The Canadian government says it is urgently trying to end the forced sterilization of Indigenous women, describing the practice as a human rights violation and a prosecutable offense. Yet police say they will not pursue a criminal investigation into a recent case in which a doctor apologized for his “unprofessional conduct” in sterilizing an Inuit woman.
In July, The Associated Press reported on the case of an Inuit woman in Yellowknife who had surgery in 2019 aimed at relieving her abdominal pain. The obstetrician-gynecologist, Dr. Andrew Kotaska, did not have the woman’s consent to sterilize her, and he did so over the objections of other medical personnel in the operating room. She is now suing him.
“This is a pivotal case for Canada because it shows that forced sterilization is still happening,” said Dr. Unjali Malhotra, of the First Nations Health Authority in British Columbia. “It’s time that it be treated as a crime.”
I absolutely can. Lemme give you an article about it, and not Fox News either.
https://apnews.com/article/covid-science-health-toronto-7c631558a457188d2bd2b5cfd360a867
It's actually a giant problem where doctors and hopsitals are actively pushing this onto the poor in order to "Free up a few beds", even going far as to shame people who refuse for being "selfish"
Nothing wrong with offering end of life care, I'm all for it, but when you're actively pushing it onto patients and even making commercials talking about "How glamorous suicide is!" (which they did, and it aired on Youtube, but it got pulled due to massive dislikes and violating Youtube's policies which forbid advocating self-harm)… It leaves me with the impression that you've got a problem you're looking for a "Final Solution" to.
Honestly more people need to know about this and just how… well… blatantly genocidal Canada is acting.
i'm not seeing the part of that article where there's any evidence at all of health care workers pushing anybody to take MAiD.
So you missed this part then?
"In one recording obtained by the AP, the hospital’s director of ethics told Foley that for him to remain in the hospital, it would cost “north of $1,500 a day.” Foley replied that mentioning fees felt like coercion and asked what plan there was for his long-term care.
“Roger, this is not my show,” the ethicist responded. “My piece of this was to talk to you, (to see) if you had an interest in assisted dying.”
Foley said he had never previously mentioned euthanasia. The hospital says there is no prohibition on staff raising the issue.
Catherine Frazee, a professor emerita at Toronto’s Ryerson University, said cases like Foley’s were likely just the tip of the iceberg.
“It’s difficult to quantify it, because there is no easy way to track these cases, but I and other advocates are hearing regularly from disabled people every week who are considering (euthanasia),” she said.
Frazee cited the case of Candice Lewis, a 25-year-old woman who has cerebral palsy and spina bifida. Lewis’ mother, Sheila Elson, took her to an emergency room in Newfoundland five years ago. During her hospital stay, a doctor said Lewis was a candidate for euthanasia and that if her mother chose not to pursue it, that would be “selfish,” Elson told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. "
While I agree that assistance in dying should not be used to offset a lack of other necessary care, like mental health, addictions (which I believe are disqualifiers for MAID), or disability, the article provided only examples of health care professionals offering the service to people who had severly diminished quality of life as an option of part of their care. I think it's a stretch to say these were examples of coersion. The decision is left solely to the patient, and I think their family's account can often cloud any reporting of what the patient's wishes actually are.
Anecdotally, the health professionals I know say there are far too many families, and ocassionally doctors who think they're superheros, who wish to prolong their relative's/patient's life for the sole purpose of delaying death. People, like Mr. Nichols' family, will say he's got a great quality of life, but picture yourself in his shoes. Deaf for most of your life, now vision loss, seizures, your body essentially withering away. He was suffering, and clearly, he wanted to end it. Several inquiries noted he fully qualified for and received MAID as he wished, even though it may not have been the wish of his family.
I do think it would be useful to have a review panel for more complex cases, like Dr Marmoreo suggests. But, I think the majority of cases where the family might raise concerns are cases where they are prioretizing their wishes above those of the patient actually seeking the care, rather than a professional wantonly pushing MAID for no particular reason.
I dunno, it's a little sus that they had that one guy who claimed someone was sent to talk to him about "Seeing if he wanted to kill himself", when he hadn't said anything to staff about wanting it.
That's precisely the job of a physician or health professional though. Ensure the patient is aware of the options they have available for care. They saw that he would likely meet the criteria and suggested it as an option. Them explaining the reasons of why they elected to suggest that option of care is not coersion in any sense.
The fact that they're going to non-terminal patients and trying to talk them into suicide is a problem in and of itself. You MUST recognize that.
Again, they are not trying to talk them into anything, they are saying it's an available option.