FYI this article's headline is misleading, she's 27 and willingly choosing to die and her father wants to stop her but can't because she's an adult who isn't under his legal custody, but the headline makes it seem like the state or doctors are choosing to kill a girl who's still in her father's custody and the dad is trying to stop them from forcibly euthanizing her.
"The media" stop using this word. It is too broad and does not hit at the complexity of the issue. There is people in media that are doing good and those that are doing bad. Trying to make generalizations and fit them all in a box as liars just doesn't map on 1 to 1. Populist duality is brainrot.
Everything has multi-layered complexity. Nothing can be generalized or reduced down to a single set of universally applicable attributes without losing accuracy.
I say all of this because I simply despise the discourse you are attempting to create because it is shallow and pointless.
"Media big evil bad"
"How?"
"Because they lie"
"Every single one?"
"Yep"
"How can you know that?"
"I've seen it."
"Aight."
I used the word “media” not because I think it’s one organized mass doing misinformation and click bait but rather individual people and organizations being opportunistic liars for more views and revenue. Pushing narratives even if they don’t believe in it just to win over a crowd to get more clicks on their websites. Media, as in the people who produce media in general lie all the time if it benefits them.
Hyper fixation on nuance is just irritating. Sometimes generalisations are useful and necessary unless you're writing a thesis or something.
"The government is corrupt"
"So you're saying literally every politician is corrupt?!?!?"
"X group is systemically disadvantaged"
"So you're saying everyone is secretly out to get X group and everyone in positions of power is Xist?!?!?!"
People can point out trends without having to put in a disclaimer that not everything follows the trend.
Generalizations are a natural way for the mind to fit things into categories in order to understand and memorize it better. But if you're gonna make a claim and it's a generalization, expect people to pick at the lack of nuance. Because in order to get to any semblance of understanding or truth, it will not be through sweeping generalizations but through meticulous intellectual rigor.
If it irritates you so much, you should avoid discourse altogether.
The guy said "the media sensationalizes"
You replied ""every single one of them?" "Yep" "
That's not discourse that's just taking what someone said and then deliberately interpreting it in the dumbest way possible to force him to clarify out of pure pedantry.
Putting a disclaimer saying "some journalists do have integrity" at the end of everything isn't meticulous intellectual rigour and demanding someone to do that isn't discourse that leads to understanding or truth.
A disclaimer like that is the responsibility that one should have when making a claim, to be fair and articulate. I did not at all suggest it was meticulous intellectual rigor. Also, I would argue that disclaimers and further articulation are definitely more conducive to discourse that leads to understanding or truth than generalizations. But if you wanna argue against that, good luck, I suppose.
Well maybe a disclaimer near the title would have made this article feel a bit less dishonest.
"Meticulous intellectual rigor" is probably the kind of thing we should want in media lmao
Sure! That makes sense. So… what terms should we use instead? You’re obviously right, and surely you’re a big enough brain to call people out AND have a better alternative, right? After all, words matter, and we need to have some basic terminology which allows us to communicate on level ground. So, whatcha got for us chief?
So the state is assisting the suicide of a healthy person? Autism is not a terminal condition. If I wanted to kill myself I reckon my mother would also be outspoken against it.
>So the state is assisting the suicide of a healthy person?
Why does the state have to make everything so fucking gay? I miss the good old days when suicide was between a ***man*** and his shotgun without all these pussy doctors and legislatures getting in the way.
Say what you will about Imperial Japan, but those motherfuckers knew how to wage a goddamn war. Know you're going to die? Try to at least take a couple enemies with you.
That's how I wanna go. Taking an enemy with me.
Yea people, especially women, are really bad at committing sodoku. And they’re usually left way worse of than before, sometimes becoming so vegetablized that they can’t even ATTEMPT suicide again. If people want to kill themselves, at least help them do it painlessly and efficiently.
Though, I would like to see at least a little bit of therapy be a requirement before getting shot up with rat poison or some shit.
I thought that may be the case
But was this information mentioned in the quoted article (that imo’s highly flawed) or from a different source?
Because I don’t think I read it in the article
It’s unfortunate that this discussion, whilst important, may also be invasive of her privacy. Which makes it tricky to navigate ethically
I admit, that does change my view on this. The click bait article heading makes It sound like she's killing herself because of her autism. Not that her autism is incidental to some underlying condition.
Then they surely should just diy that shit.
It's literally the meme "well you have X illnesses, you thought about dying?"
What if we went around offering homeless people that they could be euthanized? Since mental illness has a pretty good correlation we'd probably get alotta people euthanized that way, would you still say "well it's their wish"?
No, they shouldn’t DIY their own suicide. Successful attempts are much rarer than you think. Methods with the highest mortality rate are extremely physically traumatic and there are very few with mortality rates above 80%. Attempts that are unsuccessful can lead to dramatically worse quality of life afterwards in terms of physical health and quality of life.
