Ipsos / Dying With Dignity online poll was skewed.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Ipsos and Dying With Dignity (DWD) conducted an online opinion poll showing strong support for expanding Canada's euthanasia law to include incompetent people who previously requested and dropping the terminal illness requirement for euthanasia and assisted suicide in Canada. 

Online polls are done by sending questions to a select group of online participants. Each question includes an explanation of the question with further information connected to the poll provided by the sponsor of the poll. Online polls enable special interest groups to have greater support for their position in the poll.

The Canadian Healthcare Network commented on the Ipsos / DWD poll by stating:

The online survey of 3,500 Canadians was conducted by Ipsos from Jan. 21 to 27, a period that overlapped with the government’s own consultations. 

Internet-based polls cannot be given a margin of error because they are not considered random samples. 

Dying with Dignity Canada is a national non-profit advocacy group that champions end-of-life rights.

March 21 - 24, 2016 Angus Reid did a scientific poll where they found that the majority of Canadians oppose many of the recommendations in the Special Joint Committee on Physician-Assisted Dying report (report).

The report of the Special Joint Committee recommended wide-open rules for euthanasia but the survey found that the majority oppose "assisted death" for most reasons. 

For instance, the survey found that 78% of Canadians opposed euthanasia for people with severe psychological suffering but no terminal illness.The Angus Reid survey also  found that support for assisted death was limited based on circumstance: 

• 36% support when a person with multiple conditions like arthritis and diabetes feels overwhelmed and wants to die,
• 31% support when a person has no hope for the future and finds no meaning in their life,
• 26% support when a person's care is perceived as a burden to their family,
• 21% support when the cost of a patient's care is very expensive to the health care. 

The Angus Reid survey found that the majority of Canadians support “assisted death,” but 50% of the respondents wanted significant restrictions on killing or wanted “assisted death” completely prohibited. 

So why are the results of the Ipsos/DWD poll so different?

People who state that they somewhat support euthanasia in an online internet survey, it also means that they also somewhat oppose euthanasia.

For instance the Ipsos/DWD online poll indicated that 86% supported the Supreme Court decision legalizing euthanasia. The data indicated that 50% strongly supported and 36% somewhat supported. That means that 50% want unrestricted access to euthanasia. The major difference being that this poll was intentionally skewed to show greater support for eliminating the "safeguards" in the law.

Kiwis oppose implications of euthanasia process

Tuesday, 20 August 2019, 2:23 pm
Press Release: Euthanasia Free NZ

Euthanasia-Free NZ urge MPs to consider concerns relevant to tomorrow’s debate on Part 2 of the End of Life Choice Bill.

Part 2 is about freedom of conscience rights and each step of the proposed process: from making a request to reporting the death.

As lawyers would know, it's important to consider the possible loopholes in a piece of legislation: What would it do and allow, even if not explicitly stated?

Two Curia Market Research Polls conducted earlier this year found that the majority of respondents are opposed to circumstances the Bill’s proposed process would allow. None of these concerns are addressed by David Seymour's proposed amendments. Their concerns are noteworthy especially since the majority of the 1,048 respondents are in favour of the concept of euthanasia.

The Bill would allow an eligible terminally ill person to request euthanasia:

1) without telling loved ones (opposed by 73%);

2) instead of treatment (opposed by 60%);

3) because they feel like a burden (opposed by 64%); and

4) because they feel depressed or that life is meaningless (opposed by 55%).

There's a distinction between eligibility criteria and reasons for requesting euthanasia.

“In its current form the Bill would not require a doctor to explore or consider the underlying reasons why an eligible person wants to die,” says Renée Joubert, Executive Officer of Euthanasia-Free NZ.

“The unbearable suffering a person experiences may not be caused by their medical condition. Instead the person may be suffering due to issues such as poverty, homelessness, abuse, neglect, loneliness, mental illness, depression, grief, bereavement or concern about being a burden.”

Part 2 is by far the most substantial part of the Bill, consisting of 17 clauses and almost 11 pages. In contrast, Part 1, which was debated on 31 July, consists of only 5 sections and almost 4 pages.

"We were shocked that the debate on Part 1 was cut short when some MPs still wished to speak and several proposed amendments had not even been mentioned, let alone debated," says Ms Joubert. "And that, after many MPs stated that they voted for the Bill at second reading in order for the House to have an extensive discussion.

