I am a GP and I want to say thank you for this respectful and frank debate which unpacked the key issues very well. The similar issue of abortion wasn’t touched on but there are a huge number of parallels. In the UK we have seen abortion move from an intervention of last resort to effectively a mainline method of contraception ( but with significant trauma to both parents in many cases in my experience). I fear that assisted dying would inevitably go down the same route. When some of my most vulnerable patients tell me about how they feel a burden to their families, some of them subjected to emotional and financial abuse, I am thankful that we don’t currently have to worry about a terminal form of ridding ourselves of inconvenience.
And as a well-informed physician, I’m certain you know that such a vulnerable person, who feels an unwanted inconvenience to her family, would be, with assessment by a MAID committee,compassionately refused assisted dying. At the same time, I am certain that her medical practitioners would also be encouraged to intervene to improve her quality of life.
@@jennifer97363 I think you're overlooking her statement that "she fears that MAiD may move down the same path that abortion had..." and not just referring to the state of the law as it stands now
@juliebarker6930 of course it will move down the same path. We've seen abortion activists make insane claims that it should be available up to the point of birth if the mother and her physican agrees on it. We've already seen horror stories come out of Canada in regards to MAID. The woman being interviewed has dedicated her whole life to ended the lives of others and she's sitting smiling about it.
While there was some reference to the Bible, a rarity in these programmes, there was no addressing of the fact that once a person dies they face the judgement & subsequent justice of God for eternity. Death is not a release, it is the entry into eternity. Once you die, there is no chance of repentance.
Then why live? What your saying is we are pawns of some god who enjoys seeing us suffer by creating us as suffering little things that it watches and finds joy in our suffering pain. I highly doubt this is the reality. But to me that is not a god id follow.
@@phoenixtoash2396 Why would you imagine that suffering ends at death? In reality, God is kinder to us than we deserve. We are, by nature, pretty horrible.
@@martinploughboy988 Why would you assume I figured that? I just don't want to exist in the first place. So really your saying a am a slave created for suffering by a very cruel God. Wow .. who wants that ?
I found this worthwhile. It was a very good choice to have on each side a physician with a wealth of direct experience. Also, it was gracious of the host not to belabour the point when it transpired that the guest had not examined the basis for her own belief in the existence of human rights.
Imagine how many young adults will end their lives so early because they’re going through a tough phase in their lives. I’m already seeing cases from Canada where people rather default to assisted death over mental health care. This will lead to a very dark rabbit hole I fear.
@@flyaware759 These lives still matter because we can and could have prevented them from dying. God always gives a person a second chance to want to change his or her ways and seek him, and make a relationship with God. Suicide will make you go to Hell and not Heaven.
Would have much preferred if the host had allowed for more functional discussion between the two parties, was significantly more a split Q&A with two callers that were constantly on hold 😬
So, here in British Columbia Canada, Hospice care was always 'not to prolong life nor to hasten death'. That has always been Hospice philosophy! When MAiD arrived, Palliative Care docs and Hospices refused MAiD on premises for that reason. BUT gov't mandated it creating a cognitive dissonance for providers. Many docs left and so did nurses. Then hospices acquiesced, because without gov't funding they could not function. What gov't has done by mandating MAiD in hospices is they harmed workers with a moral injury which will have lasting effects. Now Hospices are forced to change the hospice philosophy away from 'not prolonging life, nor hasten death' to 'not prolonging life, but hastening death as the progressive 'woke' way! Society no longer sees any suffering as having any redemptive purpose! This will be humanity's undoing: killing its weak, harming care givers, and teaching its young that there is no gain in pain.
I am a nursing professor in Canada. We have terribly lower amounts of applicants of people wanting to enter the nursing profession. We also have extremely high levels burnout and nurses leaving the profession. I can only imagine that it is because of these dark ideologies entering the healthcare system. As a Christian, I would not work in a palliative care environment that endorsed assisted dying. It is so sad to see what is happening to the nursing profession in Canada. May God bring us back to him and his design for human life.
@@ZOEISLIFE487 The way MAiD unfolds in British Columbia is that Hospice nurses aren't req'd to be involved. There is a dedicated MAiD team with its own doc and nurses who aren't based anywhere, but travel about visiting various venues. They will even come to the patient's home. Realize that Hospices can't function without gov't money nor without volunteers. If you volunteered at a BC Hospice you would not know which patient died because of MAiD. It is all confidential as it should be. But the patients there need good volunteers and nurses who are mature enough to put their biases aside and to be a companion and be present during a time in life's journey that can be frightening for some to navigate.
Do you make your dog suffer to give it more purpose in life? Does any other animal’s suffering give it more purpose in your eyes, or just humans? In reality, you’ve been duped by the machine to cope with existence using God and/or consumerism. Convinced that continuing to be a cog and enduring as much as you can is actually for the greater good, when really it is just to help keep the gears turning.
I wonder if the Net Worth of this Doctor who founded an organisation to promote her ‘business’ whereby she profits from promoting suicide? Because she doesn’t do it for free I’m imagining, so she has a financial incentive to encourage these people? Dear God!
My mother died without medical drugs and intervention and it was peaceful. She passed away aged ninety and we made her comfortable in her own home with her family around her. Dying is part of a cycle in life, it should not be hastened, it is a natural process. Death is nothing to be afraid of. Society should support the dying and provide a care and support programme. People need to prepare and it gives families time to accept and say their goodbyes. No one has the right to terminate and medically end life.
The example presented of two people with terminal motoneuron disease, one wealthy with all supports,the other lacking supports of most kinds-was,I agree with Dr Wiebe, exactly the same at its core: progressive, terminal illness.The British doctor tried to paint it as a lack of decent housing issue for the male exampled, forgetting the central point- the intersection of illness and the quality of life each autonomous human being wants for themself. NO ONE would support medically-assisted dying strictly for those living in poverty. Be serious. At the centre of every single medically assisted dying request lies illness; that will never change. The slippery slope argument is fear-mongering by those who have very little real knowledge of the entire, regulated process. These decisions are not made by solitary physicians- there are strict medical and legal standards of care; the counsel of ethicists; as well as multiple other professionals weighing in on each case. If my life proceeds to dementia, as is prevalent in my family, I have chosen not to continue to live an existence surrounded by strangers, no longer recognizing my loved ones! becoming steadily incapacitated until I am permanently curled into the fetal position, closed off from the world. Is it caring, ethical, moral human behaviour to force that upon a fellow human being? Not in my opinion it isn’t. To force suffering (of all sorts) on others, based on your perspective of what value of life means, grossly disrespects your fellow human beings and is immoral. The heavy-handed Christian religion should have absolutely no role in this discussion; we,sentient,are quite capable of figuring this out for ourselves. You value me by respecting my right to decide for myself what MY values are; not by forcing me to live my life/ prolong my death based on YOUR values.🌿
She said Canadians believe in human rights and bodily autonomy. I think the last few years of COVID added a bonus layer of clarity that our moral fabric is eroding, not progressing. She’s crowning off her career by “assisting the deaths” of our three most vulnerable populations: babies in their mothers womb, the sick, and elderly. If we genuinely values human rights, we’d start with the right to life - not death.
I second everything you said, COVID was a wake up call to how selfish and self absorbed our humankind has become. No wonder they say AI despises us. Not even robots would want us alive with the extent of our evil. I would add how worrying it is to see the disabled being treated as inconvenient.
@@rir79 I am a mature disabled man and I want the option. Don't treat me like a child, give me the choice. I don't care if some people may see me as "lesser than", that is a social irritation of far less importance then controlling my own death.
"Lots of ways we treat humans in a special.way"...but of course we should treat all sentient life in these ways if we wish to have any pretentions to common decency.
@@mnmmnm925 equality of wrongs is not the point, this is just a misleading tactic to claim the privilege of continued oppression. Similar cases deserve similar treatment, therefore all sentient life merits continuance except in self defence. I note you simply assert the human right over others' lives with no ethical case to back it up. Looking at the mess humans have made of the world with amimal.agriculture, has exceptionalism really worked well for our species, not to speak of the hideous suffering inflicted in its name on nonhumans.?