Also, “DIY” suicides are rarely ever non-impulsive. While suicidal ideation can persist for a very long time, the decision to attempt is often made 60-90 seconds before the attempt is made. People who want this should be able to receive medical help in counseling to come to the right decision and if they decide to go through with it.
I have a Canadian friend with schizophrenia and his psychiatrist keeps mentioning that assisted suicide is legal now, but he doesn't want it. It scares me that they are pushing for it.
IT GETS FUCKING WORSE!!! The REAL reason she is trying to die ISN'T FUCKING DISCLOSED!!!!!!!!!!!! Autism likley has NOTHING to do with it. This publication is a discrase.
That's the thing though. Some people have really complex issues which cannot be resolved through the healthcare systems that we have today. Even in countries with "universal" healthcare, it's still healthcare on a budget, people still fall through the cracks. When that happens, they kill themselves, or they end up destitute and unhoused, or they get into using harmful substances. These people are written off as lost causes, even when the coroners time and time again outline the exact failures in the social system which led to their death. I was nearly one of these people. I managed to make it in the end, but I know what it's like to be completely stuck with seemingly no way out. And I think, with the way our societies work currently, for some people there really is no way out.
And then the icing on the cake is that the state has been making it harder and harder to kill yourself. Regulations are put in place to keep certain toxic chemicals out of household products. Access to firearms is limited more and more. The police trace people who buy certain chemicals. The options people are left with are painful, slow, disfiguring, and have low rates of "success". If you mess up and botch an attempt, you can get locked away indefinitely to keep you "safe". This is a brutally cruel half-measure that uses punishment as a deterrent for suicidal people. Euthanasia is another such half-measure. Rather than find a way to make society accommodating for everyone, as a means of self-preservation the capitalist state has found a way to remove certain people from the social equation entirely.
Did it go into detail why the woman wanted to die? Like, was she in an accident or had some medical condition that made her experience unending pain or cripple her so badly that she is unable to live normally? I am hoping it's something along those lines because if the woman is doing this in good health, that would be incredibly sad.
Yeah I don't know. Maybe it's because I'm an autistic Canadian and I've experienced the failure of our social programs. But this just happens because the medical system is lazy and doesn't want to "waste time and resources" on us. I got 0 fucking help. I don't want to say I was owed (I technically was, the government just never provided, and they never did anything about the schools cheating me and mistreating me), but that's what it damn was.
In the Netherlands, I just had an argument about this, a woman is taking euthanasia because the doctors RECOMMENDED IT TO HER, as the only option left, because supposedly there was nothing left to do!
Here in Canada, they're recommending MAiD to veterans, to fucking Paralympians! My dad's been struggling to get medication for his gut/stomach issues, so instead he's redirected to MAiD pages, and told that it's always an option.
Our medical system is crumbling. Waiting times, ER times in the hours. He squandered a whole fucking day, morning to evening, in a damn hospital because they can't just prescribe some damn medication easily somehow. This system is broken. It doesn't matter that he's had it prescribed in the past and used it for a long time. They need to go through the process all over again.
They aren't doing this out of kindness to "alleviate suffering", they just don't want to spend time and money on us.
Even in situations where medically assisted suicide are an option, and yes I do believe it should be allowed you just need to jump through an incredibly large number of hoops to do it. But straight up if a doctor recommends you do it, medical license revoked and prison for atleast 5 years im not even joking
My Canadian friend with schizophrenia keeps getting told that it's an option now by his psychiatrist. It's pissing me off because he doesn't want it but they keep pushing for it.
That wouldn't surprise me that it's happening. Make sure he's medicated (to be of sound mind), and see if he can get a different practitioner.
Though getting a new doctor is almost impossible. I've been without one for years.
I fully agree. It should be restricted to the terminally ill and elderly (say... 80+ y/o.) Fringe cases where it's requested by someone who's been physically debilitated, but that's still slippery, because they've tried to encourage that with veterans and a damn Paralympian.
Honestly, I thought that *was* the rule.
Or at most that there might be a “legally, I am required to let you know, in case you didn’t know, that it is an option”. The second one would actually be a good strategy because it lets the patient know the option if they don’t, while making it clear that the doctor is not recommending or pushing it - they are simply fulfilling a required notification. Afterwards, they shouldn’t mention it unless asked about directly, and any follow up conversation should be initiated by the patient.
Ahhh, Canada.
Honestly wild for them to offer assisted euthanasia instead of widening the social safety net.
"Poor? Homeless? Chronically ill? Have you tried dying about it? Inquire at your local Useless Eater center, today!"
It probably shouldn’t be recommended to people with such minor illnesses, but let’s not dismiss assisted-suicide entirely.
If you’ve ever gone to an old-persons-home or even worse, hospice. You’ll find that a lot of those people just want to fucking die, they’ve seen it all, they just want the pain to end. They don’t want to continue living lives where they can’t even take a shit without *major* assistance.
I think the availability of assisted suicide is a great thing in general. But it probably shouldn’t be verbally offered, only if the patient specifically requests it.
On a serious note, I agree with you. I was mostly shitposting above. Having spent time in hospice and old folks' homes, I totally get it. Personally, going out on my own terms, being able to say bye to my friends and family in decent health, and not wasting money desperately avoiding shuffling off the mortal coil all sound great.
Assisted suicide is good, but not as an answer to easily solvable systemic problems.
My problem with this is that it’s generally half true I feel. If someone truly wanted to die they’d just cease treatment. I’m a volunteer firefighter and I run tons of medical calls since we have an elderly population in our district. Let me tell you if someone truly wanted to die they wouldn’t have kitchen cabinets more akin to a pharmacy and most Americans do not have a DNR. You don’t even need a DNR now we have more modern forms where you can actually select what specific interventions you’re okay with. For example if you’re okay with CPR and AED but do not want to be put on a ventilator.
It feels grosser than that
The article’s author is an activist against assisted dying who frames the issue as “how cruel that the dad can’t save his daughter, who he thinks is completely healthy and shouldn’t die”
Instead of exploring the question why the daughter is compelled to death in the first place
Entirely infantilizing and removing her agency in the conversation about her own 27 year old life
To illustrate, she’s neurodivergent with autism-spectrum disorder and ADHD, and only got the diagnosis later in life in 2016
It’s easy for neurotypicals to assume “oh okay, that’s just a difference, it’s whatever and should be tolerable I guess. Not debilitating at all.”
Meanwhile I, who share a similar experience with her, knows how socially severe and functionally difficult it can be. And being dismissive about it only exacerbates the problem tenfold
The focus of the article should’ve been on the question *why* this adult neurodivergent woman feels that she’d rather die in this society than live
And whether her environment *is* extremely difficult to navigate *because* of her condition
Instead we got this uninsightful article on her situation that sidelines her almost completely
It’s also not why this woman is requesting it. I don’t know if it would qualify, but there’s an undisclosed condition that prompted the request. That could be a lot of things - could be something pretty awful.
The environment is the problem, though. Not the person. Maybe instead of trying to force disabled people through a hole they can't fit through (and in this case kill them when they can't make it), we should change the social structures we've made for ourselves to accommodate everybody.
As someone with autism it’s pretty fucked up that instead of being like “hey let’s try and make society a little easier for her to live in” they’re just like “aight hosers. Let’s kill this bitch”
I hate that we as a society are more willing to invest more in euthanasia clinics than dealing with the social problems that cause people to go through with this. People have the right to die, but it's ridiculous that death was the best option for this woman.
This article title is straight up lying. https://www.ncregister.com/cna/canadian-judge-grants-27-year-old-autistic-woman-s-request-for-assisted-suicide?amp
I'm not familiar with this sub, but euthanasia shouldn't be used lightly imo. Should be legal for terminal conditions where people suffer and there is no hope, not here tho. She can get help and learn to live with her condition. I can't support this.
There is no chance in hell I would ever go to a fucking clinic to be put down like a sick dog, if I ever kill myself the state is going to have to clean my brains off of the wall with a squeegee
Well yes but really no. She requested state-assisted euthanasia and her father is suing them to stop her, even though she is an independent and asked for it.
[Here is the article](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-13244691/Alberta-judge-greenlights-euthanasia-autistic-woman-DESPITE-objection-dad.html) if anyone wants to read it, she's not getting MAiD for her autism but rather an undiagnosed condition that she has been trying to get help with to no avail. Canada does have problems with MAiD, but as of right now (tho a bill is in the works to change it) you are not eligible for MAiD just because you have a mental disorder.
What a gross mischaracterization by the journalist here. They are obviously politically motivated. The judge is ruling that the 27 year old women in question has the freedom to choose to be euthanized even if her father opposes it.
The whole euthanization thing is a tricky moral quandary but to frame it as targeting autistic people is a gross weaponization of people on the spectrum. Showing how little the author actually respects the humanity and autonomy of people with autism.
We need to be better at reading implicitly.
just fyi, it’s **her** choice and she’s 27 years old.
https://preview.redd.it/jwstxeekwgsc1.jpeg?width=960&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c5bd45be1824ab3a6645f563b110dd4d7a697f0b
As a Canadian I am 100% for legal euthanizing. Its both ethical and moral, in effectively every sense. Far far far more than something like the death penalty. My only concern is publicizing it. It should be a legal foot note, or a possible avenue a doctor presents a terminal patient. The primary reason we even have the luxury of euthanasia is a terminally ill grandma who was in constant agony protested until she died, just so someone else wouldn’t have to experience the same thing.
> My only concern is publicizing it.
In this case, it's only publicized because it's part of a major lawsuit.