"Since Part 2 is about the crux of the Bill, we hope that its details, as well as each of the proposed amendments, will receive discussion and unprejudiced scrutiny.

"Our members and supporters will be watching tomorrow's debate with interest."

END

Kaiser Health News article promotes assisted suicide.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Kaiser Health News is once again promoting assisted suicide. In their article concerning the court decision striking down the California assisted suicide law as unconstitutionally implemented, the Kaiser article specifically employs the story model to promote assisted suicide.

This is not the first time Kaiser not only reports on assisted suicide but actually promotes assisted suicide. In the past, Kaiser has featured articles promoting a doctor in California who "specializes" in assisted suicide (I doubt the doctor paid for the advertising) while another feature promotes couple assisted suicide.

The article features Debbie Gatzek Kratter, 69, a lawyer from Half Moon Bay, California who was diagnosed last year with terminal pancreatic cancer, who was planning to die by assisted suicide. Kaiser News reports:

Kratter said she is considering moving to Washington state, where medical aid-in-dying remains legal, or flying to Switzerland, where physician-assisted death is allowed. Others may choose grimmer options, she said.

At least they reported on why the California assisted suicide law is unconstitutional:

Several groups, including the Life Legal Defense Foundation and the American Academy of Medical Ethics, challenged the law, saying it failed to protect elderly, infirm and vulnerable patients. In mid-May, Ottolia upheld the groups’ motion that the law was unconstitutional because legislators improperly passed it during a special session limited to health care issues. 

“Even the strongest proponents of assisted suicide should be gravely concerned about the lack of safeguards and protection in the law that was found to be unconstitutionally enacted by the Legislature,” Stephen Larson, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said in an email.

Remember, Kaiser will claim that the article is neutral because they included an explanation of why the assisted suicide law was struck down by the court, but in fact, the article promotes assisted suicide and it is about Debbie Kratter who is living with pancreatic cancer and wants to die by assisted suicide.

Are People Being Deceived about Euthanasia?

This article was published by HOPE Australia on September 20, 2017

Many euthanasia and assisted suicide proponents frame their arguments around “facts” and declarations that there is a majority of citizens who support such legislation. Yet, when you take a closer look, their “strong” basis for support is based on misconceptions about such legislation – and misconstrued facts!

John Buchanan highlights some of the major discrepancies between what euthanasia and assisted suicide advocates consider to be a strong basis for their campaign, and what the true facts of the matter are:

Myth 1: Public polls are reliable, and a decision about assisted suicide must accord with their results.

Reality: a poll about any matter is only useful to the extent that the question asked is realistic, and those polled have some knowledge about the matter…. Is it clinically realistic to ask a question like “Are you in favour of assisted suicide if someone has uncontrollable pain, and is terminally ill?”

A reading of the 1037 submissions to the Victorian parliamentary committee shows that such scenarios have occurred in the past (before palliative care was available) but should not be the case in 2017, now that modern palliative care is available – if people will use it. Good pain control measures are now possible if used properly. 

Myth 2: Pain is the main issue.

Reality: Recent research with people in Canada who requested assisted suicide shows that pain is not the main issue. The main reason given was a desire for control of personal circumstances.

This means that the “uncontrollable pain” issue has been used somewhat as a selling point, and the assertion of ‘autonomy’ is the main underlying issue. However, an assisted suicide process is not really autonomy, since others would be involved, and to exercise such choice would require a major change to medical ethics.

Myth 3: Doctors can tell you how long you have to live.

Reality: Doctors can give five-year survival rates. No doctor can tell you how long a person has to live. Such comments are guesswork. A guideline for PAS involving a 12-month prognosis is an illusion.

Myth 4: Assisted suicide would affect that individual only.

Reality: A law change affects everyone in the community. Hence there is a need to evaluate the effect of PAS law on the common good and medical practice. The fact is that in The Netherlands, and Belgium, the criteria have slipped to include not just people who appear terminally ill, but those with psychiatric illness who are physically well, and those who state they suffer in some way (but who are not assessed for any possible treatment).

Myth 5: Families are always benign and caring.

Reality: Evidence is that elder abuse is most likely from those close to a person, especially family. It is also a reality that when a person is seriously ill, many family members find it very stressful, and have quite mixed feelings about the ill person: part of you wants them to go on; part of you wants the whole experience over asap. I have experienced this myself. It makes a seriously ill person vulnerable to coercion from family to go down the assisted suicide path.

