From the blog of Alex Schadenberg, executive director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, I bring you this good news:

The Canadian Society of Palliative Care Physicians (CSPCP) recently published a paper opposing the legalization of euthanasia and assisted suicide and instead promoting the development of palliative care in Canada.

A survey of the CSPCP also shows that a majority of its members do not support euthanasia or assisted suicide.

CSPCA Euthanasia Survey Results

 The Canadian Society of Palliative Care Physicians (CSPCP) represents nearly 300 member physicians who provide care to the dying. Our mission is to advance the quality of life of our patients and their families. The survey used the definitions and glossary of the Quebec National Assembly for clarification and standardization.

Definitions are as follows:

Euthanasia - "An act that consists of deliberately causing the death of another person to put an end to that person's suffering."

Assisted Suicide - "The act of helping someone commit suicide by providing the means or the information on how to proceed, or both."

Almost half (46%) of CSPCP members responded to the survey, and the overwhelming majority were OPPOSED to the legalization of euthanasia (88%) or assisted suicide (80%).

* 90% of responding members would not be willing to participate in the act of euthanasia.

* 83% of responding members would not be willing to aid in assisted suicide.

Based upon the survey results, the Canadian Society of Palliative Care. Physicians strongly oppose the legalization of euthanasia and assisted suicide at this time, and most of its members are unwilling to participate in euthanasia or assisted suicide.

Thank God for the decision of the Canadian Society of Palliative Care Physicians! We need more doctors that adhere to the values of compassion and care.

Today, a 180-page report was released by the Dying with Dignity Committee suggesting that the Quebec's attorney general recommend to the Crown in Quebec that assisted-suicide be legalized. This is bad news for the pro-life side…it is the beginning of the second wave of societal degeneration. First, the unborn can be killed for any reason and at any time. Now, the elderly and those with “intolerable pain” are going to be allowed to request an assisted suicide. Soon, anyone who deems that their life is not worth living (or any person who has caregivers that wish to see them gone) will be euthanized or assisted in suicide. This means that, eventually, even children (such as is already the case in the Netherlands, google "Groningen protocol"), people with mental health problems ("incurable disease, psychological "distress"), adults (again, the "psychological distress" criterion, with the tenuous "incurable disease" criterion to be dismissed soon enough) and the elderly (see the "Free Will" initiative gaining steam in the Netherlands) alike will all be made victims of a system where people are treated as commercial goods that can be eliminated once no longer valid or wanted. If this seems like an over-reaction, you just haven't been keeping up with developments...

For further enlightenment on this topic, I invite you to read “EUTHANASIA AND ASSISTED SUICIDE: WHY NOT?", an interesting and informative document published by the Catholic Organization for Life and the Family  which offers quick answers to common arguments regarding euthanasia.

Below I have included some snippets of this document which I believe help in elucidating the problem of euthanasia and assisted suicide (please note that I have reworded some of the questions/concerns for the sake of brevity- the original formatting of the questions can be viewed in the document indicated above.)

“It is my choice” ----“Such a law would be a guaranteed recipe for abuse of the vulnerable; it would be incapable of protecting them from coercion by family members and others.” (page 3)

“I want to die with dignity” ----“We all have the power to respond with friendship, love and solidarity to the illness of others in order to uphold and protect their “right to life” until the moment of natural death. We need each other in death as we need each other in life.” (page 4)

“I don’t want to be hooked up to machine if it is time for me to die” ---“The withdrawal or withholding of extraordinary or disproportionate treatment, when its burdens outweigh its benefit, is not euthanasia because the intention is not to cause death but to allow the person to die naturally; in euthanasia the intention is to cause death – the patient does not die naturally but rather is killed by another human being before his or her time…There is a great difference between allowing to die and making die.” (page 5)

“I want control over when I die” – “Our society has always reached out to suicidal citizens who need help in living, not help in dying. It would be quite a contradiction to continue funding distress centers and suicide prevention programs while legalizing assisted suicide. If people chose to die while temporarily depressed or in intense pain, instead of receiving proper medical attention, they will potentially be deprived of many good years of life.” (page 6)

“Why force someone to suffer pain?” ---“We need to eliminate the pain, not the patient. Pain relief medications used appropriately rarely shorten life; the patient usually dies from his or her underlying disease. There is a huge difference between giving drugs to relieve pain and suffering, and intentionally using pain relief treatment to euthanize a person.” (page 7)

“I don’t want to burden my family” ---“The fear of being a burden is the key reason why some people ask to have their death hastened. Many Canadians also feel abandoned and are very isolated. They need to be consoled, encouraged and comforted.” (page 10)

“If euthanasia is already happening in our country, wouldn’t it be better to legalize it?” --- “If euthanasia is being carried out against the law, this shows that the law is incapable of controlling euthanasia. Legalizing euthanasia will not fix this problem. Providing government sanctions for euthanasia will endorse a practice that will harm the most vulnerable members of society and devastate the institution of medicine.” (page 12)

“Why are you imposing your religious values?” Euthanasia is not a religious issue, but a human rights issue. “The Universal Declaration of Human Rights clearly states that “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person” (art. 3). In order to uphold this right for all citizens, at this moment in Canadian history when we are faced with the prospect of legalizing euthanasia and assisted suicide, we need to (1) encourage new research and education on pain relief; (2) provide public funding for more palliative care centers and units in order to ensure that all Canadians have access to end of life care; (3) and develop fiscal measures to allow primary care givers to commit themselves freely to the support of their sick or dying loved ones.” (page 14)

Killing cannot be the solution to disease and suffering. Human life must be valued and protected in all circumstances- euthanasia and assisted suicide threaten this most fundamental human right. If you are a resident of Quebec, please voice your stance against euthanasia and assisted suicide by calling your MPP.