@@lark8356 "equality of wrongs is not the point," Yes, it is. The fact that it's more wrong to kill an innocent toddler vs. a lizard (all else being equal) implies that humans have higher moral standing, special dignity, more moral value, or more rights than animals. Humans are special. "this is just a misleading tactic to claim the privilege of continued oppression." A hypothetical is not a "misleading tactic." It's a legitimate debate tool. And you cannot oppress animals; that would imply that our treatment of them is unjust. "Similar cases deserve similar treatment, therefore all sentient life merits continuance except in self defence." Lol bullshit. You don't actually believe this. A toddler and a lizard are both sentient. Do you really believe that, for example, the punishment for killing a toddler should be similar as the punishment for killing a lizard, assuming all else is equal? Obviously not. Sentience is a poor standard for determining how we ought to treat something. "I note you simply assert the human right over others' lives with no ethical case to back it up." Humans have the Imago Dei, and God told us we can eat animals. There are secular cases for these beliefs, but I'm not going to go into them here. "Looking at the mess humans have made of the world with amimal.agriculture, has exceptionalism really worked well for our species, not to speak of the hideous suffering inflicted in its name on nonhumans.?" Yes, God gave us dominion over the earth and its animals.
Those against assisted dying need to try suffering like many unheard people that cant advocate for themselves. Most of those suffering will wonder why they are being forced to suffer and can't die peacefully in a planned manner with their loved ones. There only needs to be regulation to protect those that need it, not to restrict those of sound mind. Even if someone seems to be mindless, if they want a planned assisted death then why stop them? Are you going to care for them? How do you know that's what they want? How do you know if they are not suffering by your care? Some cases can be tricky but those cases need to be addressed individually not some blanket restriction on people's freedom. Often laws are used to empower certain people rather than protect individual liberty. Again try suffering for years. Actually put yourself in other people's shoes, really thinking about the pain and suffering some are experiencing. Most people only give a minor shallow thought to this....and on the outside you don't realize all the various ways various types of suffering is affecting people. Think what it would be like for the sufferer and those around them. What might it be like for a week, a month, months, years....24/7. It's always a passing thought for others BUT NOT THE SUFFERER! Bottom line, why should someone else determine how you live or die. Sure there are situations like children and those that are clearly mentally no longer there, but again the laws don't reflect protecting their rights, the laws reflect an authoritarian status of "i, the law, will decide everything about your life" Wonder if the medical "authorities" want to restrict those that choose peaceful dieing because they want human lab rats? Some procedures may be helpful, but some prolong suffering. Some would say you don't have to accept medical treatment, but again they think this without considering what it may be like for the sick person and their loved ones. The suffering is hidden from the public...possibly for nefarious reasons. Everyone must die, and our silly cover ups of reality are dangerous. People tend to think life is pretty simple....you're just living well, then get sick, then die. They don't see the tremendous amount of cost, pain and suffering...and don't realize how long this can go on for. This is a serious problem.
Of i would “manage” my pain I would be basically in a coma anyway. Completely useless. Not able to work function socialize. To what end? Why suffer and for who? You?
I found one of the arguments here quite deceptive: the interdependence of the discussion about assisted dying on the one hand, and about improving housing and welfare on the other. No-one would argue against improving the quality of life, or eliminating poverty. However it's utopic to expect that anytime soon, and there is no justification to suppress the discourse about assisting dying (or any other urgent matter) until then.
Far from anyone suppressing debate, the media seems generally supportive of the case for assisted killing. Then again, instead of having Esther Rantzen popping up a over the shop, might we not see more of Liz Carr to give her own take on this issue?
I really appreciated hearing Ellen Wiebe share from the perspective of someone involved in the the process. Other than her rather lacking response to the origin of human rights it was clear she has wrestled with the reality of assisted dying and is trying her best to love and serve her patients.
The host needs to be quiet and let the guests speak. How frustrating to be asked a question and not given the chance to answer it. He's spoilt a hugely important debate.
This is both a religious and moral debate. Medical professionals take an oath to do no harm. Where is the respect for the unborn, who are vulnerable and need protection? Don’t they have human rights? Who defends their dignity and their right to life? Certainly not the doctors who perform these executions. I speak with experience as a midwife in our family will testify to the gruesome procedures to maim, dislike and destroy innocent lives. Abortion, euthanasia and assisting any individual to terminate their life is murder. God gives everyone gifts, talents and skills to help others, so how is this programme of death helping others. A doctor should help not cause suffering. This is a depopulation programme perpetrated by the government in league with willing doctors like Dr Ellen Wiebe. Surely health support should be given to those who are transitioning from life to death in a dignified manner. Just as a mother carrying her unborn baby should be given assistance and choices. Debating over death and murder is the demise of our society and those implicit are accountable to God. I’m a proud single parent of a beautiful, talented and successful daughter who has enhanced my life is the most wonderful of ways. Prayers are needed for this woman and like minded individuals who are deceived and tarnished in their moral compass and reasoning. It is such an abuse of power and authority to mock God.