Myth 6: Likely guidelines are adequate safeguards.

Reality: The guidelines set out by the Victorian Ministerial Advisory Panel do not provide for any medical assessment of palliation at all. They do not provide for a genuinely independent medical opinion and do not attempt to detect coercion of the person. The door to elder abuse is left wide open.

Myth 7: The standard of future healthcare will not be affected.

Reality: As has become apparent overseas, healthcare economists soon realize that it is likely cheaper for the bureaucracy to offer a ‘comfort medication’ (suicide pill) than to pay for palliative care or chemotherapy. It is therefore very likely that assisted suicide legislation will distort future health care delivery – and that conclusion is drawn without even considering the expense of future dementia care.

These myths and misconceptions can have (literally) deadly consequences. Before any decisions or even debate takes place, all citizens have the right to fully understand what effects potential euthanasia and assisted suicide legislation could have, AND what other options exist.

Prematurely killing people as a means to escape pain and fear is not the answer. Instead, we can focus on making care and life better for all citizens, at all ages and for any condition.

We can live without euthanasia and assisted suicide.

CARP assisted dying poll results may be skewed.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The Canadian Association of Retired Persons (CARP) may have skewed the results of their assisted dying poll. 

As a CARP member, I was sent a link to the "assisted dying" poll on March 3. Even though CARP claimed that it was a "members poll", the link to the poll could be accessed by anyone. After answering the poll questions I was shocked by the radically pro-euthanasia results.

Late that evening, I checked the poll results and noticed that there were already more than 5000 responses with the results remaining unbelievably one-sided.

Susan Eng

On January 27, Moses Znaimer, the President & CEO of CARP, fired Susan Eng, the CARP executive VP, based on her neutral stand on assisted dying and Znaimer replaced Eng with Wanda Morris, the CEO of Dying With Dignity, a euthanasia lobby group.

Considering the recent official poll results as compared to the Nanos poll and the Angus Reid Institute Survey, my assertion seems likely.

According to the CARP poll 80% stated that publicly funded health care institutions, including hospices and long-term care homes should participate in assisted dying. The Angus Reid Institute Survey found that 68% oppose forcing religiously affiliated hospitals to participate and 62% oppose forcing nursing homes to participate.

According to the CARP poll 85% stated that waiting periods should be flexible, while the Angus Reid Institute survey found that 88% support waiting periods.

According to the CARP poll 87% stated that a doctor must refer a patient for an assisted death, while the Nanos poll found that 75% support doctors having the right to opt-out from participating in assisted death.

Since the CARP poll could be done by anyone (even though it claimed to be a members survey) and the Angus Reid survey and the Nanos poll were scientifically done based on representative samples, it seems likely that the CARP poll was intentionally skewed.

Nanos poll: Doctors should be able to opt-out of assisted dying - majority oppose assisted dying for minors and for psychiatric reasons.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

In the past few weeks, three professionals polls have been done on Canadian views on euthanasia and assisted suicide, referred to as "assisted dying."

The recent Nanos poll of 1000 Canadians that was done March 31 - April 4, 2016 was commissioned by the Globe and Mail. The Nanos media release stated that the poll found:

Canadians believe doctors should be able to opt-out of offering assisted dying - majority oppose or somewhat oppose assisted dying for minors 

• The majority of Canadians think that doctors should be able to opt-out of providing access to assisted dying against the will of their patients. Most Canadians do not think people under the age of 16 and 17 years should be able to access assisted dying and a marginal majority think that those with mental illness or psychiatric conditions should have access.

• Ability of doctors to opt-out - Three-fourths (75%) of Canadians believe doctors should be able to opt-out of offering assisted dying against the will of their patients (50% agree; 25% somewhat agree). Twenty-one percent say they would disagree or somewhat disagree with the same thing (11% disagree; 10% somewhat disagree). Four percent of Canadians are unsure.

• Assisted dying and minors - Six in ten Canadians (60%) say that they would disagree or somewhat disagree (16% somewhat disagree; 43% disagree), that minors who are 16 and 17 years of age should be able to access assisted dying, while thirty-seven percent of Canadians either agree (13%) or somewhat agree (24%). Five percent are unsure.

