 46 points 1 year ago

It is a bit unfair that only drug addicts get this. Assisted suicide should be available for the general population.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 28 points 1 year ago

The article says that the mentally ill also get this option.

[-] polygon6121@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

Aha ok. Thank you for clarifying 🙌

[-] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Have any of their politicians taken them up on the offer?

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] lukzak@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 year ago

Getting addicted to drugs isn't exactly an insurmountable barrier

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] JoBo@feddit.uk 42 points 1 year ago

This feels very click-baity. As far as I can tell, the assisted suicide law is being extended to include people in unbearable pain from mental health problems, not just physical ones. Because substance abuse is classified as a mental health problem, people with drug addictions would have the right to request assisted suicide under this extension to the law.

The objections being raised speak to the same fears many disabled people have about legalising assisted suicide: that people struggling with their health might be, or feel, pressured to end it for the convenience of others, not because it is the best thing for themselves. I assume that the existing law attempts to address this properly, with safeguards against external pressures.

Assisted suicide is most valuable for people who do not have the physical capacity to do it themselves, and do not want to put a loved one at risk of a murder charge. In practice, most people with a serious drug problem can quite easily end it themselves if they want to. Access to assisted suicide doesn't seem particularly likely to change much, except perhaps offer a more peaceful, dignified death for those who want it anyway.

[-] willybe@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 year ago

This article seems to be pushing the conservative narrative. They make a leap from mental health to eugenics, which is a stretch. I call BS

Denying the people the right to die with dignity is a sick perversion of morals.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] vasametropolis@lemmy.world 42 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Honestly just seems like a tee up so the government can "persuade" these people to kill themselves. It's a bold strategy, Cotton.

Could be a dry run for when life gets so bad in the next few years that people just look for the exit.

[-] Perhapsjustsniffit@lemmy.world 36 points 1 year ago

"Kill em all". Canadian here. Disabled folks like myself have been taking this route for a while now simply because they can't afford to live any longer. That's pretty fucked. Canada doesn't want anything to do with us or the "junkies". They'd rather we die.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] Ketchup@reddthat.com 34 points 1 year ago

The government: Can’t function well enough to perform tasks that increase the GDP? We have a drug for that.

[-] hubobes@sh.itjust.works 32 points 1 year ago

Why is there always such a shitshow when it comes to these laws? In Switzerland we have EXIT which is also assisted suicide. Nobody cares that it exists, it is just a reasonable system.

[-] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 24 points 1 year ago

Because the conditions applied always seem to be revolving around removing undesirables within Canada. This example makes people fear that Canadian hospital workers will begin pressuring drug addict patients to kill themselves, or even darker, signing them up for euthanasia without their knowing or consent.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[-] beaubbe@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago

That sounds fucked-up, no? Is it an uncureable condition?

[-] gregorum@lemm.ee 19 points 1 year ago

Addiction isn’t a condition which can, generally speaking, be cured. It’s a chronic condition and is often genetic. While many choose a lifetime of treatment, it’s a constant struggle, and the quality of life varies widely.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] IverCoder@lemm.ee 24 points 1 year ago

Canada is several months away from medically assisted "suicide" for people who don't support currently elected politicians

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Acters@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I do hate this, but at least dying is not an illegal thing to do to oneself, but at the same time, I don't want people to die, even if they decided to. On top of that, there has to be a better way to deal with addiction than allowing someone to just die. Plus, there is a stupid loophole brewing where people who decide not to die could be documented as wanting to die by some powerful individuals. All around, a bad thing to legalize and the administrative problems it would bring

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Portosian@sh.itjust.works 22 points 1 year ago

I'd be worried that this will be used as a screen to kill "undesirables" without scrutiny.

[-] Jaytreeman@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago

Most of the homeless I see are tweaking.
It seems like they're solving the housing crisis in the most dystopian way possible

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[-] ChiefSinner@lemm.ee 21 points 1 year ago

Lord have mercy. Canada has lost their minds.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Eric_Pollock@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago
[-] Veedem@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago

This feels like it crosses a line.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

I just don't know how I feel about it. They do go through an assessment before they're allowed to end their life this way. Maybe if you really want to die because your life is just generally unbearable, you should be allowed to? I get that there are methods to beat addiction, but they don't always work. If you just can't stop smoking meth and you just can't live that way anymore, maybe let that person die like they want to? I honestly don't know if those are yes answers for me.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Neato@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago

Yes, it does. People addicted to drugs have mental issues: addiction. That will warp their judgement. Medically-assisted dying is something that needs to be legal. But the doctors involved need to be sure that the dying properly consents and that is going to be MUCH harder when they have to judge it through a lens of addition.

To me this reads just shy of saying medically assisted dying is now legal for people with mental health issues. Which would 100% be compared to what the Nazis did to the mentally and physically disabled.

[-] gregorum@lemm.ee 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The Nazis didn’t give those (or many people) a choice; it was forced upon them. This isn’t comparable at all.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] who8mydamnoreos@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Just roll out the suicide booths already

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Smoogs@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

This opens some uncomfortable doors for people who have a severe negative and abusive view towards drug addicts.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] doyadig@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

For the last two months I’ve been seriously considering taking my own life. What holds me back is that I’ll severely fuck up my loving family, my mum, dad and brothers and my girlfriend/ex-girlfriend (it’s complicated). It would hurt them so much. If it wasn’t for them I would have already done it.

So what I want to know is why shouldn’t I just end my 33 year old Swedish life right now when there’s just too much stuff to battle. Before I wanted to battle my way through this. But I can’t take this anymore. I’ve never posted something like this before. Sorry everyone. I don’t know why I did it.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2023
540 points (95.0% liked)

News

23259 readers
2831 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS