Letter to the Editor
Editor,
In response to Bill C-384 (Private Memberʼs Bill) to legalize euthanasia calling it “the right to die with dignity”, I morally oppose the concept of “assisted suicide”.
One has to ask for what segment of our society is this Bill designed for? The elderly? The disabled? the terminally ill? All of above? In other words the most vulnerable among us?
I cannot find or access who presented the Bill, and what is the background rationale for it?
Coming from a time when suicide is still considered immoral and illegal how does the fact that if suicide is assisted..it is OK in the new society being forged? There is very little to prevent suicide from occurring now. Surely we don’t need a law to give it assistance.
Who shall have the power to determine the necessity for lethal assistance? The Doctor? family? Friend? Self?
Is our humanity that exemplary that the act of “putting one down”, “ending life” would be executed with wisdom and circumspection? OR will it become normalized as an act of supposition and convenience for whatever underlying reasons that may be presented?
DNR (Do not resuscitate) is already a waiver agreed upon by the patient or third party when lucid. The patient is allowed to die “with dignity” naturally without intervention.
In a time when effective pain management is available the argument supporting need for assisted suicide as an Act of Compassion to end the pain (ie a cancer patient) is not rational. Natural death can occur without pain and without assisted suicide. Is it a bother to look after your loved one in times of “sickness and health” or are the terminally ill afraid to face their sickness and debility therefore death is easier?
Is one’s death a singular decision for the patient only or are other family members and/or friends impacted by this decision?
A person might wish for ending life prematurely due to depression, anxiety or fear and feel totally different the next day, week, month? Who is going to determine the state of mind of the patient and/or just as importantly the state of mind of the person giving suicide assistance?
It has been said that “I’d rather be dead than end up drooling in a wheel chair in a nursing home… just put me out of my misery”. Is the solution to put down the soul (perhaps an Alzheimer patient) who is no longer connected to life around them when natural death will occur soon enough. Surely assistance is not required in such hopeless instances unless those in charge are eager for the bed/room for next patient as a cost saving measure all in the counterfeit name of “Compassion” and “Dignity”. Is setting policy with enactment of Bill C-384 designed to protect the medical profession from liability or to protect a private citizen from indictment ie. where a parent in the notorious case who euthanized (killed) his physically disabled 13 year old daughter?
Perhaps we also need to address the beginning spectrum of life. Every attempt is made to keep alive an afflicted newborn that would have normally died a natural death. Yet we subject these tragic souls to forced life in a tragic unnatural state? Is it God’s plan that such souls die naturally or is it man’s plan to keep them alive because they can? … only to kill them off later when everything seems overwhelming.
In conclusion I petition my Member of Parliament, Larry Miller and Minister of Justice, Attorney General of Canada Peter MacKay to speak on behalf of the vulnerable among us and oppose Bill C-384 and ban all attempts to enact “Assisted Suicide” as a Govʼt. supported death procedure.
Brenda Carlton, Meaford
