That is why grandma must choke to death on her vomit while everybody watches and sobs instead of having a celebration of life party with loved ones and then comfortably drifting off to cardiac arrest in her sleep.

All instances that these Christians bring up in Canada where it appears that MAID is being pushed on someone who doesn’t need it turns out to be a nothing story. No one is seriously being sent to their death because they are poor or require expensive care. This is a fear that is being manufactured so that grandma can die painfully. In Christ name amen.

[–] leisesprecher@feddit.org 15 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I watched my great grandma slowly rot away in a nursing home. Three years. Three years of wanting to die, waking up in a puddle piss and shit every morning, can't get up after a stroke paralyzed her right side, almost blind, almost deaf, not even granted the ignorance of dementia.

She never wanted to die in a nursing home. She told me on her very first day there, that she just wants it to end. And I could do nothing to help her.

[–] PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca 5 points 4 months ago

I’m so sorry. Despite the radical anti-human lunatics that fight medically assisted dying, the world is moving towards expanding it. Let’s hope the next generation can choose how they leave this world.

[–] Comment105@lemm.ee 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

If you or I end up in that situation, if we end up deciding we want to end it, then no matter how much we want to die we won't be allowed to.

If I really wanted to get the fuck out of there and find something to kill myself with I would be strapped down and force fed if necessary.

If I still had strength they'd get someone big and strong to physically hold me down as they strap me to the bed.

That's not okay. That's wrong.

[–] leisesprecher@feddit.org 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

And unfortunately, not even suicide is an option in some cases.

My personal approach to, say, terminal cancer is to get doped up enough to get everything in order and then end it before the cancer can. Use the good weeks I have and avoid the long tail of suffering.

But if you're ripped from a relatively healthy life by a stroke or accident, there's nothing you could do.

Here in Germany, you can give a legally binding statement about what to do if you're incapacitated (Patientenverfügung), but that doesn't cover things like euthanasia, just organ donation, shutting off machines and stuff like that.

[–] Comment105@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Nådestøt is a word we have in the Norwegian language, it means mercy-blow or mercy-stab.

It's interesting to think centuries ago men were kinder to their enemies than we are to our sick and old.
They respected their enemies' suffering and wishes, more-so than we respect the suffering and wishes of a patient today.

[–] leisesprecher@feddit.org 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Oh I think we still respect that by and large. Ask any doctor or just, they're 100% on board. And I'm pretty sure, most people are in favor too.

The problem is, that life as a concept is framed as so incredibly valuable, that every tiny hint there might be someone "rescueable" being euthanized is an argument for "slippery slope" and thus literally Hitler.

[–] Comment105@lemm.ee 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Your second statement is in conflict with your first. No, we don't respect their suffering or their wishes. We have other priorities that completely supercede them.

What we do is pay lip service while completely overruling them in practice.

[–] leisesprecher@feddit.org 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Of course this is a conflict, that's my entire point.

Humans, and especially societies, are always full of internal inconsistencies. If everything would be logical and consistent, we wouldn't need politicians.

[–] Comment105@lemm.ee 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

We. Do. Not. Reapect. Their. Wishes.

Period.

I used the word conflict and you latched onto it. The one you should have paid intention to was the word "supercede".

[–] leisesprecher@feddit.org 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

You can throw semantic hissy fits as much as you want, that doesn't change the reality.

We also respect other's freedom of speech, unless it's libel. We respect your right to roam wherever, unless it's a restricted area.

And finally, the populations of many countries support e.g. abortions, but some countries restrict it anyway.

You seem not to understand the difference between public opinion and legislation.

[–] Comment105@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Fuck you.

You don't get to hide behind this and stay cordial. You don't get to excuse indifference and tolerance of forcefully overruling the deathwish of the suffering.

Your opinion means nothing. It's fleeting, performative and inconsequential. You're still accepting the restraints put upon the people who wish to die.

You personally are fine with people who restrain people who suffer and want to die to end it. You are fine with the enforcers of natural death being unyielding to the will of the restrained.

You don't really give a shit.

You're only temporarily acting like you're on the right side because we're currently having a conversation about it and the right and wrong of it is kind of obvious for the most part.

Public opinion overrules law if the public really cares. If it doesn't, it's not a democracy.

The public doesn't care to right this wrong. You don't care.

[–] leisesprecher@feddit.org 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Puberty was hard for all of us, you'll pull through, I'm sure.

Afterwards you might understand that explaining a concept and advocating for it are not the same thing.

[–] Comment105@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Condescending little shit.

I hope you choke on vomit when your time comes.

[–] leisesprecher@feddit.org 0 points 4 months ago

That's interesting. What makes you feel that way?

Seriously, though. Who exactly are you trying to convince like that?

Did that approach work anywhere before?