• Assisted dying and mental illness - Half of Canadians (52%) would either somewhat disagree (18%) with letting people with mental illness or psychiatric conditions access assisted dying, or disagree (34%). Just over two fifths (42%) of Canadians think that people who are suffering from with mental illness or psychiatric conditions should be able to access assisted dying (22% agree; 20% somewhat agree), while six percent of Canadians are unsure. 

The full survey results can be found by visiting our website.

An Angus Reid Institute survey of 1517 Canadians done March 21 - 24, 2016 found that:

• 68% of Canadians opposed forcing religiously affiliated hospitals to participate in euthanasia, 

• 62% supported religiously affiliated nursing homes from having to participate in euthanasia. 

• 36% supported forcing medical professionals who oppose euthanasia to refer their patients to a doctor who will kill their patient. 

• 88% supported a waiting period, similar to the Oregon law.

Both polls are done by recognized professional political pollsters and both polls indicate that Canadians want clear restrictions, controls and guidelines on "assisted death" (euthanasia and assisted suicide).

The LifeCanada poll was done by Public Square of 950 people done March 7- 14, 2016 found that 50% of Canadians wanted strict limits on euthanasia and only 16% would allow euthanasia for psychiatric reasons.

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition recognizes that laws permitting a doctor to kill a patient by "assisted death" will be misused. Assisted deaths will occur without request, without being reported and outside of the rules of the law, which is occurring in Belgium. Euthanasia and assisted suicide is not in the interest of patient safety.

Angus Reid survey: Canadians oppose euthanasia for psychiatric reasons and forcing hospitals to do euthanasia.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition
 
An Angus Reid Institute survey of 1517 Canadians focusing on euthanasia and assisted suicide (also known as assisted death) done between March 21 - 24 found that the majority of Canadians oppose many of the recommendations in the Special Joint Committee on Physician-Assisted Dying report (report). The report made 21 recommenations including euthanasia for: people with dementia, people with dementia, and people with psychiatric conditions. The report provided recommendations for legislation on assisted death.

The survey found that 78% of Canadians opposed euthanasia for people with severe psychological suffering but no terminal illness, meaning they oppose recommendation 3, in the report, that supported euthanasia for people with psychological suffering.

The survey found that 68% of Canadians opposed forcing religiously affiliated hospitals to participate in euthanasia while 62% supported religiously affiliated nursing homes from having to participate in euthanasia. Therefore they oppose recommendation 11 in the report.

The euthanasia lobby has pressured the government to reduce funding for institutions that refuse to kill their patients. The survey found that only 24% of Canadians supported this idea.

The survey found that only 36% of Canadians supported forcing medical professionals who oppose euthanasia to refer their patients to a doctor who will kill their patient.

In the State of Oregon, where assisted suicide is legal, there is a two week waiting period before a person can obtain a lethal dose. Recommendation 14 in the report stated that there should be no waiting period. The survey indicates that respondents disagree with the report with only 12% opposing a waiting period.

The report of the Committee on Physician-Assisted Dying recommended wide-open rules for euthanasia but the survey found that the majority oppose "assisted death" for most reasons. The survey found that support for assisted death was limited based on circumstance: 

• 36% support when a person with multiple conditions like arthritis and diabetes feels overwhelmed and wants to die,
• 31% support when a person has no hope for the future and finds no meaning in their life, 
• 26% support when a person's care is perceived as a burden to their family, 
• 21% support when the cost of a patient's care is very expensive to the health care. 

The survey found that the majority of Canadians support “assisted death,” but 50% of the respondents wanted significant restrictions on killing or wanted “assisted death” completely prohibited.

The Liberal government is expected to present their euthanasia bill on April 11, 2016.

Belgium doctors are hastening death without request.

This article was published by OneNewsNow on June 4, 2015

A jump in support for assisted suicide in the United States fails to reflect the dangers of the practice.

Alex Schadenberg

A Gallup poll tallies 68 percent support for assisted suicide for patients who request it, have an incurable illness and are living in severe pain.

Alex Schadenberg of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition is not surprised by the numbers after the extensive publicity on Brittany Maynard, who had terminal brain cancer and moved from California to Oregon for help to commit suicide.

He says there was a "media love-in" for Maynard's death, which affected the American public.

