Law ‘Disturbing’: Experts troubled by Canada’s euthanasia laws - Canada takes the /adv/ route on helping the disabled

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
‘Disturbing’: Experts troubled by Canada’s euthanasia laws
By MARIA CHENG yesterday

TORONTO (AP) — Alan Nichols had a history of depression and other medical issues, but none were life-threatening. When the 61-year-old Canadian was hospitalized in June 2019 over fears he might be suicidal, he asked his brother to “bust him out” as soon as possible.

Within a month, Nichols submitted a request to be euthanized and he was killed, despite concerns raised by his family and a nurse practitioner.

His application for euthanasia listed only one health condition as the reason for his request to die: hearing loss.

Nichols’ family reported the case to police and health authorities, arguing that he lacked the capacity to understand the process and was not suffering unbearably — among the requirements for euthanasia. They say he was not taking needed medication, wasn’t using the cochlear implant that helped him hear, and that hospital staffers improperly helped him request euthanasia.

“Alan was basically put to death,” his brother Gary Nichols said.

Disability experts say the story is not unique in Canada, which arguably has the world’s most permissive euthanasia rules — allowing people with serious disabilities to choose to be killed in the absence of any other medical issue.

Many Canadians support euthanasia and the advocacy group Dying With Dignity says the procedure is “driven by compassion, an end to suffering and discrimination and desire for personal autonomy.” But human rights advocates say the country’s regulations lack necessary safeguards, devalue the lives of disabled people and are prompting doctors and health workers to suggest the procedure to those who might not otherwise consider it.

Equally troubling, advocates say, are instances in which people have sought to be killed because they weren’t getting adequate government support to live.

Canada is set to expand euthanasia access next year, but these advocates say the system warrants further scrutiny now.

Euthanasia “cannot be a default for Canada’s failure to fulfill its human rights obligations,” said Marie-Claude Landry, the head of its Human Rights Commission.

Landry said she shares the “grave concern” voiced last year by three U.N. human rights experts, who wrote that Canada’s euthanasia law appeared to violate the agency’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights. They said the law had a “discriminatory impact” on disabled people and was inconsistent with Canada’s obligations to uphold international human rights standards.

Tim Stainton, director of the Canadian Institute for Inclusion and Citizenship at the University of British Columbia, described Canada’s law as “probably the biggest existential threat to disabled people since the Nazis’ program in Germany in the 1930s.”

During his recent trip to Canada, Pope Francis blasted what he has labeled the culture of waste that considers elderly and disabled people disposable. “We need to learn how to listen to the pain” of the poor and most marginalized, Francis said, lamenting the “patients who, in place of affection, are administered death.”

Canada prides itself on being liberal and accepting, said David Jones, director of the Anscombe Bioethics Centre in Britain, “but what’s happening with euthanasia suggests there may be a darker side.”

___

Euthanasia, where doctors use drugs to kill patients, is legal in seven countries — Belgium, Canada, Colombia, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand and Spain — plus several states in Australia.

Other jurisdictions, including several U.S. states, permit assisted suicide — in which patients take the lethal drug themselves, typically in a drink prescribed by a doctor.

In Canada, the two options are referred to as medical assistance in dying, though more than 99.9% of such deaths are euthanasia. There were more than 10,000 deaths by euthanasia last year, an increase of about a third from the previous year.

Canada’s road to allowing euthanasia began in 2015, when its highest court declared that outlawing assisted suicide deprived people of their dignity and autonomy. It gave national leaders a year to draft legislation.

The resulting 2016 law legalized both euthanasia and assisted suicide for people aged 18 and over provided they met certain conditions: They had to have a serious condition, disease or disability that was in an advanced, irreversible state of decline and enduring “unbearable physical or mental suffering that cannot be relieved under conditions that patients consider acceptable.” Their death also had to be “reasonably foreseeable,” and the request for euthanasia had to be approved by at least two physicians.

The law was later amended to allow people who are not terminally ill to choose death, significantly broadening the number of eligible people. Critics say that change removed a key safeguard aimed at protecting people with potentially years or decades of life left.