[–] DiabolicalBird@lemmy.ca 4 points 4 months ago

Man I wish it was a nothing story. A friend of mine had MAID suggested to her after she spent only a couple days in the hospital for having a suicidal episode (mental health, long story but she's doing much better now... so why the fuck was it brought up after only two days there?!). Guess that's the result of my province's healthcare being gutted like a fish. Thanks conservative government!

MAID is important, don't get me wrong. People can keep their fucking gods out of healthcare in general. But saying that mistakes aren't being made with it is ignoring a problem.

[–] JimVanDeventer@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

Suffering is sharing in the passion of Christ. Suffering is the kiss of Jesus, a sign that you have come so close to Jesus on the cross that he can kiss you.

–Mother Teresa

[–] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Fetishizing pain is a defense against it. Better to deal with it in other ways.

I'm not saying you don't know that, just pointing it out.

[–] FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone -2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

This is not what the documentary is about though?

It’s about countries refusing to help disabled people who want to live because they tell them to choose assisted dying.

[–] PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca 21 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

No this is exactly what I’m referring to. These instances where “countries are refusing to help people and instead want to kill them” is the fake fear they are trying to instill. It simply isn’t happening.

There have been extremely publicized instances where it has appeared that way like in Canada, where a rogue nurse went strictly against protocol and did that. They then fired that nurse. Too late though, because hundreds of opportunists like these documentary makers jumped on that story to retell it in a scarier way.

That instance and other similar and rare instances are being made to appear much bigger and more sinister so that they can manufacture a conspiracy theory for people to cling onto. That euthanasia cannot be allowed because it’s going to be used for evil instead of its intended use.

Edit: it appears from your account name and profile that you have a vested interest in this issue and are trying to push the same agenda as these religious radicals. I’m not going to engage any further.

[–] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com -3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

yeah I don't see them showing the countries were taking care of people better before it was an option. All the same I do prefer the places where its not allowed to be brought up in an individual context except by the patient but the option is available and legal.

[–] PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca 7 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Yes of course you don’t see them showing the countries taking care of people. Why would they show you something that runs counter to their argument and agenda? Look critically at this and which groups are behind the push to force the suffering of those that are terminally ill.

Maybe you would like to have your body and/or mind progressively fall apart to prove your “machismo”, but you have zero right to dictate how others deal with their terminal suffering. Mazel tov on your preference.

[–] CanaryWhiskey@lemmy.world 24 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Perhaps, but my mother has gone and said outright that if she’s a vegetable in pain when she’s old she wants to just die. My great aunt is in a similar situation and has said the exact same thing. Law forbids it though.

[–] earphone843@sh.itjust.works 16 points 4 months ago (1 children)

It's ridiculous. We allow our pets to have a more humane death than we allow ourselves. It's extremely unethical to let someone suffer until their body shuts down when there's nothing that can save them.

It's like abortion. If you disagree with it, don't do it.

[–] Comment105@lemm.ee 2 points 4 months ago

It's not about what we allow ourselves.

It's about what others disallow us.

I believe that anyone being physically prevented from taking their own life has an ethical right to physically hurt the people violating their will. Claw and punch and spit. Poke their fucking eyes out. Fuck em.

[–] ironhydroxide@sh.itjust.works 13 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Capitalism is a clear and present danger to people with disabilities.

Assisted dying is just a way for people to try and mitigate some of the problems inherent in capitalism.

[–] leisesprecher@feddit.org 6 points 4 months ago (1 children)

If you're suffering from something that can't be cured, capitalism isn't the problem.

You can live in the best socialist utopia anyone can imagine, but if your particular condition can't be cured or treated, you're suffering. Suffering is universal.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 7 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_model_of_disability

Tl;Dr the model points to the fact that often the most disabling thing about a disability is how society treats the individual. It is not claiming that physical limitations do not exist, just that it is often in fact things like access problems that truly isolate the disabled.

For example, what is at fault when a ramp is not provided to enter a building, the unavoidable disability that requires a wheelchair, or exclusionary design?

You can also see this in action on this very "leftist" community when the fake progressives defend sub-minimum wage.

[–] leisesprecher@feddit.org 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Sure, pain is a social construct, right?

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I'm sorry about your illiteracy.

[–] leisesprecher@feddit.org -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

So ableism it is now? How very progressive.

BTW, I addressed exactly what you're referring to in the comment above. But you chose to ignore that.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Sure you did, bro. Also, willful illiteracy is not a disability, but keep on going.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Christ some of you people are insufferable.

[–] Gold_E_Lox@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

sometimes societies frameworks are the root cause of societies issues, disabled people aren't generally a profitable market.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Yeah, I get it, but "caPiTliSM" in every goddamned reply is getting old, and diluting the argument.

[–] Lumiluz@slrpnk.net 0 points 4 months ago

If most of the world is against a thing, asking if said thing might be bad isn't asking "tough questions"