Friday, May 13, 2016

Why is euthanasia singled out for legislative safeguards?

I have been following Bill C-14 (medical aid in dying) on CPAC (Channel 123) and PARLVU the best I could. Conventional media is not detailing very much.

I am not convinced about the safeguards. There is parliamentary discussion about safeguards if an applicant wants to die a safe and painless death "euthanasia".  But there is no parliamentary/legislative safeguards concerning refusal of treatment, withdrawal of treatment, palliative sedation (use of morphine), advance directives, or DNRs, the intent of all is to hasten death. Why protect euthanasia more so than these other methods.

There is a disconnect between the Government and the Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons. The Government says that a health care professional should have conscience objection protection but the College says that a physician's job is to treat a patient i.e. do what a patient wants.  So it comes down to whose constitutional rights are more important, a physician's or a patient's.

At this moment in time I would go with the senate who is asking for an amendment that doctor's have the right to refuse to assist MAID applicants.

Also the federal government should not download MAID to the provinces.  On this most important issue there has to be strong oversight.
--------------------------

Today it was reported that $86 million has been raised for Fort McMurray. It is not very much:only 86 houses X $1 million each









Blog Archive