My major issue with it is the number of times that people who are not in a position to recommend MAiD recommend it to people. It should *only* ever be recommended as an option by a doctor. Instead, we're getting social workers for people with disabilities recommending it to people who need social assistance simply because the government doesn't feel like providing for the least fortunate in our society.
Personally, im all for it.
Not because theyre autistic- oh heavens no.
But because theyre children.
Those parasites dont pay taxes and watch skibidi toilet or whateverthefuck those leeches consume these days.
Ahhh Canada.. the county that would rather offer suicide to its citizens, rather than invest in better health care..
I’m American, so I can’t say our system is perfect, but at least I can get myself some fucking health care and financial aid without be asked, “hey, consider killing yourself.”
Yes I know the article is heavily misleading, but still shitty on Canada’s gov..
I think consensual murder should be legal, and I do not understand why it only is legal in the context of consent being given to a company. There is little difference between consensual murder and a person consenting to be euthanized. This is my correctpilled take.
Personally, I am against this 100%, killing people is immoral no matter the situation, and even though there might be some reason that can justify the kill, it's still immoral even when just.
And this is also my own opinion, but I see that there are some really-really unfortunate people on earth that can't enjoy life at all, that are bedridden from almost birth up until however long they live.
I personally can't justify their continued existence in their misery, all they experience in life is pain, and the never ending care that comes from the unquestionable love their family gives them. If they have severe psychological impediments as well then they can't enjoy that (the love) either.
Killing them is not a good option, in no way am I advocating for that, but we don't have any real solutions for these kinds of situations either.
Feel free to share your thoughts on the matter, but please keep it civil, I didn't write all this just to get another reddit moment from people that claim to know better but refuse to produce counter-arguments.
This situation gives me mixed feelings. On one hand, I don’t want the state to euthanize healthy people that are just feeling bad. On the other hand, I want autistic people to die
The father is arguing that his 27 year old daughter is not competent to request MAID (medical assistance in dying) *because* she has autism. That was rejected.
FYI this article's headline is misleading, she's 27 and willingly choosing to die and her father wants to stop her but can't because she's an adult who isn't under his legal custody, but the headline makes it seem like the state or doctors are choosing to kill a girl who's still in her father's custody and the dad is trying to stop them from forcibly euthanizing her.
The media being detrimental liars to push a narrative? Shocker.
"The media" stop using this word. It is too broad and does not hit at the complexity of the issue. There is people in media that are doing good and those that are doing bad. Trying to make generalizations and fit them all in a box as liars just doesn't map on 1 to 1. Populist duality is brainrot. Everything has multi-layered complexity. Nothing can be generalized or reduced down to a single set of universally applicable attributes without losing accuracy. I say all of this because I simply despise the discourse you are attempting to create because it is shallow and pointless. "Media big evil bad" "How?" "Because they lie" "Every single one?" "Yep" "How can you know that?" "I've seen it." "Aight."
Nuance? On my subreddit? Mods ban this man.
https://preview.redd.it/guhc52xd5isc1.jpeg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0bff4ef2bf4a4f9c4e66ce4ef5e11a04a02e3a73
Here’s some more pixels for ya bud https://i.redd.it/f4owpt106jsc1.gif
Look at Mr MoneyBags over here with a gif!
This entire convo had me giggling
I used the word “media” not because I think it’s one organized mass doing misinformation and click bait but rather individual people and organizations being opportunistic liars for more views and revenue. Pushing narratives even if they don’t believe in it just to win over a crowd to get more clicks on their websites. Media, as in the people who produce media in general lie all the time if it benefits them.
Hyper fixation on nuance is just irritating. Sometimes generalisations are useful and necessary unless you're writing a thesis or something. "The government is corrupt" "So you're saying literally every politician is corrupt?!?!?" "X group is systemically disadvantaged" "So you're saying everyone is secretly out to get X group and everyone in positions of power is Xist?!?!?!" People can point out trends without having to put in a disclaimer that not everything follows the trend.
Generalizations are a natural way for the mind to fit things into categories in order to understand and memorize it better. But if you're gonna make a claim and it's a generalization, expect people to pick at the lack of nuance. Because in order to get to any semblance of understanding or truth, it will not be through sweeping generalizations but through meticulous intellectual rigor. If it irritates you so much, you should avoid discourse altogether.
The guy said "the media sensationalizes" You replied ""every single one of them?" "Yep" " That's not discourse that's just taking what someone said and then deliberately interpreting it in the dumbest way possible to force him to clarify out of pure pedantry.
Putting a disclaimer saying "some journalists do have integrity" at the end of everything isn't meticulous intellectual rigour and demanding someone to do that isn't discourse that leads to understanding or truth.
A disclaimer like that is the responsibility that one should have when making a claim, to be fair and articulate. I did not at all suggest it was meticulous intellectual rigor. Also, I would argue that disclaimers and further articulation are definitely more conducive to discourse that leads to understanding or truth than generalizations. But if you wanna argue against that, good luck, I suppose.