"So what's really missing here is the reality of what is the actual effect of legalizing assisted suicide," Schadenberg observes. "We don't see that readily being promoted by the media and we also don't see counter stories dealing with the same issues."

Gallup acknowledged that the poll results are questionable. The headline itself reads, 

"U.S. support for euthanasia hinges on how it's described," because support dropped from 70 percent to 51 percent when "help end a patient's life" was changed to helping "commit suicide."

Schadenberg points to a March report from Belgium that shows 1.7 percent of all deaths were hastened in the country without a person's request.

The head of a euthanasia committee in Belgium, he says, has admitted that an average 50 Belgians are dying every year due to psychiatric problems – a far cry from brain cancer.

Millions have been spent in America to change minds about assisted suicide and Schadenberg says it's time for a counter campaign to educate people on the truth of it.

Poll Shows Little Support for Assisted Suicide and Major Concerns

Link to the PR Newswire media release on April 16, 2015.

As assisted suicide failed to pass in state legislatures across the country this year, a new Marist Poll sponsored by the Knights of Columbus found that a majority of Americans do not support assisted suicide and that strong majorities harbor deep concerns over such proposals.

Assisted suicide proposals have stalled since the start of the year in a number of states, including Connecticut, Maryland, Colorado and Nevada.

More than 6 in 10 Americans (61 percent) do not support a doctor prescribing or administering a lethal drug dose, saying that a doctor should instead only manage an illness or remove life support.

Additionally, 57 percent of Americans say they are less likely to trust a doctor who engages in assisted suicide.

Strong majorities of Americans also have deep concerns about assisted suicide, including:

• 67 percent concerned that fewer life-saving options will be given at end of life.
• 65 percent concerned that the elderly will be at risk in nursing homes.
• 64 percent concerned that the depressed will be more likely to take their lives.
• 59 percent concerned about a wrong diagnosis.
• 55 percent concerned that the doctor could misjudge a patient's state of mind.
• 55 percent concerned that it will become a cost-saving measure for health care decisions.
• 54 percent concerned that patients will be pressured to take their life so as not to be a burden.

Assisted Suicide poll - shows that Canadians are divided on the issues.

By Alex Schadenberg

Executive Director - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The Angus Reid Institute completed an assisted suicide poll  in late November that shows that Canadians are divided and conflicted on the issues, and that a negative experience with palliative care directly effects the opinion of people on the issues.

In its description of the survey results, the Angus Reid Institute states:

Canadians express moderate to strong support for changes in legislation that would allow physicians to help patients who want to commit suicide, but the specific circumstances that might justify this course of action suggest deep divisions in public opinion. 

Canadians’ views on doctor-assisted suicide vary significantly based on the perceptions of recent experiences with loved ones receiving end-of-life care. 

Those reporting a negative experience with palliative and hospice based care are significantly more likely to support physician-assisted suicide.

... In the middle is the largest group of Canadians who are open to the arguments in favour of a new overall approach in law, but who remain highly uneasy about specifics.

Contrary to media reports: an Israel court did not permit euthanasia for the first time.

By Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition.

Alex Schadenberg

The language of the euthanasia debate continues to confuse people and much of the media. Recent opinion polls that ask: If you were suffering and terminally ill, should you be able to ask for a death with dignity have received a strong YES response. But what does the question actually mean?

In a similar way, the Israel media falsely reported that - for the first time in Israel, the court permitted euthanasia for a terminal patient. The article states:

The Tel Aviv District Court gave the verdict after the Attorney General reached an unprecedented decision to allow the patient to be disconnected from the life support machine he was connected to, according to the Israeli daily. 

The verdict was carried out and the patient died after the machine was switched off. The unique case was released for publication after a request from Ha'aretz.

Euthanasia causes death.

In the past, the withdrawal of medical treatment was falsely referred to as passive euthanasia. The withdrawal of medical treatment does not constitute euthanasia but rather it allows a natural death.

There is a clear distinction between euthanasia, which is the direct and intentional cause of death, and withdrawing treatment, which allows death to occur naturally. No one actually caused the death of this person in Israel, the person died of her medical condition.

UK poll: Assisted suicide is not safe.

This article was published by the Care Not Killing Alliance in the UK.

Peers urged to ditch dangerous assisted suicide bill, as new polling shows that one in ten Britons would favour rewarding older people for ending their lives.

1. More than four in 10 believe assisted suicide will be extended beyond the terminally ill if the current law is changed. 

