Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Assisted dying now accounts for one in 20 Canada deaths

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

861–870 of 870 posts

Re: Assisted dying now accounts for one in 20 Canada deaths

#861

Post by Tiktaalik »

michael1999 wrote: post #860
Tiktaalik wrote: post #856

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that there's a difference between "this is a thing that has happened" and "this is a thing that happens ". The latter thing is the toxic exaggeration of the truth IMO. Like you're absolutely right that this particular rare event has happened before and I'm not discounting that, but the phrasing of the OPs story more suggests at the form of this story that is the myth that this is a trend and frequent occ…

Please don't call real events that you acknowledge "urban legends". You demean our cognitive commons with language like that, and undermine your own credibility.

I decline to join you in your brave fight against context but good luck sir

Re: Assisted dying now accounts for one in 20 Canada deaths

#862

Post by JohnBooty »

alphakappa wrote: post #847
o11c wrote: post #546

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How do you square that with the modern Catholic church’s systemic support of sexual abuse of minors? I'm the first to criticize Catholicism given a chance, but ... I'm not sure that's actually a valid claim to make outside of the particular case of ... I think it was New York in the 1990s, which is a statistical outlier (at least in English-speaking countries). There are a lot of Catholics and therefore it's unavoi…

That’s an odd comparison to make. The ‘school system’ isn’t a monolithic system that is actively refusing to acknowledge or take action against sexual predators. Is there an example of a school district that has been shielding predators on an ongoing basis and refusing to take remedial action?

I'm an atheist and no fan of any church (or, y'know, sexual abuse) but I don't love this line of discussion because it's a real case of whataboutism.

The Cathlolic church's actions w.r.t. sexual abuse are certainly worth talking about. Their views on euthanasia (which I disagree with) are too. I don't know that they can be meaningfully discussed simultaneously within the same discussion.

Re: Assisted dying now accounts for one in 20 Canada deaths

#863

Post by JohnBooty »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #396
JohnBooty wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a danger for sure, but every single path we as a society here take can be exploited by people with ill intentions. The pharma companies and hospitals have a financial incentive to keep people alive indefinitely, even despite horrible suffering. The folks paying for the treatment (government, insurance, etc) have a financial incentive to terminate lives prematurely. Family members with ill intentions may have…

Natural death is the nash equilibrium, everything else is politics.

The concept of "natural death" is self-evidently ridiculous. We treat disease with the best technology possible, but then death has to be "natural."

That notion is at best a distasteful joke before we even get to the ambiguity of what a "natural death" even is, and at worst an evil attempt to define one particular sort of arbitrarily Church-sanctioned death.

What even is "natural death?" Being eaten by a bear? Starving to death because there was a drought and there were no berries for you and your hunter-gatherer buddies to eat? Dying from untreated cancer?

According to Catholic doctrine (to choose an extreme example) we have to keep permanently vegetative people alive indefinitely via feeding tubes and whatever other modern medical technology is required for as long as it takes. What single aspect of that could be described by a sane mind as "natural?"

Re: Assisted dying now accounts for one in 20 Canada deaths

#864

Post by jacobgkau »

squigz wrote: post #859
jacobgkau wrote: post #858

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a great attitude when you're talking about other people (a.k.a. numbers). We'll see if you have the same attitude when it's you or someone you know.

I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make. If it were someone I knew, I would be upset, yes, and would pursue options for justice - which is, as I said, the more important aspect of such a system. Furthermore, even if my position changed if it were one of my loved ones, I wouldn't think my emotionally-charged thinking should be used to craft legislation. If you're advocating for systems that cannot possibl…

I'm advocating for not enabling a system that allows legalizing death. This is similar to people who are against the death penalty because it can and has been used to execute people who were later exonerated. "Move fast & break stuff because the benefits are worth the cost" is a better argument for almost any other policy than ones that explicitly result in death.

Re: Assisted dying now accounts for one in 20 Canada deaths

#865

Post by jacobgkau »

defrost wrote: post #600
jacobgkau wrote: post #567

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? Then how did the man in guyzero's anecdote do it in less than a week?

> anecdote Perhaps it'd be best to circle back and check the actual specifics?

Absolutely. The thing is, guyzero told a nice little story in which the speed and seamlessness of the process were portrayed as a positive aspect. If it turns out those details were completely incorrect, then he was being extremely misleading with the way he told that story, and any emotional feel-goods one might get from it should be just as invalid as negative knee-jerk reactions.

That tends to not be what happens-- instead, the correction is used as a rebuttal against people who don't like it, but the correction and its implications aren't considered by people who liked how the story went in the first place. Even now, that comment is the top one in this thread, and it has not been edited to add any additional clarification or corrections.