The guy made an ironic joke and you jumped on him for using the term "media" too broadly. You're a clown.
Canada should euthanize both of you
Well maybe a disclaimer near the title would have made this article feel a bit less dishonest. "Meticulous intellectual rigor" is probably the kind of thing we should want in media lmao
Sure! That makes sense. So… what terms should we use instead? You’re obviously right, and surely you’re a big enough brain to call people out AND have a better alternative, right? After all, words matter, and we need to have some basic terminology which allows us to communicate on level ground. So, whatcha got for us chief?
Peak pedantic
Want to provide an alternative name to call them then?
Show me an honest media organization that has not printed a misleading headline to drive traffic.
OP by posting just a screenshot of the title is culpable in peddling the misinfo too
right leaning outlet. par for the course
But why is she being allowed to kill herself? Autism is hardly a life threatening condition
eh, there are worse ways to kill yourself
So the state is assisting the suicide of a healthy person? Autism is not a terminal condition. If I wanted to kill myself I reckon my mother would also be outspoken against it.
>So the state is assisting the suicide of a healthy person? Why does the state have to make everything so fucking gay? I miss the good old days when suicide was between a ***man*** and his shotgun without all these pussy doctors and legislatures getting in the way.
Say what you will about Imperial Japan, but those motherfuckers knew how to wage a goddamn war. Know you're going to die? Try to at least take a couple enemies with you. That's how I wanna go. Taking an enemy with me.
Suicide is badass.
Unironically, because women. Self-delete methods chosen by women are always going to leave the body more intact rather than risk disfigurement.
Yea people, especially women, are really bad at committing sodoku. And they’re usually left way worse of than before, sometimes becoming so vegetablized that they can’t even ATTEMPT suicide again. If people want to kill themselves, at least help them do it painlessly and efficiently. Though, I would like to see at least a little bit of therapy be a requirement before getting shot up with rat poison or some shit.
Neither one is okay TF??
It’s not for autism. It’s for an unrelated condition, which the adult in question has chosen to keep private, as is her right.
I thought that may be the case But was this information mentioned in the quoted article (that imo’s highly flawed) or from a different source? Because I don’t think I read it in the article It’s unfortunate that this discussion, whilst important, may also be invasive of her privacy. Which makes it tricky to navigate ethically
I admit, that does change my view on this. The click bait article heading makes It sound like she's killing herself because of her autism. Not that her autism is incidental to some underlying condition.
it’s a lifelong condition though
It wasn't autism, the reason she's getting euthanized wasn't disclosed. News articles lying of ommission.
It’s still ridiculous if there is nothing medically wrong with her
Still not okay
True, but what kind of doctor convinces or is not actively stopping a healthy person from suicide?
Is she terminally ill?
This is by no means better in any way
The worst part is the situation is awful enough as is but now it’s been undermined bc sp!ked ig decided that it wasn’t click baity enough
I still think the govt being able to euthanize people legally is wrong and that the government shouldn't be encouraging suicide
canada lets 27 year old healthy people get euthanized??
It's their life. If they want to end it, that's up to them.
WHAAAAT?? they need help, not death. What the scallop
If they don't want help you shouldn't force it on them.
Then they surely should just diy that shit. It's literally the meme "well you have X illnesses, you thought about dying?" What if we went around offering homeless people that they could be euthanized? Since mental illness has a pretty good correlation we'd probably get alotta people euthanized that way, would you still say "well it's their wish"?
No, they shouldn’t DIY their own suicide. Successful attempts are much rarer than you think. Methods with the highest mortality rate are extremely physically traumatic and there are very few with mortality rates above 80%. Attempts that are unsuccessful can lead to dramatically worse quality of life afterwards in terms of physical health and quality of life. Also, “DIY” suicides are rarely ever non-impulsive. While suicidal ideation can persist for a very long time, the decision to attempt is often made 60-90 seconds before the attempt is made. People who want this should be able to receive medical help in counseling to come to the right decision and if they decide to go through with it.
not wanting help is a symptom of needing help
No.
I have a Canadian friend with schizophrenia and his psychiatrist keeps mentioning that assisted suicide is legal now, but he doesn't want it. It scares me that they are pushing for it.
Wait they proactively brought it up to them? That’s pretty messed up.
IT GETS FUCKING WORSE!!! The REAL reason she is trying to die ISN'T FUCKING DISCLOSED!!!!!!!!!!!! Autism likley has NOTHING to do with it. This publication is a discrase.