Today, any adult with a serious illness, disease or disability can seek help in dying.

Canadian health minister Jean-Yves Duclos said the country’s euthanasia law “recognizes the rights of all persons ... as well as the inherent and equal value of every life.”

___

The countries that allow euthanasia and assisted suicide vary in how they administer and regulate the practices, but Canada has several policies that set it apart from others. For example:

— Unlike Belgium and the Netherlands, where euthanasia has been legal for two decades, Canada doesn’t have monthly commissions to review potentially troubling cases, although it does publish yearly reports of euthanasia trends.

— Canada is the only country that allows nurse practitioners, not just doctors, to end patients’ lives. Medical authorities in its two largest provinces, Ontario and Quebec, explicitly instruct doctors not to indicate on death certificates if people died from euthanasia.

— Belgian doctors are advised to avoid mentioning euthanasia to patients since it could be misinterpreted as medical advice. The Australian state of Victoria forbids doctors from raising euthanasia with patients. There are no such restrictions in Canada. The association of Canadian health professionals who provide euthanasia tells physicians and nurses to inform patients if they might qualify to be killed, as one of their possible “clinical care options.”

— Canadian patients are not required to have exhausted all treatment alternatives before seeking euthanasia, as is the case in Belgium and the Netherlands.

Still, Duclos said there were adequate safeguards in place, including “stringent eligibility criteria” to ensure no disabled people were being encouraged or coerced into ending their lives. Government figures show more than 65% of people are being euthanized due to cancer, followed by heart problems, respiratory issues and neurological conditions.

Theresia Degener, a professor of law and disability studies at the Protestant University for Applied Sciences in northwestern Germany, said allowing euthanasia based exclusively on disability was a clear human rights violation.

“The implication of (Canada’s) law is that a life with disability is automatically less worth living and that in some cases, death is preferable,” said Degener.

___

Alan Nichols lost his hearing after brain surgery at age 12 and suffered a stroke in recent years, but he lived mostly on his own. “He needed some help from us, but he was not so disabled that he qualified for euthanasia,” said Gary Nichols.

In one of the assessments filed by a nurse practitioner before Nichols was killed, she noted his history of seizures, frailty and “a failure to thrive.” She also wrote that Nichols had hearing and vision loss.

The Nichols family were horrified that his death appeared to be approved based partly on Alan’s hearing loss and had other concerns about how Alan was euthanized. They lodged complaints with the British Columbia agency that regulates doctors and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, asking for criminal charges. They also wrote to Canada’s minister of justice.

“Somebody needs to take responsibility so that it never happens to another family,” said Trish Nichols, Gary’s wife. “I am terrified of my husband or another relative being put in the hospital and somehow getting these (euthanasia) forms in their hand.”

The hospital says Alan Nichols made a valid request for euthanasia and that, in line with patient privacy, it was not obligated to inform relatives or include them in treatment discussions.

The provincial regulatory agency, British Columbia’s College of Doctors and Surgeons, told the family it could not proceed without a police investigation. In March, Royal Canadian Mounted Police Cpl. Patrick Maisonneuve emailed the relatives to say he had reviewed the documentation and concluded Alan Nichols “met the criteria” for euthanasia.

The family’s parliamentary representative, Laurie Throness, asked British Columbia’s health minister for a public investigation, calling the death “deeply disturbing.”

The health minister, Adrian Dix, said the province’s oversight unit reviewed the case and “has not referred it for any further inquiry.” He pointed out that the euthanasia law does not allow for families to review euthanasia requests or be privy to hospitals’ decisions.

Trudo Lemmens, chair of health law and policy at the University of Toronto, said it was “astonishing” that authorities concluded Nichols’ death was justified.

“This case demonstrates that the rules are too loose and that even when people die who shouldn’t have died, there is almost no way to hold the doctors and hospitals responsible,” he said.

___

Some disabled Canadians have decided to be killed in the face of mounting bills.

