tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9216787076261944467.post14325273803299049..comments2024-03-27T11:49:41.376-04:00Comments on Euthanasia Prevention Coalition: Bill C-384 received its first-hour of debate on March 16th (again)Alex Schadenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07649977828342637842noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9216787076261944467.post-69387391342942999832010-03-21T11:33:27.221-04:002010-03-21T11:33:27.221-04:00Alex, after reading the email the other night, I w...Alex, after reading the email the other night, I wrote an opinion about the transcript.<br /><br />The next day, I tried to do a poll here of nurses and PA's (nurse assistants), but didn't really pen-and-paper stats. The few answers I got before I just dropped it showed that many people can't understand poll questions.<br /><br />My question was very simple:<br /><br />Q: Do you believe that Canada needs a law on euthanasia/assisted-suicide?<br /><br />Most answers were "yes".<br /><br />Two answered "that's private", although they would not say that if somebody else conducted the poll.<br /><br />One said "no".<br /><br />One PA who originally sayd "yes", changed their mind, when I asked if people here don't die with dignity. When I further asked them if they think people are being forced to stay alive longer than they want to, they said "no". They went on to say, after I asked if this hospital's palliative-care is not doing good enough for patients--"no"! It's just that they feel patients need to have an option of euthanasia/assisted-suicide.<br /><br />Then I further had to clarify that the question was not if you think patients should have the option available; the question was, do you believe a law is needed?<br /><br />With a clearer understanding, the PA and one nurse absolutely oppose a law being passed.<br /><br />This I'm posting here, Alex, because you and Margaret Dore plus legilators need to understand that this hospital is appreciated by most people, in how they handle palliative-care.<br /><br />The people who answered "that's private" were being deliberately snobby about it, for which I told them flat-out, "it's an obvious yes"!<br /><br />This makes this continuous campaign of legalizing DEATH--dangerous! First of all, this illustrates the level of comprehension many nurses and PA's have about ethical health-care. Even though many of these people are working in hospitals with considerate and caring doctors and nurses, their peers and co-workers think there is still a need for a law on euthanasia/assisted-suicide.<br /><br />Alex, I think if there was mandatory education seminars for nurses and PA's to be taught what is going on, and to realize there is a difference between having an option, and needing a law for an option, I'm persuaded that you will have a checkmate on the chess-board! The show of support for passing a law in this country will drastically shrink.<br /><br />The way alot of hospital workers think is pretty universal, and their level of comprehension is equally universal.<br /><br />I really believe that you and Margaret Dore might want to organize sessions to do in hospitals, and to capitalize on the hospitals which are doing well, and their staffs are not populated by euthanasia pushers.<br /><br />You might want to ask hospital care-givers if the nonstop campaign the Duty-to-Die movement are on, has an adverse effect on their job? You could ask if they feel that their patients are not happy with the care they receive before they die?<br /><br />I think this strategy is important, because I doubt that dying patients have cursed the nurses and PA's for the care they received when dying.<br /><br />Even my wife left the workers with a good feeling, that she was thankful for how they helped her in the last few days. <br /><br />Some workers made my wife's life miserable with their attitudes many times. However, in her last stage, after her liver and kidneys shutdown, she was very nice to those who cared for her.<br /><br />Realistically, I feel that most hospital care-givers who support a law right now, will change their minds when you ask how many of their own patients who died, cursed them because they were forced to live too long.<br /><br />Please email a reply to this at: ironsidesx@gmail.com !Ironsideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17859574716267489609noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9216787076261944467.post-80969493827622200712010-03-18T17:48:25.607-04:002010-03-18T17:48:25.607-04:00Hello, I listened to the March 16th debate too and...Hello, I listened to the March 16th debate too and, although I do not perceive Ms. Lalonde as exactly scheming to decieve her fellow MP's and the Canadian voting population, I agree that her private members bill is so flawed that no non-partisan would consider supporting such a poorly constructed piece of legislation. In fact, during the debate, not even the NDP delegate could agree that our country is presently ready to accept euthanasia ( assisted suicide aside). As was said, this bill would require us to consider 're-constituting' our criminal code. ( my paraphrase ) Even Ms. Lalonde's same research sources as to the rationale for suicider patients proported that about 23% of those consenting to lethal injections were due to pain and suffering concerns. Of course, everyone is sympathetic and wants to be compassionate with the type of graphic pain she reports in her presentation. " The type of pain that stabs to the follicles of your hair" however, as the Conservative MP suggested, that means we need to improve and increase our hospices and palliative care practise not introduce a cheaper means of eliminating our health care costs. Not surprisingly the majority 75%ers described in a compilation of studies, did not want to continue their life being a burden on themselves, loved ones or society according to the Bill C-384 opposing speakers. This bill, in addition to its muddled, vague and unclear language relies on the notion that such patients are able and willing to provide informed and responsible consent. Which is nearly an impossibility given the nature of the situation. To say it would cause a split in the medical profession, which is already teetering on the edge over other such culture of life versus death issues, is a mild understatement. No politician in his/her right mind and constituency representation would consider supporting this " ticking Timex". In fact we need to hit 911 and dispatch the bomb squad asap before it causes our country any more real and lasting damage.Edellenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04281844699557008702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9216787076261944467.post-22670479849542394262010-03-18T11:51:17.420-04:002010-03-18T11:51:17.420-04:00You would think after the third attempt at writing...You would think after the third attempt at writing up a bill, Madame Lalonde would finally get it right. I listened to the debate on Tuesday and the woman made absolutely no sense at all, in that she had no statistics to back up any of her remarks. It is my belief the loopholes in her so-called one and half page bill are intentional, and it would be a national disaster if it ever made it to committee. We have only to read up on what is happening in Europe and the USA regarding euthanasia and assisted suicide to realize the cat and mouse game she is playing with this bill to get it passed. Offering lethal injection to terminally ill patients in our aging Canadian society alone would exterminate a large portion of Canadians, thus cutting medical costs and end-of-life palliative care. That's one way of bringing down the deficit. Then we can work on the next groups on the food chain to go, the disabled and the depressed. Go Canada Go!!!Pauline from Coquitlam, BCnoreply@blogger.com