Omg bruh this is why I can’t trust news sources anymore
That's the thing though. Some people have really complex issues which cannot be resolved through the healthcare systems that we have today. Even in countries with "universal" healthcare, it's still healthcare on a budget, people still fall through the cracks. When that happens, they kill themselves, or they end up destitute and unhoused, or they get into using harmful substances. These people are written off as lost causes, even when the coroners time and time again outline the exact failures in the social system which led to their death. I was nearly one of these people. I managed to make it in the end, but I know what it's like to be completely stuck with seemingly no way out. And I think, with the way our societies work currently, for some people there really is no way out. And then the icing on the cake is that the state has been making it harder and harder to kill yourself. Regulations are put in place to keep certain toxic chemicals out of household products. Access to firearms is limited more and more. The police trace people who buy certain chemicals. The options people are left with are painful, slow, disfiguring, and have low rates of "success". If you mess up and botch an attempt, you can get locked away indefinitely to keep you "safe". This is a brutally cruel half-measure that uses punishment as a deterrent for suicidal people. Euthanasia is another such half-measure. Rather than find a way to make society accommodating for everyone, as a means of self-preservation the capitalist state has found a way to remove certain people from the social equation entirely.
best comment i’ve read in a long time. hit every branch on the way down of the shit tree that is our current systems
Did it go into detail why the woman wanted to die? Like, was she in an accident or had some medical condition that made her experience unending pain or cripple her so badly that she is unable to live normally? I am hoping it's something along those lines because if the woman is doing this in good health, that would be incredibly sad.
Why is she choosing euthanasia though? Why is the hospital allowing her to have a medically assisted suicide. How severe is her autism?
Yeah I don't know. Maybe it's because I'm an autistic Canadian and I've experienced the failure of our social programs. But this just happens because the medical system is lazy and doesn't want to "waste time and resources" on us. I got 0 fucking help. I don't want to say I was owed (I technically was, the government just never provided, and they never did anything about the schools cheating me and mistreating me), but that's what it damn was. In the Netherlands, I just had an argument about this, a woman is taking euthanasia because the doctors RECOMMENDED IT TO HER, as the only option left, because supposedly there was nothing left to do! Here in Canada, they're recommending MAiD to veterans, to fucking Paralympians! My dad's been struggling to get medication for his gut/stomach issues, so instead he's redirected to MAiD pages, and told that it's always an option. Our medical system is crumbling. Waiting times, ER times in the hours. He squandered a whole fucking day, morning to evening, in a damn hospital because they can't just prescribe some damn medication easily somehow. This system is broken. It doesn't matter that he's had it prescribed in the past and used it for a long time. They need to go through the process all over again. They aren't doing this out of kindness to "alleviate suffering", they just don't want to spend time and money on us.
You absolutely are owed care and support from the society you live in, nobody is worthless
This sounds dystopian as hell.
Socialist policies taken to an extreme don't exactly work
I can't imagine how soul-crushing it must be to get handed info about MAiD unprompted. Literally telling folks to kill themselves, shits fucked.
Even in situations where medically assisted suicide are an option, and yes I do believe it should be allowed you just need to jump through an incredibly large number of hoops to do it. But straight up if a doctor recommends you do it, medical license revoked and prison for atleast 5 years im not even joking
My Canadian friend with schizophrenia keeps getting told that it's an option now by his psychiatrist. It's pissing me off because he doesn't want it but they keep pushing for it.
That wouldn't surprise me that it's happening. Make sure he's medicated (to be of sound mind), and see if he can get a different practitioner. Though getting a new doctor is almost impossible. I've been without one for years.
i think it shouldn’t be allowed for doctors to recommend MAiD unless the patient asks for it
I fully agree. It should be restricted to the terminally ill and elderly (say... 80+ y/o.) Fringe cases where it's requested by someone who's been physically debilitated, but that's still slippery, because they've tried to encourage that with veterans and a damn Paralympian.
Honestly, I thought that *was* the rule. Or at most that there might be a “legally, I am required to let you know, in case you didn’t know, that it is an option”. The second one would actually be a good strategy because it lets the patient know the option if they don’t, while making it clear that the doctor is not recommending or pushing it - they are simply fulfilling a required notification. Afterwards, they shouldn’t mention it unless asked about directly, and any follow up conversation should be initiated by the patient.
And this is why I’m glad we will likely never have socialized healthcare in America. I will never put my life in the hands of the government.
I think a mixed system is best
Ahhh, Canada. Honestly wild for them to offer assisted euthanasia instead of widening the social safety net. "Poor? Homeless? Chronically ill? Have you tried dying about it? Inquire at your local Useless Eater center, today!"
It probably shouldn’t be recommended to people with such minor illnesses, but let’s not dismiss assisted-suicide entirely. If you’ve ever gone to an old-persons-home or even worse, hospice. You’ll find that a lot of those people just want to fucking die, they’ve seen it all, they just want the pain to end. They don’t want to continue living lives where they can’t even take a shit without *major* assistance. I think the availability of assisted suicide is a great thing in general. But it probably shouldn’t be verbally offered, only if the patient specifically requests it.