Re: Assisted dying now accounts for one in 20 Canada deaths

#866

Post by defrost »

jacobgkau wrote: post #864
squigz wrote: post #859

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make. If it were someone I knew, I would be upset, yes, and would pursue options for justice - which is, as I said, the more important aspect of such a system. Furthermore, even if my position changed if it were one of my loved ones, I wouldn't think my emotionally-charged thinking should be used to craft legislation. If you're advocating for systems that cannot possibl…

I'm advocating for not enabling a system that allows legalizing death. This is similar to people who are against the death penalty because it can and has been used to execute people who were later exonerated. "Move fast & break stuff because the benefits are worth the cost" is a better argument for almost any other policy than ones that explicitly result in death.

Tracing back, this one case of one case worker who suggested MAID to perhaps as many as five veterans .. did not result in death being "forced" upon any one.

The outrage over MAID being suggested as a viable option has resulted in even more scrutiny, oversight, and guard rails.

This is not the example that demonstrates abuse of the system.

Re: Assisted dying now accounts for one in 20 Canada deaths

#867

Post by squigz »

jacobgkau wrote: post #864
squigz wrote: post #859

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make. If it were someone I knew, I would be upset, yes, and would pursue options for justice - which is, as I said, the more important aspect of such a system. Furthermore, even if my position changed if it were one of my loved ones, I wouldn't think my emotionally-charged thinking should be used to craft legislation. If you're advocating for systems that cannot possibl…

I'm advocating for not enabling a system that allows legalizing death. This is similar to people who are against the death penalty because it can and has been used to execute people who were later exonerated. "Move fast & break stuff because the benefits are worth the cost" is a better argument for almost any other policy than ones that explicitly result in death.

"Legalizing death" isn't really accurate, isn't it? I mean, it's not illegal to die. And this isn't legalizing murder, as murder doesn't generally require the informed, prolonged consent of the person going to be murdered.

Re: Assisted dying now accounts for one in 20 Canada deaths

#868

Post by jacobgkau »

squigz wrote: post #867
jacobgkau wrote: post #864

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm advocating for not enabling a system that allows legalizing death. This is similar to people who are against the death penalty because it can and has been used to execute people who were later exonerated. "Move fast & break stuff because the benefits are worth the cost" is a better argument for almost any other policy than ones that explicitly result in death.

"Legalizing death" isn't really accurate, isn't it? I mean, it's not illegal to die. And this isn't legalizing murder, as murder doesn't generally require the informed, prolonged consent of the person going to be murdered.

Death that isn't murder doesn't generally require someone else taking an action that kills you.

And while encouraging people to commit suicide may or may not be illegal depending on where you live, who it is, etc, it's generally not seen as moral.

Re: Assisted dying now accounts for one in 20 Canada deaths

#869

Post by jacobgkau »

defrost wrote: post #866
jacobgkau wrote: post #864

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm advocating for not enabling a system that allows legalizing death. This is similar to people who are against the death penalty because it can and has been used to execute people who were later exonerated. "Move fast & break stuff because the benefits are worth the cost" is a better argument for almost any other policy than ones that explicitly result in death.

Tracing back, this one case of one case worker who suggested MAID to perhaps as many as five veterans .. did not result in death being "forced" upon any one. The outrage over MAID being suggested as a viable option has resulted in even more scrutiny, oversight, and guard rails. This is not the example that demonstrates abuse of the system.

> This is not the example that demonstrates abuse of the system.

I don't know how you can come to that conclusion. It's an example that demonstrates abuse, and "guard rails" (LOL) that are supposedly going to protect against future abuse.

Re: Assisted dying now accounts for one in 20 Canada deaths

#870

Post by jacobgkau »

yatopifo wrote: post #815
jbm wrote: post #7

I find it overall very unnerving how quiet this is and how the Canadian press never really finds issues with this. I often saw Japanese media moving lock-step with the police (in terms of vocabulary to use for certain crimes, how to report certain issues), and thought it was creepy as hell. However, the complete lack of questioning of the purpose behind a sudden legalization of euthanasia (in a country with public he…

As a Canadian, i would certainly write a very unpleasant letter to the editor of a Canadian newspaper publishing anything against MAiD. To me, euthanasia is unquestionably necessary. The problem of healthcare availability is completely orthogonal because MAiD is an option available but never forced as an alternative.

> The problem of healthcare availability is completely orthogonal because MAiD is an option available but never forced as an alternative.

> an option available

You're saying it's an "option," but also saying it's "orthogonal" whether the alternative option actually exists. What kind of logic is that?

Post reply on HN