Before being euthanized in August 2019 at age 41, Sean Tagert struggled to get the 24-hour-a-day care he needed. The government provided Tagert, who had Lou Gehrig’s disease, with 16 hours of daily care at his home in Powell River, British Columbia. He spent about 264 Canadian dollars ($206) a day to pay coverage during the other eight hours.

Health authorities proposed that Tagert move to an institution, but he refused, saying he would be too far from his young son. He called the suggestion “a death sentence” in an interview with the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.

Before his death, Tagert had raised more than CA$16,000 ($12,400) to buy specialized medical equipment he needed to live at home with caretakers. But it still wasn’t enough.

“I know I’m asking for change,” Tagert wrote in a Facebook post before his death. “I just didn’t realize that was an unacceptable thing to do.”

Stainton, the University of British Columbia professor, pointed out that no province or territory provides a disability benefit income above the poverty line. In some regions, he said, it is as low as CA$850 ($662) a month — less than half the amount the government provided to people unable to work during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Heidi Janz, an assistant adjunct professor in Disability Ethics at the University of Alberta, said “a person with disabilities in Canada has to jump through so many hoops to get support that it can often be enough to tip the scales” and lead them to euthanasia.

Duclos, the national health minister, told The Associated Press that he could not comment on specific cases but said all jurisdictions have a broad range of policies to support disabled people. He acknowledged “disparities in access to services and supports across the country.”

Other disabled people say the easy availability of euthanasia has led to unsettling and sometimes frightening discussions.

Roger Foley, who has a degenerative brain disorder and is hospitalized in London, Ontario, was so alarmed by staffers mentioning euthanasia that he began secretly recording some of their conversations.

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.”

Foley said he had never previously mentioned euthanasia. The hospital says there is no prohibition on staff raising the issue.

Catherine Frazee, a professor emerita at Toronto’s Ryerson University, said cases like Foley’s were likely just the tip of the iceberg.

“It’s difficult to quantify it, because there is no easy way to track these cases, but I and other advocates are hearing regularly from disabled people every week who are considering (euthanasia),” she said.

Frazee cited the case of Candice Lewis, a 25-year-old woman who has cerebral palsy and spina bifida. Lewis’ mother, Sheila Elson, took her to an emergency room in Newfoundland five years ago. During her hospital stay, a doctor said Lewis was a candidate for euthanasia and that if her mother chose not to pursue it, that would be “selfish,” Elson told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.

___

Canada has tweaked its euthanasia rules since they were first enacted six years ago, but critics say more needs to be done — especially as Canada expands access further.

Next year, the country is set to allow people to be killed exclusively for mental health reasons. It is also considering extending euthanasia to “mature” minors — children under 18 who meet the same requirements as adults.

Chantalle Aubertin, spokeswoman for Canadian Justice Minister David Lametti, said in an email that the government had taken into account concerns raised by the disabled community when it added safeguards to its euthanasia regulations last year. Those changes included that people were to be informed of all services, such as mental health support and palliative care, before asking to die.

Aubertin said those and other measures would “help to honor the difficult and personal decisions of some Canadians to end their suffering on their own terms, while enshrining important safeguards to protect the vulnerable.”

Dr. Jean Marmoreo, a family physician who regularly provides euthanasia services in Ontario, has called for specialized panels to provide a second opinion in difficult cases.

“I think this is not something you want to rush, but at the same time, if the person has made a considered request for this and they meet the eligibility criteria, then they should not be denied their right to a dignified death,” she said.

Landry, Canada’s human rights commissioner, said leaders should listen to the concerns of those facing hardships who believe euthanasia is their only option. She called for social and economic rights to be enshrined in Canadian law to ensure people can get adequate housing, health care and support.

“In an era where we recognize the right to die with dignity, we must do more to guarantee the right to live with dignity,” she said.

___

Nicole Winfield in Edmonton, Alberta, contributed to this report.

___

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

SOURCE
 
I think euthanasia happens more than we know. When my Dad died, he was comatose and I was there, wouldn't leave, and they sent in a nurse I'd never seen before in the months prior. I wanted to sleep. The nurse kept me up talking about whatever. He had no other duties. When I finally got exhausted I said I'm going home to shower and change. Moments after I got home I got a call that dad had died.