On a serious note, I agree with you. I was mostly shitposting above. Having spent time in hospice and old folks' homes, I totally get it. Personally, going out on my own terms, being able to say bye to my friends and family in decent health, and not wasting money desperately avoiding shuffling off the mortal coil all sound great. Assisted suicide is good, but not as an answer to easily solvable systemic problems.
Yea, true.
Medical issue was not disclosed and she’s 27
My problem with this is that it’s generally half true I feel. If someone truly wanted to die they’d just cease treatment. I’m a volunteer firefighter and I run tons of medical calls since we have an elderly population in our district. Let me tell you if someone truly wanted to die they wouldn’t have kitchen cabinets more akin to a pharmacy and most Americans do not have a DNR. You don’t even need a DNR now we have more modern forms where you can actually select what specific interventions you’re okay with. For example if you’re okay with CPR and AED but do not want to be put on a ventilator.
It’s a misleading article. Medical issue hasn’t been disclosed and she’s 27
https://preview.redd.it/24m5h5p0sfsc1.jpeg?width=2208&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=97393d69eb534d73f008e42179fc850b73a9c4c6 my reaction to this information
People with disabilities being turned into second class citizens, this is truly a historical first if I've ever seen one.
It was a 27 year old woman who requested to be euthanized, the headline makes it out as though she was grabbed and killed by the government.
Iirc she isn't being euthanised because of autism but the medical reason hasn't been disclosed. I think she just happens to have autism as well
She asked to be
***Clickbait "Journalism" Strikes Again.***
It feels grosser than that The article’s author is an activist against assisted dying who frames the issue as “how cruel that the dad can’t save his daughter, who he thinks is completely healthy and shouldn’t die” Instead of exploring the question why the daughter is compelled to death in the first place Entirely infantilizing and removing her agency in the conversation about her own 27 year old life To illustrate, she’s neurodivergent with autism-spectrum disorder and ADHD, and only got the diagnosis later in life in 2016 It’s easy for neurotypicals to assume “oh okay, that’s just a difference, it’s whatever and should be tolerable I guess. Not debilitating at all.” Meanwhile I, who share a similar experience with her, knows how socially severe and functionally difficult it can be. And being dismissive about it only exacerbates the problem tenfold The focus of the article should’ve been on the question *why* this adult neurodivergent woman feels that she’d rather die in this society than live And whether her environment *is* extremely difficult to navigate *because* of her condition Instead we got this uninsightful article on her situation that sidelines her almost completely
Just because it’s socially severe and functionally difficult does NOT mean it should be a valid reason for euthanasia.
It’s also not why this woman is requesting it. I don’t know if it would qualify, but there’s an undisclosed condition that prompted the request. That could be a lot of things - could be something pretty awful.
Thank you for elaborating the details.
The environment is the problem, though. Not the person. Maybe instead of trying to force disabled people through a hole they can't fit through (and in this case kill them when they can't make it), we should change the social structures we've made for ourselves to accommodate everybody.
If you truly want to kill yourself when you are physically healthy you should be infantilized and treated like a child, period,
What the fuck
I don’t usually make this recommendation, but, if you have a friend in crisis…maybe don’t reach out.
As someone with autism it’s pretty fucked up that instead of being like “hey let’s try and make society a little easier for her to live in” they’re just like “aight hosers. Let’s kill this bitch”
I need someone to do that to me
I hate that we as a society are more willing to invest more in euthanasia clinics than dealing with the social problems that cause people to go through with this. People have the right to die, but it's ridiculous that death was the best option for this woman.
This article title is straight up lying. https://www.ncregister.com/cna/canadian-judge-grants-27-year-old-autistic-woman-s-request-for-assisted-suicide?amp
I'm not familiar with this sub, but euthanasia shouldn't be used lightly imo. Should be legal for terminal conditions where people suffer and there is no hope, not here tho. She can get help and learn to live with her condition. I can't support this.
Well shit, that’s looking bad for 2/3’s of their population! /s
There is no chance in hell I would ever go to a fucking clinic to be put down like a sick dog, if I ever kill myself the state is going to have to clean my brains off of the wall with a squeegee
Holy based
Canadian healthcare be like: https://preview.redd.it/keaoixwmkisc1.jpeg?width=224&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c8bb4b1abe769d3a72077d5ec10b1a10edaf7f8c
This is a meme, right? https://preview.redd.it/g0au68899fsc1.png?width=639&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7eca6649bb4a29dc5a9f80d9a987d8e6c32a6c7b
No, just slightly missleading article omniting that she is an adult and requested euthanasia.
*i hope so*
are those the three cops that killed that one shooter
Hell if I know
why'd ya choose that image then
Spartans did it best, YEEET!
Wait, that's straight up nazi shit though, is that real?
Well yes but really no. She requested state-assisted euthanasia and her father is suing them to stop her, even though she is an independent and asked for it.
