Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Saturday September 28 2019, @06:17PM   Printer-friendly
from the MAD dept.

Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:

Since Canada legalized Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) in 2016, as of Oct. 31, 2018, more than 6,700 Canadians have chosen medications to end their life.

Canadians who meet eligibility requirements can opt to self-administer or have a clinician administer these medications; the vast majority of people choosing MAiD have had their medications delivered by physicians or nurse practitioners. Canada is the first country to permit nurse practitioners to assess for medically assisted dying eligibility and to provide it.

The precise meaning and implications of MAiD—in particular, who can request medical assistance in dying in Canada—is still evolving through court rulings. Québec's Supreme Court recently struck down the reasonably foreseeable death requirement under the Criminal Code and the end-of-life requirement under Québec's Act Respecting End-of-Life Care.

Without the requirement of a reasonably foreseeable death, it is likely that other legal challenges will occur to extend assisted dying to other groups such as those whose sole underlying condition is severe mental illness.

Our research has explored how the nursing profession is regulating the new area of responsibility towards medically assisted dying and how nursing ethics might guide policy and practical implications of nurses' experiences.

Current legislation guards the right of health-care providers to conscientiously object to participation in MAiD. Nurses who do conscientiously object have a professional obligation to inform their employers of that objection, to report requests for MAiD, and to not abandon their clients. They also must ensure that their choices are based on "informed, reflective choice and are not based on prejudice, fear or convenience."

The nurses who surround the process of medically assisted dying are an important source of insight into the complex and nuanced conversations our society needs to have about what it is like to choose, or be involved with, this new option at the end of life, and to be involved in supporting patients and their families toward death with compassion.

Our most recent research involved interviews with 59 nurse practitioners or registered nurses across Canada who accompanied patients and families along the journey of medically assisted dying or who had chosen to conscientiously object. Nurses worked across the spectrum of care in acute, residential and home-care settings.

[...] With the changing landscape of medically assisted dying in Canada, the need for reflective conversations becomes ever more urgent. We need to better understand how medically assisted dying changes the nature of death to which we have become accustomed and how those changes impact all those involved.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday September 29 2019, @04:02AM

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday September 29 2019, @04:02AM (#900160) Journal

    Implementing this is just another Overton window shifting, sliding the whole culture normatives into barbarism.

    Nonsense. There's two ways your post is utterly barbaric. First, you're advocating increasing the suffering of millions so that corporations might not have good things. There's plenty of technologies, rules, etc that can be abused. That doesn't mean we shouldn't have those rules. We just need to prevent abuses. You'd want regulation to prevent medically assisted suicide, so we might as well have regulation to prevent murder by such means. Some might think we already have such regulations in place.

    But to not do something merely because you can think of a corporation that would benefit? (meanwhile ignoring that there are other corporations that would benefit from banning such suicides.) That envy has no place in a proper civilization.

    Second, what is the point of civilization? I think first and foremost it's about making something bigger than us. Not taking it down by expensive, phony morality that consumes resources we could have instead used to make our lives better.