Assisted dying…. we treat our loved animals kindly at the time of death, so dignity in dying is also important for humans too. The most important issue is CHOICE!
@@sysprogmanadhoc2785 I don’t see a person in a veggie state as less worthy of love and assistance in living just because she/he is in a state we consider undesirable. And my grandmother is actually suffering from Alzheimer’s, so Independently of what her state is, I will love her to the end and she will always be dignified. I don’t think of her, of a poor person or a disabled person as someone we should just give up on. One last word for you, we are only capable of showing unconditional love to those who are absolutely useless to us or others. Allowing someone else to be useless and still stick around is what true love is about. Have a good day.
@@sysprogmanadhoc2785 and of course I should have expected such a rude and unkind answer. People who choose this path can only think of such a way of communicating.
Euthanasia could be a measure of compassion but capitalism stifles debate and takes no prisoners. I believe in the sanctity of life but believe that to resolve the issue of victims and their tendancy to be blamed for crime and cannot be addressed without serious discussion as to Euthanasia as a solution to crime. I'm not brave or virtuous but but cannot see beyond a impasse that exists in a culture of rape and murder where abuse has become a virtue. Egotism for the alphas and compassion rejected by them has resulted in a pandemic in moral disillusionment. Please consider Euthanasia as a civilised consideration for many of us who cannot perceive a benefit to continue living in emotional purgatory and have no stake in a competitive world where success is perceived as the ability to exploit another and subvert authority to those who define pleasure from inducing suffering in others. The prison system cannot continue to justify incarceration in schools designed to generate hatred and abuse. I have survived three attempts on my life and at 61 have no relish for life. Goodbye to the narcissist and power freaks who use rape and murder as entertainment for they drugged and drunk lifestyles. Clutching their Bibles and exercising they democratic right to joy. Strange that murder is more popular than Euthanasia which says so much about human nature and our profound failure to grasp compassion and reasoned thought.
Dr Weibe was such a wonderful, compassionate doctor that I would have no hesitation in accepting her decision as to whether I, or any of those I love, was eligible for assisted dying. She described both of her patients as each suffering with the same physically disabling medical conditions, but the juxtaposition of their living conditions. I thought that the medical conditions were missed when the interviewer framed his questions regarding the physical living conditions, suggesting that there would be a different decision had the second patient been provided with an improvement in his housing, conditions. This would not have altered his total medical incarnation, and as such, his right to a medically assisted death was just as much his right, as it was for the other lady with the same medical incapacitation. I've been in the same position where I've relied on assistance for every physical requirement for anything from my neck down, once for over a year and once for over 8 years. I asked my husband to put the medications into my hand and put the bottle of morphine to m mouth and then to leave the room.. I later called him back in so that he could just hold me during the night. Unfortunately, I woke up the following day. I was devastated. I've since been in the same position but I failed again. I'm currently heading towards being in a similar position but im holding on for the sake of my dog. I hoe that when I reach close to that position again, that my medications will be enough to make a permanent transition into my true home with God. I believe that God my creator, loves me so much that He is always loving, no matter what. I truly admire doctors who assist those who need their assistance to release their patients who are unable to ensure that they have a painless transition into their home with God. My Dad suffered greatly for the last 6 months of his life, and the medical 'business that gave him radiation right up until the very morning when he died that night! It was the most cruel thing I've ever been forced to experience anyone to have to suffer the wat he did. No amount of my pleading for them to stop torturing him outweighed the rest of the family's consent to continue treatment. Over 40 years on and it still breaks my heart to know that such a wonderful father and a caring man had to suffer in the manner in which he did. Im glad to know that medically assisted dying is now legal in Australia, but what does one do when the loved one has been so dosed up on morphine and told that there's hope by the rest of the family, and they have lost competency for consent? There also NEEDS to be clinicians who have to be honest with their patients and who will also offer suggestions for the best care and the least painful death for their patient. What happened to my father was abuse, by both the medical 'business' .... and my family who allowed that abuse to continue because he was able to pay for all of the continuing expensive treatments ... and his doctor's bills! BTW It was the most expensive church owned private hospital in Sydney!
This needs to be available, at least for people who are dying and in agony. But at the same time we need to make sure that people are not asking for this because the same society offering it is failing to provide them resources they need, such as housing or adequate analgesia.