There is a supernatural narrative/belief that your loved ones "wait for you to leave" but I don't think God or Dad waited for me to leave. That grim reaper nurse waited for me to leave and gave Dad a little extra morphine.

They won't do it unless there's no more money to be made. Dad was certainly going to die. But I don't think he died naturally. Can't prove it.

I think euthanasia is standard practice in nursing homes and hospices.
In Hospices it is a grey area because they are allowed to up the Morphine doses past normal limits, because what's it gonna do, kill him? Hospital's? If your story is true you probably should have spoken to someone. Trust me on this Hospital's DO NOT send in the grim reaper to put down patients. But they have been known to have problems with "Angel of Death" Serial Killers. I actually encountered one in the flesh quite a few times before he was discovered. The dudes name was Richard DeAngelo. He worked at Good Sam hospital in Bay Shore, Long Island. He was a male RN. And he liked to send Granny's off to the great beyond. It was a fairly big story but this was pre internet days. I forget his number of confirmed kills, but it was really high.

And folks, PAY ATTENTION! I am about to teach you the most useful and important words to know when dealing with a (US) hospital. These are the magic words that open doors, solve problems, and send the staff into an absolute panic. These are the words you are not supposed to know. But I do caution you not to use them lightly. Only use them when care is not being properly delivered.

"What Floor Is Risk Management On?"
Whoever you ask this will respond "Oh do you need to speak to the Patient Advocate?" or some similarly useless yes man who will attempt to convince you that any problems in care are in your head or simply your fault. Respond with...
"No I am looking for Risk Management. Now please tell me what floor are they on!"

To explain, in a Hospital the Patient Advocates, or whatever they choose to call them, are the patient and family facing Customer Service Liars. They are utterly useless in every way possible. But Risk Management? Risk Management is the internal team of lawyers that audit and assess risk. They are hospital staff facing. They are the hospital equivalent of Internal Affairs or the Inspector General. No Hospital Employee wants to get on their radar for ANYTHING. And they do take all complaints or questions seriously. But you the general public are not supposed to know they exist. And quite honestly normally you don't even have to talk to them. Just saying their name is enough to change the entire pattern of your loved ones care. Within minutes. Suddenly you will find the Charge Nurse herself taking extra special care. Suddenly one Doctor will be assigned to straighten up the herd of squabbling specialists each seeking to micromanage the patient using their own brand of voodoo.

In the case of your fathers passing, it might be nothing, but it might have been worth at least talking to them or giving them a heads up. Because they are there to look for things like that. Things like how often was said male nurse the last nurse known to be treating departed patients? Police Forces have to be careful not to hire Sociopaths and Psychopaths. Fire Departments have to screen heavily for Arsonists and Vanity Pyro's. The Clergy has to keep watch for Pedophiles, especially the Catholics. and Hospital's and Health Care have to watch out for "Angels of Death".
 
I remember a news report about how Netherlands officials were quietly using the Legal Euthanasia laws to “Take care of” people who were too expensive and threatened the solvency of their health care system and there were warnings that this may spread to other countries.

Looks like Canada just said “Hold my beer”
That's complete and utter bullshit. The fearmongering about euthanasia in Anglo countries is ridiculous, it is extremely difficult to get euthanasia here even if you are clearly dying. A relative of mine recently helped an old lady she had been taking care of for years pass through euthanasia. This lady was in her 80s, all alone, in a wheelchair in a home, and had lost the ability to do anything because half her body was paralysed. And you still had doctors saying 'are you suuuuuuure, you might feel better tomorrow!'

Asking people to suffer endlessly because death makes you personally uncomfortable is pure evil.

Edit: That said, what Canada is doing is absolutely retarded because Canada. Don't associate European euthanasia legislation with Canadians being retarded.
 
