3 ms·

In the linked article, conservatives are objecting to a new legal standard which requires doctors to either kill patients themselves or find another doctor who’

In the linked article, conservatives are objecting to a new legal standard which requires doctors to either kill patients themselves or find another doctor who’s willing to do it. This seems like a pretty straightforward argument for the conservative position; in just 8 years Canada has traveled from “people in extreme pain have a right to self-determined death” to “you’re a bad doctor if you won’t give your patients lethal injection drugs”.

PuppyTailWags 4y ago
We need more evidence than a handful of ancedotes to proclaim that the entire country of Canada has changed its position on doctor quality based on willingless to participate in MAiD. I get that this is an emotional thing but we're really talking to basically a mom who says she knows better than her adult son whether or not he wants to kill himself (regardless of whether or not I personally disagree with the son, that situation is emotionally totally fucked and I don't think its representative of the entire country)
- SpicyLemonZest 4y ago
  The article linked in the comment I’m responding to is based not on a handful of anecdotes but new standards from the courts and Parliament. “ Last year, the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled unanimously that doctors who have moral objections to providing health services like abortion or assisted death must provide patients with an ‘effective referral’ to another doctor.”
  - PuppyTailWags 4y ago
    You told me that doctors who don't want to participate in MAiD can willingly opt-out of it and refer any patients to other doctors. This seems completely opposite, unless you mean doctors are being forced to not throw up barriers to access to MAiD to be the same as being forced to participate in MAiD, which seems totally backwards.
    - josephcsible 4y ago
      If you don't believe in killing people, you shouldn't have to give a recommendation of someone who does.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - notatoad 4y ago
        Health care in canada is limited by availability, and there's often a wait to be able to see a doctor. If a patient has waited in line to see a doctor, but the doctor they draw fails to treat them, a referral allows the patient to see another doctor instead of being sent to the back of the line again. A doctor should not be able to impede or delay somebody's legal right to medical care just because they have a personal objection to it.
      - govg 4y ago
        Good thing they're using your abilities as a medical professional, not your beliefs in your personal moral sphere. As a professional you're required to provide the same service to everyone without any regard to your own beliefs. Otherwise medicine as a national service doesn't work.
ttul 4y ago
I'd love to know where you're reading that "you’re a bad doctor if you won’t give your patients lethal injection drugs." As with Canada's abortion laws, doctors aren't required to perform the procedure, but they must still provide assistance to patients who require it. If doctors are given a free hand to apply their own moral code, then what's the point in having a law that legalizes and regulates a particular medical practice?

PuppyTailWags 4y ago

We need more evidence than a handful of ancedotes to proclaim that the entire country of Canada has changed its position on doctor quality based on willingless to participate in MAiD. I get that this is an emotional thing but we're really talking to basically a mom who says she knows better than her adult son whether or not he wants to kill himself (regardless of whether or not I personally disagree with the son, that situation is emotionally totally fucked and I don't think its representative of the entire country)

SpicyLemonZest 4y ago
The article linked in the comment I’m responding to is based not on a handful of anecdotes but new standards from the courts and Parliament. “ Last year, the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled unanimously that doctors who have moral objections to providing health services like abortion or assisted death must provide patients with an ‘effective referral’ to another doctor.”
- PuppyTailWags 4y ago
  You told me that doctors who don't want to participate in MAiD can willingly opt-out of it and refer any patients to other doctors. This seems completely opposite, unless you mean doctors are being forced to not throw up barriers to access to MAiD to be the same as being forced to participate in MAiD, which seems totally backwards.
  - josephcsible 4y ago
    If you don't believe in killing people, you shouldn't have to give a recommendation of someone who does.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - notatoad 4y ago
      Health care in canada is limited by availability, and there's often a wait to be able to see a doctor. If a patient has waited in line to see a doctor, but the doctor they draw fails to treat them, a referral allows the patient to see another doctor instead of being sent to the back of the line again. A doctor should not be able to impede or delay somebody's legal right to medical care just because they have a personal objection to it.
    - govg 4y ago
      Good thing they're using your abilities as a medical professional, not your beliefs in your personal moral sphere. As a professional you're required to provide the same service to everyone without any regard to your own beliefs. Otherwise medicine as a national service doesn't work.

ttul 4y ago

I'd love to know where you're reading that "you’re a bad doctor if you won’t give your patients lethal injection drugs." As with Canada's abortion laws, doctors aren't required to perform the procedure, but they must still provide assistance to patients who require it. If doctors are given a free hand to apply their own moral code, then what's the point in having a law that legalizes and regulates a particular medical practice?