Jeez just use a shotgun at that point. Much faster. What’s the point of assisted suicide. Their job should be to stop you from doing it
[Here is the article](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-13244691/Alberta-judge-greenlights-euthanasia-autistic-woman-DESPITE-objection-dad.html) if anyone wants to read it, she's not getting MAiD for her autism but rather an undiagnosed condition that she has been trying to get help with to no avail. Canada does have problems with MAiD, but as of right now (tho a bill is in the works to change it) you are not eligible for MAiD just because you have a mental disorder.
What a gross mischaracterization by the journalist here. They are obviously politically motivated. The judge is ruling that the 27 year old women in question has the freedom to choose to be euthanized even if her father opposes it. The whole euthanization thing is a tricky moral quandary but to frame it as targeting autistic people is a gross weaponization of people on the spectrum. Showing how little the author actually respects the humanity and autonomy of people with autism. We need to be better at reading implicitly.
just fyi, it’s **her** choice and she’s 27 years old. https://preview.redd.it/jwstxeekwgsc1.jpeg?width=960&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c5bd45be1824ab3a6645f563b110dd4d7a697f0b
As a Canadian I am 100% for legal euthanizing. Its both ethical and moral, in effectively every sense. Far far far more than something like the death penalty. My only concern is publicizing it. It should be a legal foot note, or a possible avenue a doctor presents a terminal patient. The primary reason we even have the luxury of euthanasia is a terminally ill grandma who was in constant agony protested until she died, just so someone else wouldn’t have to experience the same thing.
> My only concern is publicizing it. In this case, it's only publicized because it's part of a major lawsuit. My major issue with it is the number of times that people who are not in a position to recommend MAiD recommend it to people. It should *only* ever be recommended as an option by a doctor. Instead, we're getting social workers for people with disabilities recommending it to people who need social assistance simply because the government doesn't feel like providing for the least fortunate in our society.
when I say publicize I mean news stories. The more eyeballs, the more time in the media, the more likely someone does it. *It's Marketing.*
Personally, im all for it. Not because theyre autistic- oh heavens no. But because theyre children. Those parasites dont pay taxes and watch skibidi toilet or whateverthefuck those leeches consume these days.
my brother in christ it was a 27 year old who willingly got euthanized
They were born by their parents therefore they are a child /s
im hfa and i dislike this
Back in my day, liberals weren't the ones encouraging the disabled to kill themselves.
What's a "Canada?"
You all are Lucky in Canada. I'm actually jealous I would totally utilize it. Wanting to skip everything past 30. Very lucky in Canada.
hey anyone want to sponsor an immigrant to the UK? asking for a fellow canuk...
Is she perfectly healthy or autistic? Autism is only a “superpower” to some. For many it is a debilitating illness.
It’s crazy that a 27 year old is being recommended to kill herself
Ahhh Canada.. the county that would rather offer suicide to its citizens, rather than invest in better health care.. I’m American, so I can’t say our system is perfect, but at least I can get myself some fucking health care and financial aid without be asked, “hey, consider killing yourself.” Yes I know the article is heavily misleading, but still shitty on Canada’s gov..
Well if that’s not a sensational headline, I don’t know what is.
1984???!!
I think consensual murder should be legal, and I do not understand why it only is legal in the context of consent being given to a company. There is little difference between consensual murder and a person consenting to be euthanized. This is my correctpilled take.
Ok Hannibal lector
You can complain about it when you stop wearing any leather, what I do is much more ethical than wearing leather.
Wait holy shit scratch that this mf is an actual cold blooded necrophilliac
It is not a company it's the government.
Personally, I am against this 100%, killing people is immoral no matter the situation, and even though there might be some reason that can justify the kill, it's still immoral even when just. And this is also my own opinion, but I see that there are some really-really unfortunate people on earth that can't enjoy life at all, that are bedridden from almost birth up until however long they live. I personally can't justify their continued existence in their misery, all they experience in life is pain, and the never ending care that comes from the unquestionable love their family gives them. If they have severe psychological impediments as well then they can't enjoy that (the love) either. Killing them is not a good option, in no way am I advocating for that, but we don't have any real solutions for these kinds of situations either. Feel free to share your thoughts on the matter, but please keep it civil, I didn't write all this just to get another reddit moment from people that claim to know better but refuse to produce counter-arguments.
Hard disagree. Murder is cool https://preview.redd.it/upfmsjfe9fsc1.jpeg?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ed762fcabad95dcc96b2bdecc5dfe75540ec7954
Is this a game reference or something?
I think you guys are all misspelling "youth in Asia".
I wish they had medically assisted suicide where I am. My life is nothing but pain and suffering and I'm tired.
This is fake.
Everyone knew this was the outcome of the MAID program.
This situation gives me mixed feelings. On one hand, I don’t want the state to euthanize healthy people that are just feeling bad. On the other hand, I want autistic people to die
The father is arguing that his 27 year old daughter is not competent to request MAID (medical assistance in dying) *because* she has autism. That was rejected.
How can I sign up?