In the case of your fathers passing, it might be nothing, but it might have been worth at least talking to them or giving them a heads up.
They knew. I knew. I think they knew I knew. I was literally there waiting for him to die. Before he was comatose, he was in a great deal of pain.

I don't even think it was the worst thing to do. It's the dishonesty about it that is strange.

Asking people to suffer endlessly because death makes you personally uncomfortable is pure evil.

I agree. You practically have to beg to die, especially if you have good insurance and it is still paying out.
 
~15 fucking years or so ago when parts of the western world were seriously beginning to toy with this idea, many people tried to point out this exact type of end game. That even without abuse, the idea of there even being a CHANCE that a "well, maybe it'll be easier if you just die" type of mentality might come from it would be horrifying and unacceptable! Oh but no you see, that was all slippery slope thinking and inhumane to the poor victims truly in need of death.

One of the other great fears was that in socialized medical systems, one day it might start being legitimized as a standard "treatment" or something. (i.e. the only "treatment" they will pay for, or allow in single payer) This is an issue where my opinions are without difference to fed posting for supporters and practitioners! A literal cult of death!

This is the most basic level of oath breaking and should be insta licensing killing.
 
Go on Indeed and look up how much care home people make. They make minimum wage even with nursing certs. I can easily see them pushing for euthanasia.

At the same time, I can also see old people killing themselves as a response to our times. Hard to know with this one.
 
This was a natural result of the “safe legal and rare” approach. You morons going “the government will only kill people who ask and have terminal cancer” shut your fucking mouths. I see some of you morons even in this thread. “Hearing loss” “allergies” etc etc. They are straight up executing the mentally ill.

Next step is financial incentives for people. It’ll become mandatory for some conditions in a decade or two its happening fast. Once the line is crossed it can only go one way. It happens that way when you abandon God and choose the culture of death.
 
I think euthanasia should be a last resort type of thing, but legal if the person is of sound mind and has consulted with their medical doctor and a psychiatrist about it.
LeftTard-'The government can con speds into terrorism charges, but totally trust them on this bro.'
RightTard-'The government has been weaponized against the right for decades, but totally trust the military bro.'
Tard-'The government wants to depopulate the planet for X reasons, but totally trust them on this bro.'

No. Either do it yourself ahead of time, or sucks to be you.
 
Seems like the ultimate end result of government healthcare is that you become just another cost to be cut.
One of the unforeseen (lol) consequences of supply-side theories.
"Cutting expenses goes almost straight to the bottom-line! A dollar saved is better than a dollar profit!"
True to a point but my brother in Christ, the market has to want to purchase that which you are selling.
As much as I would like for people with painful terminal conditions to choose to end life on their own terms, I wouldn't want a bunch of Canadian bugmen deciding whether I live or die. It smacks of Boxer the Horse from Animal Farm being carted to the slaughterhouse because he was no longer useful. Also, I seem to recall the Nazis reframing their murder of the disabled as a compassionate act. As much as I think the Jews harp too much about the six gorillion, I am going to be sad to see the Holocaust pass into history, because we'll no longer have that knee-jerk reaction against the slaughter of the weak and feeble.

What put me squarely in the stigmatized "HoLoCaUSt DeNiEr!!1!" camp was learning that Jews actually do advocate for historical revisions now. Not to the sacred 6M Jews, no. The "5M" of everybody else has been dramatically slashed on the other hand. Many will go so far as to say the Holocaust only applies to the extermination of Jews. Not only is it completely irrational but it betrays their intent. It's not about truth, or remembrance of history. It's self-serving to the detriment of others that by their own arguments existed until very recently.
 
Last edited:
With how many immigrants are starting to leave Canada, alongside the constant cutting corners of healthcare funding it’s no surprise that the government is allowing the elderly to be euthanized just to save on long term cost.

The biggest argument for mass migration in Canada was to “care for the aging population”, but that has failed so now we’re just straight up killing the elderly because otherwise the demographic collapse would be quite severe
 
With how many immigrants are starting to leave Canada, alongside the constant cutting corners of healthcare funding it’s no surprise that the government is allowing the elderly to be euthanized just to save on long term cost.

