New bill on assisted dying won't be as permissive as parliamentary committee urged

I never thought I'd say this but, good for them.

A little common sense now, will go along way in preventing any future abuses.

I agree, all we have is the small media snipit, but...I won't fault them for being cautious. This is not something to get wrong!

Being kept alive to suffer some of these illnesses and injuries is literally torture and a fate far worse than death. I can't understand why people would want to force others to endure that kind of misery. For that reason only, the right to a quick and painless death shouldn't be wholly denied to any person or category of people who are aresuffering to that extent, including children and mentally ill. Those people can be considered on a case by case basis and there can be special rules that apply in those circumstances, but a blanket exclusion regardless of the individual's situation is cruel and I think a violation of individual rights.

This is all about the feelings of the people who aren't suffering. A CBC interviewer actually asked a death with dignity advocate "what about the people who commit suicide who regret it?" People just don't want to face up to how bad suffering can be.

There is the legitimate concern about people being pressured to ask to die, whether the state not providing the resources for palliative care, or relatives making them feel like a burden. That is what should be probed by a psychologist before the right to die is granted. Don't see the state stepping up any time soon tho to improve the hospice/palliative care system.

Years ago I did computer work for a chain of palliative care hospices. A common statement from many patients was, "the bastards won't let me die", or words to that effect.

I agree with the sentiments of the proposed bill.

Why would it be a violation of an individuals rights not to be able to get an assisted suicide?

This doesn't mean that people who are suffering intolerable pain with no recourse won't be able to terminate their lives it simply means people who have treatable diseases and mental health issues won't be allowed to use assisted suicide as a first choice health care option which, is a good thing.

People should be able to leave this world any time they want and not be obligated to provide a justification for their decision to others. Mental agony, most of which is incurable, is just as real and awful to the ones suffering from it as the physical variety is. If someone's had enough and can't move forward any more it's their absolute right to leave if they decide to.

Like I said there can be rules about when it is and isn't appropriate to provide that option, applied on a case by case basis. But this article suggests it will not ever be an option to minors or mentally ill regardless of circumstance, and I think that's wrong.

So they suffer more pain terminating their lives, and often aren't successful and just wind up further damaged. Not everybody has access to a firearm (98% success) and might use pills say (6%) success or hanging. Thing is, if they are not successful they can wind up brain damaged and suffer further, as well as being more of a burden on us. Or if they jump, they may also be physically damaged/crippled but not dead.

We could say give them the means, but not the assistance, but that leaves all the people who are unable to do it themselves. Imagine being quadriplegic - would you want to be locked into that with not way out? They're "only" suffering mentally, since they're surviving just fine physically. Personally I would want to be given the option when I've had enough, and be given the assistance to die that I would need.

As I say, the only barrier should be if I feel pushed or coerced into it.

Leave it to a Canadian government, no matter how clear the instruction from the Court, to turn something basic into a multi-volume bureaucratic nightmare that anyone contemplating euthanasia or suicide is going to completely ignore. Just like with medical marijuana they'll foot drag and obfuscate until the proponents that dragged them into court in the first place give up in frustration. Left or right, the busybodies and their need to interfere in every single aspect of a citizen's life will never go away. Why the hell should a citizen have to spend $10K of their own money to fly to a place like Belgium or Holland to get it done properly, with kindness and dignity, just because a range of government and religious ass-clowns back home in Canada are bound and determined to cause roadblocks any way they can?

I have no problem with people leaving this world when they want. The problems I have are when people are coerced into it, are wrongly informed of their prognosis or they demand that doctors who still believe in the Hippocratic oath must assist them.

Guarantee that these things will never happen and no problem. But, if you can't then why don't we just save ourselves a few bucks and give everyone with a terminal illness, painful condition, dementia, depression, schizophrenia and any other myriad of mental illnesses a suicide pill so they can kill themselves at will.

That way it's their choice and nobody has to compromise their own beliefs just to make someone who's suicidal happy.

So condemn many people to suffering because there will be some mistakes along the way? Where else in human affairs can we guarantee perfection.

Coercing of course should not happen, and safeguards put in place to prevent it. Wrong prognosis - bound to happen. What, the guy is going to demand death on day one, or is he going to wait until the pain becomes intolerable? If the prognosis is wrong, he'll find out when the symptoms don't appear. As for forcing doctors, we don't force them to do abortions either - red herring.

Kevorkian built a machine. There should be a way to automate this process so nobody has to be involved. It just can't be that hard to euthanize people, we do it with dogs all the time.

But someone still has to run the I.V. line. Until it simply comes in pill or gas mask form, there will always need to be some sort of assistance, and it's that assistance that meets opposition.

Well yes, and some people are so disabled they can't even take a pill on their own. We should allow people to assist without fear of prosecution.