I agree with much of what you have to say. However, I have malignant stomach and liver cancer. In other words it’s palliative and terminal. I’m also a retired RN who has dealt with pain and death on many levels. For me, imo, agony at any level is not acceptable in a terminal situation. And should be attempted to be avoided in all situations, but of course is almost impossible. The reason why I’m responding is that intervention should be started before ‘agony’ level. I’m sure you’d agree. As a nurse, it’s extremely difficult sometimes to control pain at that agony level. Sometimes it seems pain meds, and sedation to an extent can’t get on top of things. The weird thing about deliberately sedating a patient, the patient can be sedated but still be experiencing full on pain under the sedation. So the key is nip it in the bud. Begin treating patients at the onset of their discomfort, and realize everybody’s need is different. Take care.
@@Larry30102 So sorry to hear about your situation, but thank you for sharing that. I agree with you. Pain should be nipped in the bud early. I also think the patient should have much more control over their own pain Tx. I know of someone who was suddenly taken off of all of her opioid pain meds during her final week in palliative care. It made no sense. I know of someone else who sought assisted dying because his doctor would only give him Suboxone for pain that probably required Fentanyl. On a related note, Canada, our federal government has approved medical assistance in dying, but told dying people waiting for an exemption to try psilocybin (the only strongly evidence-based Tx for end of life distress) to “go find a clinical trial”. Psilocybin is probably associated with fewer (actual) harmful outcomes than any other psychoactive drug, including caffeine. How many people would not ask for MAID if their pain was treated early, as you say, and if they were also permitted to choose for themselves the treatment that works for them, without a paternalistic gatekeeper?
@@Larry30102 for as much as I am sorry for your situation, pain whether in labour or end of life is a part of life, all we can do is bet on good palliative care but even you in a terminal situation should not get to decide when to go, sorry.
To be honest, I haven’t watched this whole video. This is a complex issue. Seems like a lot of word play. I have malignant stomach and liver cancer. It’s strictly palliative. I live in the state of Georgia, but am originally from Oregon. I have family in Oregon and if logistically possible, I’d like to die out there under the state’s death with dignity. Imo they do it right. 2 MDs confer regarding the situation. If terminal within 6 months and the patient opts for it medication is made available for the patient to take to end their life. I don’t like the term “physician assisted”. While the physician oks the use of medication, they are not involved in the administration. From what I’ve read its surprisingly 40% or so opt not to take the medication and go on to die naturally, as it should be according to the patient’s wish. There was no physician standing there ensuring they’d take the medication. Additionally, and trying not to be too long winded, I’m a retired Registered Nurse. I spent probably around 6 years out of 40 working as an oncology nurse. I did witness and take care of patients who’s oncologists treated them with dignity at the end of life. I also witness many deaths that were needlessly inhuman, as imo, was directed by the physician. It was hard to comprehend. So my impending death doesn’t bother me as much as the potential suffering. A DNR, depending on the circumstance, physician, and family can and does factor into end of life decisions. But strictly speaking a DNR applies if the patient arrests. Sure there are different levels of resuscitation, but for me if I say no DNR that means comfort measures only. It’s kind of funny (not funny ‘ha ha’), in my experience how living wills are basically ignored by Drs and to some extent families. I’ll quit now. Death with dignity in a terminal situation should be national law.
@@Larry30102 since when is palliative care undignified????? Being surrounded by family members and taking morphine is undignified? I will pray for you, for now that is all I can do.
The young doctor says nowhere in the Bible does God suggest it is OK. But also, nowhere does Godi say it' is NOT OK.. I suspect people will find it more of surprising the lack of prohibition than the lack of permission..
Thank the universe some of us live in countries where we can decide to avoid the worst agonies of some (god-given) illnesses. These countries all have rigorous criteria for requesting sssisted dying, and it works!
@@RpMcMurphy_ you were correct, I did not read the articles: now I have and I see they only apply to Canada, and are pretty flimsily constructed at that: the inset page in the first article makes the actual position clearer. I have before me the papers for the Spanish position, and I assure you the conditions are rigorous to a fault- I know many who have submitted the application - it is held until further verification at one's local gp - only too pleased to be assured that their last agonies will be under control. So far as I know, these social conditions are excluded from euthanasia provision here - and I note that the Canadian provisions have been postponed and will anyway include offers of all available help before the individual goes ahead.