The biggest argument for mass migration in Canada was to “care for the aging population”, but that has failed so now we’re just straight up killing the elderly because otherwise the demographic collapse would be quite severe
Speaking as somebody who worked in a nursing home as a security guard, that had alot of the staff turn out to be be asians who barely spoke english, who the dementia patients could hardly understand half the time and who were so incompetent that assaults weren't recorded as assaults on residents by other residents because the nursing staff couldn't prove the bruising was from what the other resident did and not from the excessively rough handling of the victim in the shower earlier that day. They also ignored a violent resident who literally tried to stab me minutes earlier with a highlighter slipping a sharp pencil into her clothes with a clear intent to use it as a weapon (this same resident walked around for days at a time wearing mittens and had latex medical gloves on underneath so the sweat from her hands and friction caused injuries so severe the staff initially thought she'd burned her hands when they finally got around to telling her to remove them one day. did they treat it? No. They put both sets of gloves back on and ignored it. This same person was going around from room to room at night pulling sedated, barely able to stand/wheelchair bound residents out of their beds, completely wacked out of their minds on their night time meds and tried to remove them from the room. When I pointed this out and tried to stop it I was told not to intervene, even after pointing out that this was going to lead to someone falling, breaking a hip and dying

If this is what they meant by increasing immigration to take care of the elderly then a major shitstorm is coming for the aging population
 
His application for euthanasia listed only one health condition as the reason for his request to die: hearing loss.

He died of being deaf?
Please tell me I'm not the only person who's read The Bible According to Spike Milligan:

24. And Rehoboam, the son of Solomon, reigned in Judah. He died of the deafness; there cometh a steamroller behind him and he heareth it not.
 
When my father died from cancer i would hear him beg his nurse to administer him an overdose of morphine, there really wasn't much left of him in the end and he died a needlessly painful and drawnout death.

As shitty as it is i fully support euthanasia with the correct checks and balances, why wouldn't you?
 
As shitty as it is i fully support euthanasia with the correct checks and balances, why wouldn't you?
I have more than one reason, but one of the important reasons I do not support euthanasia is the fact that "correct checks and balances" are impossible to implement, and there is a great material incentive for ending lives of people who are deemed too costly to care for.
 
When my father died from cancer i would hear him beg his nurse to administer him an overdose of morphine, there really wasn't much left of him in the end and he died a needlessly painful and drawnout death.

As shitty as it is i fully support euthanasia with the correct checks and balances, why wouldn't you?
Assuming you are an atheist then just pretend I gestured vaguely at canada. It can’t be done the way you think it can because the incentive is to kill more people. So you get to the point where you are executing mentally ill people for ridiculous reasons. Its only gonna accelerate from there.

For Christians its prohibited by God as all people have an inherent value due to being an imagebearer of God. We don’t have authority to take it away as creations. When you allow the removal of that value, even for an ostensibly narrow “”””””good””””” purpose, a line is crossed. You usurp God and make the State god. Its happened many times in history. Have you noticed how atheist states always go straight to mass murder genocide at a blink? Because the state is god and assigns value in partial ways. God doesn’t change.
 
56bc7338dd0895eb0a8b468a.jpeg
 
For Christians its prohibited by God as all people have an inherent value due to being an imagebearer of God. We don’t have authority to take it away as creations.
If that’s the case, then every Christian that’s ever killed anyone in war or self-defense (you know, those cases in which it’s supposedly morally justified) is apparently burning in hell now despite the assurances to the contrary I’ve heard over the years from assorted pastors.

Human intellect and ability are supposed to be used for the glory of God, are they not? That’s the message I was taught when discussing the Parable of the Talents, anyway. When medicine has reached the limits of what it can do, and the patient is damned to linger in agony until they finally die, how is leaving them in pain the moral choice? The knowledge is there to prevent that suffering—to ‘wisely invest the talent’ as the good and faithful servant did. Is doing nothing any different than the guy who buried his silver to ensure he wouldn’t make the boss mad losing it?
 
Back
Top Bottom