Hey who wants to talk about something
super emotionally-charged and controversial
this guy apparently
now before we all predictably separate into our respective
political affiliations
can we just try to take a look at this
issue with a fresh lines and let me be
the first to say that i've heard the
various perspectives on this issue and I
think that there are thoughtful and
compassionately motivated reasons on
both sides
it's not simple and with the amount of
sophisticated advertising messaging
trying to lead to certain conclusions
it's pretty hard to evaluate objectively.
As I've heard both sides make their case
I feel like there are some points that
haven't been included in the public
debate for whatever reason so I'd like
to try to offer them here as gently and as
logically as I can. In that spirit I invite
you to let go of some of your
preconceived ideas and try to be
objective and hear some of these reasons.
That said I also want to invite you to
treat the topic seriously and with the amount
of attention that it deserves
after all this is life and death for the
people that it impacts which is the
most of us if not all of us so we shouldn't
avoid treating it critically. Before I
get into the reasons I wanted to dispel a
pretty big misunderstanding that's out
there that seems to have really confused
the debate on this topic
a lot of people who have been in favor
of the legalization of euthanasia and
assisted suicide seemed to be under the
impression that they were fighting for
the right to die that is that they
believe that this is about ensuring that
when our time comes we'll have the right
to refuse extraordinary medical
intervention.
The problem is we already had the right
to refuse treatment. If you're dying you
can choose how that happens if you want
to stay at home and refuse hospital care
you can do that. If you do want hospital
care then you can define the limits of
that treatment.
This isn't about keeping people
artificially alive beyond their wishes.
Euthanasia and assisted suicide is when
someone who is not necessarily dying is
administered a drug that kills them
prematurely. That's a really important
distinction.
So with that in mind let's consider what
I believe are three important reasons
why legalizing euthanasia and assisted
suicide is a bad idea.
Reason number one: research funding.
An illness that always seems to be a
focal point of this topic is Lou Gehrig's
disease or ALS. Now just so that it
doesn't seem like I'm being insensitive
I have a pretty intimate understanding
of what that disease does. I've known two
people that have died from it
one of whom was a close family member
who I was with at the end so I know what
it looks like. The research and treatment
methods that are focused on diseases
like ALS are quite expensive, so that
means in public health care systems like
in Canada's, we as a society have to make
sacrifices to make sure that treatment is
available. We also need to help support
funding for research in the hopes that
better treatments and cures
become available.
That's what the ice bucket challenge was
all about. Through that movement millions
of dollars came in for research that led
to the discovery of a gene that was
responsible for triggering the onset of
that disease. Now we're willing to
support funding for these measures for
the sake of loved ones who might
otherwise suffer, but if euthanasia and
assisted suicide become a prominent
alternative to medical care, that could
reduce our motivation and incentives to
find a cure.
On top of that politicians who are often
motivated by optics and balanced budgets
might show preference for something that
is a cheap alternative to medical care
which euthanasia would be. So all of a
sudden we have interests that will
compete with the pursuit for better
treatments or cures for these illnesses.
Reason number two: unjust discrimination
Now that we have legalized euthanasia
and assisted suicide
we've also had to introduce safeguards
that ensure that only specific people
qualified. We can't just let anybody kill
themselves after all so we've had to
create a criteria and a classification
for those who are eligible and those who
are not. Think about the message that
we as a society are sending to people
who are already vulnerable because they
live with illnesses and disabilities
both mental and physical; when we say
that your situation is bad enough that
we think suicide is actually a suitable
option for you but for other people
we won't allow it because they're still
useful or vital to us. That's f$%#ed up.
We've essentially classified certain people as
less worthy of life. That's a disturbing
precedent. You might be objecting because
you think that this is only something
that's available for people that are on their deathbed
but that's not what the Supreme
Court decision said. It describes anybody
with intolerable suffering, intolerable
obviously being a relative term here.
In jurisdictions where this has been legal
for a while now, like Belgium and the
Netherlands they've already opened it up
to people with mental illness and even
children. There was one case i read about
recently in which a sex abuse survivor
was killed because of her incurable PTSD.
That's where we're headed with this.
Reason number three: egalitarianism.
Most people in a liberal democracy seem
to affirm egalitarianism which is the
idea that we are all equal.
I can't tell anybody how to live their
life within reason and vice versa. In the
same way we can't impose restrictions on
each other that violate our human rights
and the fundamental human right is the
right to life so nobody should have the
authority to decide who should live and
who should die.
Many of the arguments I've heard in
favor of legalizing euthanasia and
assisted suicide seemed to emphasize
this point about independence like I
should be able to decide when I die.
The problem with that kind of thinking
is that wherever this has been made
legal that's not how it works. Because of
the necessary safeguards we've had to
give certain people authority to decide who
is eligible for this treatment. In other
words if you want medical assistance to
kill yourself, you first have to apply
for it and to appeal to a bureaucracy to
ask them if you're eligible.
That's not you claiming independence or
sovereignty. That's you appealing to an
authority that is set above you.
If anything it's the relinquishment of
your right to life to other people who
are supposed to be your equals. Again
this is a really disturbing precedent,
that by legalizing something we've had
to create a government authority who has
the power to decide who can live and who
can die. For a bureaucracy like that to
to exist, we'd be kidding ouselves
if we still believed we're a society of equals.
