Experts troubled by Canada’s euthanasia laws

I mean the Canadian government highlighted the "cost savings" when they passed the legislation.

https://www.pbo-dpb.gc.ca/web/default/files/Documents/Report...

"The predicted gross reduction in health care costs amounts to $109.2 million while the cost of administering MAID is estimated at $22.3 million. Thus, the difference between the two represents a net cost reduction for provincial governments of $86.9 million."

This post (and many others here) kind of put the ignorance of the "Canadian" system on display. It's not really one uniform system and has varying levels of privatization across the country because it is handled by provinces.

> Arguably, the horrible US for-profit health system offers stronger protection against this. A dead patient can’t be charged for more services. But a system that equates medical consumption with good care has it’s own set of problems too obvious to mention.

This isn't stronger protection; it just creates a different perverse incentive to effectively drag out someone's suffering.

AP revenue is primarily content licensing [1]

You could perhaps argue that since their customers probably get their money primarily through ads so AP needs to generate sensationalist content to keep them happy.

They (and perhaps Thomson Reuters) themselves don't need ads to make money that is not their business model (while they do have ads revenue as well it is not key to their business )

That isn't to say AP's quality has not dropped over the years it certainly has. It seems more like given the pay journo's make these days, top talent is simply no longer interested in the field. Economic pressures of online journalism does not reward knowledgeable people taking the time to write well informed pieces, rather content mills are more likely to make money with low quality output.

To me this is more a reflection of us as consumers not paying for quality rather than industry which merely adapts to what users want and pay for ( whether with subscriptions or eye balls)

[1]https://www.ap.org/about/annual-report/2021/ap-by-the-number...

My mom died this year; liver and kidneys failed, lungs filled with fluid, suffocating, maximum oxygen support in the hospital. After several days, she was too tired to go on, went with "comfort care", supposedly minimizing suffering, but it's a euphemism for torture. I stayed with her for half an hour after they took off her oxygen mask before I couldn't take it any more -- my mother gasping for breath. After about an hour I was told she'd passed away so I should go back in -- to see her frozen with her jaw locked forward, desperately trying to get a breath. I hate anyone who claims euthanasia is wrong. Why couldn't they just replace the oxygen with nitrogen?

Suicide drugs exist but they're generally pretty awful ways to go or very illegal to sell. If the police find out suicidal people use your chemical store or pharmacy as their suicide shop, you can get in huge trouble, up to aiding in murder.

I'm 100 in favour of euthanasia for people who are suffering with no end in sight. If I get sick and face ten years of slowly dying, suffering every day, I'm taking the easy way out somehow, and it's up to the government if that's in a controlled environment or if they'll need to send out a cleanup crew when they find the suicide note.

However, I don't think you should be able to just buy suicide pills online. It's the only way to do it relatively safely and successfully for people in countries where assisted suicide isn't legal, but it's a workaround rather than a solution.