Recently, the International Herald Tribune published an article describing the initiatives of Complete Genomics, a firm in Silicon Valley that has performed significant research on genomic sequencing technology.

Complete Genomics aims to lower the cost of human genome sequencing in order to make this service more readily available to the general population. On the company’s website, Dr. Reid predicted that the cost for gene sequencing could one day be as low as that of a blood test.

I believe that the impact on the medical community of whole human genome sequencing at a cost comparable to a comprehensive blood test will be profound, and it will raise a host of public policy issues (privacy, security, disclosure, reimbursement, interpretation, counseling, etc.), all important topics for future discussions.

Yes, and there is another vital issue that will be impacted by the potential widespread availability of genomic testing: bioethics.

I would like to make it clear that I completely support scientific advancement and research that does not injure human life from conception to natural death. I am frequently amazed by what science can do in assisting people with serious diseases. We are lucky to live in a time where many illnesses are understood and treated, though there is still a lot of work to be done.  

My concern with this news on gene sequencing is that too much information can cause great damage when it comes to medical testing and the diagnosis of genetic disorders. How many people, after going through genetic testing, may find out that they are “at risk” for certain genetic disorders and thus choose to euthanize themselves? Furthermore, how many mothers, after finding out that their unborn child has a genetic anomaly, will choose to abort their child?

We have already seen a rise in the number of abortions of female children since parents became able to know the sex of their child. This phenomenon will repeat itself if access to gene sequencing becomes commonplace- only it will be worse, because then the medical community will thoroughly defend the parents’ ‘choice’ on the grounds that the child’s quality of life would be lower, and that the child would have some life-threatening illness.

It can seem inconsistent on God’s behalf to give us access to so much information, and yet to also ask that we respect human life under all circumstances. However, the inconsistency is really within the medical community. God gives us information to help us, not to hurt us. In the same way, doctors and scientific researchers have a duty to help others and protect their lives.

Let us suppose, for example, that a mother has just recently found out that her baby has a genetic defect. Under such conditions, what can the doctor do? He can either advise her to abort her child, which would likely leave her with scars of suffering and guilt…or he could offer her resources to better prepare for the arrival of her newborn child. The woman could educate herself on the genetic disease, talk to families who have experienced raising children with genetic disease, and maybe even immerse herself in prayer (or companionship with friends and family) to develop the strength to accept the uncertainty that awaits her, and her child.

Also, let us not forget that genetic testing could help us perform surgeries in the womb, before the child is born, in order to replace a defective gene. As long as such surgeries pose no harm to the child, they would be ethically approvable and could even cure the child of his genetic anomaly. Dr. Jérôme Lejeune, a pro-life pediatrician and geneticist, always dreamed that one day a cure for Down’s Syndrome would be discovered. Given the rapid development taking place in the scientific field, let us hope that workers in the medical and scientific community orient their efforts towards initiatives that respect all human life.

A hard-hitting ad sponsored by Campaign Life Coalition, our parent organisation. Pass it on!

With the court proceedings on the legality of euthanasia in Canada currently under way in British Columbia, I found the following three news stories insightful, in addition to the one appearing on our own site (see November 14), to contextualize the issues of euthanasia and assisted-suicide.

The first two are commentaries, appearing in yesterday's Journal de Montréal. First, Richard Martineau is critical of the recent study released by the Royal Society of Canada (RSC) advocating for the decriminalization of euthanasia and assisted suicide. According to Martineau, the RSC study lacks "encadrage" - i.e., properly defining the circumstances permitting end-of-life decisions. Abuses are inevitable, he writes, drawing examples from the United States and Switzerland.

Yet what worries Mr. Martineau the most is euthanising persons for economic rather than humanitarian reasons.

Second, Jean-Luc Mongrain, in "La vie à quel prix?", raises both philosophical and theological questions concerning end-of-life issues. So, unlike his peer who favours euthanasia, Mr. Mongrain is indeterminate.

The third article covers the release on Wednesday of a bi-partisan Parlimentary ad hoc committee report advocating for an improved emphasis on palliative care. In addition to delving into the report, Peter Baklinski at LifeSiteNews weaves together the events in British Columbia, the study of the RSC, and a couple of interviews, including quotes from Jean Vanier, in his article.

I hope these three stories prove helpful to better understand current events and the issues involved.

Living with Dignity conducted an independent analysis of the 427 oral presentations and written submissions to the Select committee on dying with dignity “The numbers are black and white. In the presentations to the Commission there was 99 per cent agreement that palliative care is the dignified choice Quebecers want available at the end of life. At the same time, 60 per cent of the submissions opposed any opening for euthanasia. Only about a third ( 34%) of those who submitted to the commission were either somewhat or strongly in favor of euthanasia.

Source.

A B.C. woman, Gloria Taylor, who suffers from ALS is asking the B.C. Supreme Court to overturn Canada's laws and grant her wish to a doctor-assisted suicide.

Following the article on the CBC News website, the broadcaster is asking in a poll if "Canadians should have the legal right to an assisted suicide". If you love life as much as me, please vote no in this CBC opinion poll. 

I was interviewed this morning on CTV's Canada AM about the Dying with Dignity Committee's work so far and the fact that this committee's work is now resuming.

Go here for our main arguments for why we at Quebec Life Coalition agree with the Canadian parliament's recent decision to keep euthanasia off the table when it comes to caring for patients and concern for end-of-life dignity.

The Quebec grass-roots network Living with Dignity has just set up its own YouTube channel. On it you can find several Quebec doctors denouncing the recent push for Euthanasia in the province of Quebec. Take a look!

Below is a video of Dr. Nicholas Newman, Head of the Orthopedics department of the University of Montreal reseach hospital.