2. Clear majority of public says there is no safe system of assisted suicide. 

3. Fewer than three in 10 believe changing the law on assisted suicide will not lead to increase in abuse of vulnerable people.

Peers are being urged to ditch a dangerous assisted suicide bill that could lead to more than 1,200 deaths a year. Lord Falconer's Assisted Dying Bill has its committee stage in the House of Lords on Friday 7 November.

This is a joint call from disability rights campaign, Not Dead Yet and from Care Not Killing.

The two groups say that changing the law on assisted suicide would weaken protections for vulnerable people. They highlight the findings of a new poll from ComRes, which reveals high levels of concern among the British public around the proposed changes.

The poll found a clear majority believe that it is impossible to make a completely safe system.

Dying with Dignity poll was biased and false

By Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

A recent online poll, paid for by the euthanasia lobby, claimed that 84% of Canadians support the legalization of assisted suicide.

After reading the poll questions and the results I published an article titled: Assisted suicide polls will fluctuate based on how the questions are asked.

Last week the Globe and Mail had their own online assisted suicide poll. The Globe and Mail has been one of the most one-sided pro-euthanasia publications in Canada.

On Saturday, October 11 - hidden in a small text box on the right hand side of page A8 the Globe and Mail published the following statement:

Next week the Supreme Court of Canada will consider a case from British Columbia that could transform taking your own life into a basic human right' Most pollsters say that Canadians are greatly in favour of changing the law to reflect this Point of view' But when we asked our online readers if they agree with assisted suicide, the response was very different indeed. 

NO 71% (20263 votes) YES 26% (7459 votes) UNSURE 5% (942 votes)

Big picture missed in Canadian euthanasia poll.

This article was written by Susan Martinuk and published in the Calgary Herald.

By Susan Martinuk is regular columnist.

Susan Martinuk

A famous quote, attributed to 19th century British prime minister Benjamin Disraeli, says: “There are three kinds of lies — lies, damned lies and statistics.”

Forget the lies and the damned lies for now. Let’s consider statistics, particularly as they relate to online public surveys. Statistics resulting from surveys can be problematic in that the answers pollsters get are directly correlated to the questions asked. That can be good or bad, depending on what perspective you are attempting to illuminate.

It’s something to keep in mind as current media and activist reports tell us that Canadians “overwhelmingly” support changing our laws to allow physician-assisted suicide.

An online survey on the public’s perception of dying with dignity was conducted by Ipsos Reid. It was commissioned by Dying with Dignity Canada (a group pushing for the legalization of doctor-assisted suicide) and therefore it is certain they had significant input (at minimum) into determining the wording of questions and the questions asked.

The very fact the poll was released this week, just days before the Supreme Court of Canada hears a case claiming laws banning assisted suicide violate an individual’s charter rights, also speaks to the activist underpinnings of this particular survey.

Activist groups do it all the time, so there’s nothing wrong with it. The point is that the public should be aware (yet rarely is) of the possible political angles attached to any survey.

Assisted Suicide polls will fluctuate based on how the questions are asked.

Dying with Dignity released a poll today that is written in a manner that causes in confusion, leading to a higher support for assisted suicide. 

Recent polls indicate that support for assisted suicide fluctuates based on how the question is asked.

For instance an article written by Lise Ravery in Quebec, Ravery stated that:

… A 2013 Ipsos Marketing poll showed that merely one-third of Quebecers know what “dying with dignity” really entails. Another third thinks it means palliative care and rest believes that it refers to assisted suicide or cessation of treatments.

Link to the Québec poll information.

The same result recently occurred in the UK. A poll that was done during the assisted suicide bill debate found that when more information about the bill was provided support for assisted suicide dropped.

A similar finding was observed in the US.

Our polling shows that most Canadians fear dying a bad death, that only a few people strongly support euthanasia and assisted suicide, and when asked, Canadians believe that the government needs to place a greater priority on improving end-of-life care rather than legalizing euthanasia or assisted suicide.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director
Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Links to more information:

• Survey results show confusion reigns.
• Public support for assisted suicide drops to 43% when arguments against are heard.
• Gallup poll claims that 69% of Americans support euthanasia.
• Pew research survey: Americans are opposed to assisted suicide.
• The majority of Connecticut residents do not support assisted suicide.

Most Doctors oppose assisted suicide.

