Interesting. It would also make sense that going full FOSS might lead to less social media use indirectly, since most social media apps would require micro-G

Yeah. I actually think your comment was very insightful, thank you

Have you even read the article were discussing?

It’s not an over-simplification that’s literally just what its called. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assisted_suicide

We already have a very dysfunctional healthcare system. It’s a real concern that people might turn to MAID because they cannot access healthcare. The article linked above cites at least one example of this. I think this concern is even greater with mental health cases, since our mental healthcare system is even more dysfunctional. Why are we offering MAID for people with mental health issues when we can barely offer proper healthcare for people with mental health issues? That’s a legitimate concern. If you want to frame that concern as me being as a nosey person who wants people to live in suffering then you can, but that’s not a very productive way to hold this conversation.

It is quite literally assisted suicide though

By that logic I am deciding when an arbitrary number of people die by choosing not to kill them. I guess theres a sense in which thats technically correct, but it seems like its stretching the terminology a bit

You are correct. I don’t trust people to decide when other people should die.

Other countries do make these decisions

Yes I know. I said nearly every other country does without it, but it is true that some countries do have similar programs.

If you read my other comment in this thread it should be clear that I think MAID due to being poor is not acceptable at all

In some ways then, you and I have very similar views. I guess one of our main differences is how much confidence we have in the current system to make it so that the poor are not disproportionately suffering as a consequence of MAiD. I don’t trust our current system to do that. Our current healthcare system is already so broken, especially for the mentally ill, so there’s a real danger that MAiD will be seen as a real alternative to proper healthcare. If we were in a place where we already had adequate care for people suffering from mental illnesses, then maybe we would be having a different discussion. But we are not there yet.

Thank you for your thoughtful comment. This thread has triggered a lot of emotions and devolved into nastiness in some parts so it was refreshing to read something well put together and measured like this

If you were suicidal the day they go to do it then you’d be disqualified.

If someone is not suicidal the day they go to do it then they won’t go through with it. Why would you choose to die if you don’t want to die? I don’t understand this sentence.

it seems to me that if were having trouble rolling out healthcare then we should focus on improving healthcare, not introducing MAiD. MAiD is not an alternative to proper mental healthcare, but I guess that’s what you’re saying?

That’s what the medical team is for. They don’t just tell you to kill yourself because you had a bad day.

Never suggested they did. But in the end they do end up killing people solely because they have a mental illness (assuming the expansion of MAiD goes through). There’s a reason why the UN considers this state sponsored eugenics. Very few other democratically run countries have done this since eugenics went out of fashion.

failed suicide attempts are rarely clean or lead to deep reflection

So instead of focusing on suicide prevention we should just get our doctors to finish the job for them?

edit: that probably wasn’t the best wording. things have been getting a bit feisty in this thread and i feel the opposition coming in hot so i got defensive. i know you think ive misrepresented how maid works but i dont think i have. granted i havent gone into detail about the vetting and how its a long process etc but i assumed thats because we are all on the same page. there is one thing i havent misrepresented though and thats this: if this expansion goes forward, people will receive medical assistance in dying solely because they have a mental illness. i think this is a dangerous system and ripe for abuse; you dont, and you think its the merciful thing to do. thats fine, clearly we disagree. but if were to keep discussing this here, lets reign it in and keep it from getting nasty (im not saying im innocent in this department; i know im not).

Deciding not to kill people is not deciding who dies. If this is really a decision we needed to make then it seems odd that nearly every other country in the would gets on fine without making it.

I can see you making a case that it’s merciful, but we also need to acknowledge the potential for abuse that does occur. Like the case article mentioned: the woman who applied for MAiD because she couldnt afford affordable housing accommodations that met her needs. Would this really a mercy killing, or just killing off our most vulnerable because we can’t be bothered to help them?

They need to be made with care.

This implies that we need to make these decisions. The other decisions you listed are decisions that we need to make. But who receives medical decision in dying is not a decision we need to make. That’s a decision we choose to make.

the alternative is failed suicide attempts . . .

This kind of seems like a better outcome to me though? Like, that’s better than a successful suicide attempt, no?

. . . and long term suffering

It’s not necessarily the case that someone with a mental illness is doomed to a life of extreme suffering. That’s an ablest mindset, and it does disservice to that community. When someone is in their darkest moment and unsure if things are going to get better, we should be giving them hope, not saying “you’re right, you’re doomed, but don’t worry you can kill yourself”.

I’m not entirely sure what you mean about the legal stuff.

That’s true, but it doesn’t contradict what I’m saying. The person making the decision is the patient, but someone does need to authorize it. And in authorizing it/not authorizing it, that physician is quite literally making a decision about who lives and dies.

I’m not really in the mood to keep going in circles about this.

My phrasing provides an accurate description of the situation. Perhaps you think it’s skimming over some nuance. But I’m phrasing it that way to draw attention to what kind of decision it is. I’m not sure if it’s a decision anyone should really be making outside of a wartime triage situation.

Yes, that is to decide who will live and who will die