5 ms·

Kind of a hyperbolic headline.

by Neil44 4y ago

kergonath 4y ago
Par for the course for the Spectator. Do not expect anything remotely informative there, it ranks just between the Daily Mail and the Telegraph in terms of accuracy.
- vixen99 4y ago
  Writing gross summary statements like that is simple. Anyone can do it. Now how about backing up your claim ? What's not remotely informative about the following extracts? Or are they untrue? It's an opinion piece but there's not much of that in the following. "Canadian parliament enacted Bill C-7, a sweeping euthanasia law which repealed the ‘reasonably foreseeable’ requirement – and the requirement that the condition should be ‘terminal’.? "In 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada reversed 22 years of its own jurisprudence by striking down the country’s ban on assisted suicide as unconstitutional" "The next year, Parliament duly enacted legislation allowing euthanasia, but only for those who suffer from a terminal illness whose natural death was ‘reasonably foreseeable’. 'Not coincidentally, Canada has some of the lowest social care spending of any industrialised country, palliative care is only accessible to a minority, and waiting times in the public healthcare sector can be unbearable, to the point where the same Supreme Court which legalised euthanasia declared those waiting times to be a violation of the right to life back in 2005.' Please note that I'm not getting into the rights or wrongs of the debate on euthanasia.
  - Neil44 4y ago
    I can accept that more 'poor people' might make use of euthanasia than 'rich people' by whatever metric you choose to define those terms. Poorer people tend to have worse health overall for various reasons, also there are a lot more of them. But the main issue I have with the headline is that Canada is not specifically euthanising the poor in the way that is implied. The statistical differences are clearly an emergence of many complex effects and situations, so to imply otherwise is inflamatory and pretty much text book hyperbole.
brutus1213 4y ago
Canadian living in Canada. There is some floral language written here but the article is exposing an issue that is relatively new and coming to the forefront. I read a more nuanced article on the ethical issues (particularly, the Canadian context this article brings out) but don't have a link handy. From my recent interactions, Canada's health care system seems to be failing for the elderly and young+disabled. Cost of living has skyrocketed in the key populated areas (GTA and GVA) and people have more of a FOMO/me-first attitude in all aspects of life. The gripe on health care is not just about waiting times. It is administers kicking patients out, threatening with private charges (Ontario Bill C7 that this article references but does not explain to someone unfamiliar), neglect in healthcare and step down facilities. I am relatively young and can recognize this is not how I want to go. The trend that could emerge is exactly what the article describes .. if life gets too hard, just end it. This is not what Canada used to be. Govt waste is monumental and services ever dwindling. The key political leaders seem to be espousing positions that pander particular viewpoints but don't actually get things better again. We need a Canadian-version of the Trump slogan - Make Canada Care Again!
- barrysteve 4y ago
  Something's deeply wrong over your neck of the woods mate. Keep your wits about you.
ZeroGravitas 4y ago
Probably just a headline generating and testing algorithm revealing the average Spectator reader's interest in killing the poor.

Kind of a hyperbolic headline.

by Neil44 4y ago

Kind of a hyperbolic headline.

Par for the course for the Spectator. Do not expect anything remotely informative there, it ranks just between the Daily Mail and the Telegraph in terms of accuracy.

vixen99 4y ago
Writing gross summary statements like that is simple. Anyone can do it. Now how about backing up your claim ? What's not remotely informative about the following extracts? Or are they untrue? It's an opinion piece but there's not much of that in the following. "Canadian parliament enacted Bill C-7, a sweeping euthanasia law which repealed the ‘reasonably foreseeable’ requirement – and the requirement that the condition should be ‘terminal’.? "In 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada reversed 22 years of its own jurisprudence by striking down the country’s ban on assisted suicide as unconstitutional" "The next year, Parliament duly enacted legislation allowing euthanasia, but only for those who suffer from a terminal illness whose natural death was ‘reasonably foreseeable’. 'Not coincidentally, Canada has some of the lowest social care spending of any industrialised country, palliative care is only accessible to a minority, and waiting times in the public healthcare sector can be unbearable, to the point where the same Supreme Court which legalised euthanasia declared those waiting times to be a violation of the right to life back in 2005.' Please note that I'm not getting into the rights or wrongs of the debate on euthanasia.
- Neil44 4y ago
  I can accept that more 'poor people' might make use of euthanasia than 'rich people' by whatever metric you choose to define those terms. Poorer people tend to have worse health overall for various reasons, also there are a lot more of them. But the main issue I have with the headline is that Canada is not specifically euthanising the poor in the way that is implied. The statistical differences are clearly an emergence of many complex effects and situations, so to imply otherwise is inflamatory and pretty much text book hyperbole.

brutus1213 4y ago

Canadian living in Canada. There is some floral language written here but the article is exposing an issue that is relatively new and coming to the forefront. I read a more nuanced article on the ethical issues (particularly, the Canadian context this article brings out) but don't have a link handy. From my recent interactions, Canada's health care system seems to be failing for the elderly and young+disabled. Cost of living has skyrocketed in the key populated areas (GTA and GVA) and people have more of a FOMO/me-first attitude in all aspects of life. The gripe on health care is not just about waiting times. It is administers kicking patients out, threatening with private charges (Ontario Bill C7 that this article references but does not explain to someone unfamiliar), neglect in healthcare and step down facilities. I am relatively young and can recognize this is not how I want to go. The trend that could emerge is exactly what the article describes .. if life gets too hard, just end it. This is not what Canada used to be. Govt waste is monumental and services ever dwindling. The key political leaders seem to be espousing positions that pander particular viewpoints but don't actually get things better again. We need a Canadian-version of the Trump slogan - Make Canada Care Again!

barrysteve 4y ago
Something's deeply wrong over your neck of the woods mate. Keep your wits about you.

ZeroGravitas 4y ago

Probably just a headline generating and testing algorithm revealing the average Spectator reader's interest in killing the poor.