By Alex Schadenberg

Executive Director - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

A survey of 600 physicians in Britain found that 60% opposed a change in the law to legalize physician-assisted suicide while 19% indicated that they would be willing euthanize or assist the suicide of a patient.

According to the article published in the Daily Mail:

a survey of 600 doctors by the Medix consultancy found that 60% are against a change in the law to allow physician-assisted suicide. 

This is a rise of 17 points from the last time the same question was asked - just 43% were against a change in 2004. 

In the latest poll almost half of doctors said that in the last six months they have had at least one patient state they would rather die than stay alive. 

Only 19% would be willing to help people die through legalised physician- assisted suicide or euthanasia, although 37% believe it is already happening anyway.

Dr Tony Calland

The article also quoted Dr Tony Calland, chairman of the British Medical Association's (BMA) ethics committee, who said:

"There have always been strongly held views on assisted dying as this is a complex, emotive issue centred upon vulnerable patients nearing the end of their lives." 

"Doctors have repeatedly expressed their opposition to assisted dying when it has been debated regularly at the BMA's annual conference that sets our policy, which since 2006 has been to oppose assisted dying in all its forms." 

"Many doctors have first-hand experience of caring for dying patients and believe that, rather than deliberately ending a patient's life, we should instead be focusing on building the very best of palliative care for those in distress."

A recent survey of 4800 members of the Canadian Medical Association (CMA) found that only 36.3% supported the legalization of euthanasia and 44.8% supported assisted suicide.

Even after the Canadian media has pushed for the legalization of euthanasia and assisted suicide, the majority of physicians remain opposed to intentionally causing the death of their patients.

Be wary of assisted dying.

By Derek Miedema - published in the National Post on August 20, 2014.

Derek Miedema

Dr. Brett Belchetz seems to think that legalizing assisted suicide is a no-brainer (‘Zero progress on assisted dying,’ Aug. 12). He says the federal government is alone in its opposition to legalized doctor-assisted suicide. He believes the slippery slope is a myth and that helping patients kill themselves is consistent with the concept of doing no harm. But the case for legalizing the practice is not as open-and-shut as Dr. Belchetz would have you believe.

Public support for legalizing assisted suicide hovers around 70%, but a 2013 Environics poll found that only 29% “strongly” support the practice. In comparison, only 26% of doctors agree with doctor-assisted suicide. Is it possible that doctors are more familiar with the vagaries of death than the general population? Or possibly that most doctors entered the profession, in order to help, not kill, people?

Seeing the slippery slope isn’t terribly hard either. The situation on the ground in Belgium (which legalized euthanasia is 2002) and the Netherlands (which has a long history of access to euthanasia, even before legalization in 2001) points to a different reality than the one Dr. Belchetz describes.

In Belgium, like the Netherlands, euthanasia started with terminally ill people, then it was allowed for the mentally ill. Now, even though the law itself hasn’t changed, anyone with unbearable physical or psychological suffering can be killed this way.

Twin deaf brothers who were going blind found a doctor who would kill them. A depressed mother was killed (her son found out when asked to collect her things from the morgue).

Earlier this year, the Belgian Parliament voted to make euthanasia legal for children, with parental consent.

A public campaign in the Netherlands argued that anyone over 70 and tired of life should be able to get euthanasia. It garnered enough support to force the Dutch Parliament to consider the proposal. In 2013, Dutch doctors killed a 70-year-old widow who was going blind. She wasn’t dying, but she was a stickler for cleanliness and couldn’t bear not being able to see the dirt on her clothes.

The movement in both countries is aimed exclusively at making more people eligible to be killed.

Public support for Assisted Suicide in the UK drops to 43% when arguments against are heard.

This article was written by Dr Peter Saunders and published on his blog on July 18.

Peter Saunders

By Dr Peter Saunders

There is ample poll data showing that the majority of the British public support legalising assisted suicide (AS) in principle.

The former Voluntary Euthanasia Society (now rebranded Dignity in Dying) claims a figure of 80% although I have previously argued that such levels of support are uncommitted, uninformed and unconvincing.

However, there has been very little poll data gauging public attitudes in light of the various empirical and rational arguments against AS. That is, until now.

An extraordinary new poll has demonstrated that public attitudes change dramatically once some of the key practical implications of AS are considered.

In a new Comres/CARE poll published today and reported by the Daily Telegraph respondents were presented with the following scenario:

‘A new Bill is due to be debated in the House of Lords which is designed to enable mentally competent adults in the UK who are terminally ill, and who have declared a clear and settled intention to end their own life, to be provided with assistance to commit suicide by self-administering lethal drugs. Two doctors would need to countersign their declaration and be satisfied that the person has a condition which cannot be reversed by treatment and is reasonably expected to die within 6 months. In principle would you agree or disagree with this proposal?’

73% agreed (38% strongly), 12% disagreed and 14% were in the ‘don’t know’ category.

So far there’s nothing that surprising. It would be odd for people not to be moved by some of the tragic stories of the ‘hard cases’ and to say they support a means of alleviating such suffering.

But then those who supported AS in principle were asked which of the following arguments would make them change their minds. Each statement below was randomised throughout the survey in order to assess which argument moved opinion the most.

The answers were truly astounding.

Overall 42% of those who originally supported the bill changed their mind on the basis of at least one of the arguments.

When these were added back into the original sample, aggregating all who opposed as a result of the arguments put to them, and incorporating all who still supported AS having heard each argument, they found the following:

43% support AS, 43% oppose it and 14% don’t know.

So hearing the arguments against AS causes support for AS to collapse from 73% to 43% - that is, to less than half!

Here are the arguments with the percentage change each cause on those who initially backed Falconer’s proposals.

News from Gallup but Pew Study is Better.

(Link to the original version published on June 19 on the Not Dead Yet Blog.)

By Diane Coleman - President of the Disability Rights group Not Dead Yet.

Diane Coleman

A new Gallup report is entitled “Seven in 10 Americans Back Euthanasia,” is a misleading opening.

First, the question was: “When a person has a disease that cannot be cured, do you think doctors should be allowed by law to end the patient’s life by some painless means if the patient and his or her family request it?” According to the poll, 69% say “yes,” down from 75% in 2005.

Support drops to 58% when the Gallup question is: “When a person has a disease that cannot be cured and is living in severe pain, do you think doctors should or should not be allowed by law to assist the patient to commit suicide if the patient requests it?”

So, as Gallup headlines it, “Diminished Majority Favors ‘Doctor-Assisted Suicide.’”

The word “suicide” is no doubt important, but there are some other issues raised by the wording of the questions. Why does the non-suicide question mention the family’s request, while the suicide question leaves family out? How many respondents are confused about the difference between the right to refuse unwanted life-sustaining medical treatment and assisted suicide? How many say “yes” because they want their advance directives honored and their health care proxy’s directions followed?

And why does the suicide question add the condition that the person “is living in severe pain”? Did Gallup ever ask this question without adding the pain factor and get a response lower than 58%?

Considering the sloppiness factor in the Gallup efforts on this issue, I’m inclined to turn to the Pew study for more accurate insights. The Pew study, “Views on End-of-Life Medical Treatments”, covered a wider range of health care decisions issues, which allowed respondents to sort out the differences between refusal of treatment and assisted suicide, avoiding the confusion inherent in the Gallup style of questioning.

The Pew result: only 47% support assisted suicide laws. Not a diminished majority, not a majority at all.

Sign the Declaration of Hope to oppose assisted suicide in America.

Gallup Poll claims that 69% of Americans support Euthanasia.

By Alex Schadenberg

Executive Director - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Gallup poll results released on June 18 claim that 69% of Americans support euthanasia and 58% of Americans support physician-assisted suicide.

The Gallup poll euthanasia question asked:

When a person has a disease that cannot be cured, do you think doctors should be allowed by law to end the patient’s life by some painless means if the patient and his or her family request it?

The Gallup poll question is vague.

The Gallup poll question refers to ending a patient’s life by some painless means. Many Americans believe that withholding or withdrawing medical treatment is the same as euthanasia and many Americans confuse palliative care with euthanasia.

The November 2013 Pew Research survey employed clear questions and it found that 47% of Americans support assisted suicide.

The 2013 Pew Research survey also found that 66% of Americans believe that there are times when a person should be allowed to die while 31% of Americans thought that doctors should do everything to save a person’s life.

When comparing the Pew research poll to the Gallup poll it is clear that the way a question is asked determines the outcome of the poll.

Sign the Declaration of Hope to oppose assisted suicide in America.