Depending on how you look at it, the worst is probably their fellow Low Country, Belgium (in spite of the whole Catholicism thing)...
They've been doing it for longer, and their "scope" for euthanizing the mentally ill is considerably more broad. Plus I think they are higher on raw numbers, for that category...
However I believe the Dutch are the first to allow this for children, i.e. those who cannot consent to other things, but apparently can consent to state-sanctioned murder..?
Where you guys in Canuckistan differ seems to be in the breadth of where this is being applied, e.g. for "financial distress", etc.
It does strike me as fairly terrifying that we have gone from "in the case of terminal illness, in a few jurisdictions, in limited cases" (the Northern Territory in Australia, Jack Kevorkian, the Terri Schiavo case), to this becoming so widespread that it is a media trope, now, and there are whole TV series and movies based around it, and that you have bipartisan support for such extreme laws, everywhere from Canada to the Pays-Bas. It's insane.
Makes you wonder - if we're at this point now, where are we going to be on this issue (and abortion, and "gay rights") in another 20 years? Are we unironically headed for Futurama-style suicide booths? Because hell, at the rate we're trending, that doesn't feel all that far off, sadly...
It's also interesting as someone with a disease that would make me eligible for this (way into the future, but not as far into the future as for most people), that my voice is... Ignored as an "inconvenience"? Generally people with terminal/chronic/neurodegenerative diseases only seem to be listened to when we support euthanasia (or when we are "special", like Steven Hawking or Neil Daniher), never when we are against it.
As Stella Young said like a decade ago, before she died, that seems a little bit backwards and fucked up.
Depending on how you look at it, the worst is probably their fellow Low Country, Belgium (in spite of the whole Catholicism thing)...
They've been doing it for longer, and their "scope" for euthanizing the mentally ill is considerably more broad. Plus I think they are higher on raw numbers, for that category...
However I believe the Dutch are the first to allow this for children, i.e. those who cannot consent to other things, but apparently can consent to state-sanctioned murder..?
Where you guys in Canuckistan differ seems to be in the breadth of where this is being applied, e.g. for "financial distress", etc.
It does strike me as fairly terrifying that we have gone from "in the case of terminal illness, in a few jurisdictions, in limited cases" (the Northern Territory in Australia, Jack Kevorkian, the Terri Schiavo case), to this becoming so widespread that it is a media trope, now, and there are whole TV series and movies based around it, and that you have bipartisan support for such extreme laws, everywhere from Canada to the Pays-Bas. It's insane.
Makes you wonder - if we're at this point now, where are we going to be on this issue (and abortion, and "gay rights") in another 20 years? Are we unironically headed for Futurama-style suicide booths. Because hell, at the rate we're trending, that doesn't feel all that far off, sadly...
It's also interesting as someone with a disease that would make me eligible for this (way into the future, but not as far into the future as for most people), that my voice is... Ignored as an "inconvenience"? Generally people with terminal/chronic/neurodegenerative diseases only seem to be listened to when we support euthanasia (or when we are "special", like Steven Hawking or Neil Daniher), never when we are against it.
As Stella Young said like a decade ago, before she died, that seems a little bit backwards and fucked up.
Depending on how you look at it, the worst is probably their fellow Low Country, Belgium (in spite of the whole Catholicism thing)...
They've been doing it for longer, and their "scope" for euthanizing the mentally ill is considerably more broad. Plus I think they are higher on raw numbers, for that category...
However I believe the Dutch are the first to allow this for children, i.e. those who cannot consent to other things, but apparently can consent to state-sanctioned murder..?
Where you guys in Canuckistan differ seems to be in the breadth of where this is being applied, e.g. for "financial distress", etc.
It does strike me as fairly terrifying that we have gone from "in the case of terminal illness, in a few jurisdictions, in limited cases" (the Northern Territory in Australia, Jack Kevorkian, the Terri Schiavo case), to this becoming so widespread that it is a media trope, now, and there are whole TV series and movies based around it, and that you have bipartisan support for such extreme laws, everywhere from Canada to the Pays-Bas. It's insane.
Makes you wonder - if we're at this point now, where are we going to be on this issue (and abortion, and "gay rights") in another 20 years? Are we unironically headed for Futurama-style suicide booths. Because hell, at the rate we're trending, that doesn't feel all that far off, sadly...
It's also interesting as someone with a disease that would make me eligible for this (way into the future, but not as far into the future as for most people), that my voice is... Inconveniently ignored? Generally people with terminal/chronic/neurodegenerative diseases only seem to be listened to when we support euthanasia (or when we are "special", like Steven Hawking or Neil Daniher), never when we are against it.
As Stella Young said like a decade ago, before she died, that seems a little bit backwards and fucked up.
Depending on how you look at it, the worst is probably their fellow Low Country, Belgium (in spite of the whole Catholicism thing)...
They've been doing it for longer, and their "scope" for euthanizing the mentally ill is considerably more broad. Plus I think they are higher on raw numbers, for that category...
However I believe the Dutch are the first to allow this for children, i.e. those who cannot consent to other things, but apparently can consent to state-sanctioned murder..?
Where you guys in Canuckistan differ seems to be the breadth of where this is being applied, e.g. for "financial distress", etc.
It does strike me as fairly terrifying that we have gone from "in the case of terminal illness, in a few jurisdictions, in limited cases" (the Northern Territory in Australia, Jack Kevorkian, the Terri Schiavo case), to this becoming so widespread that it is a media trope, now, and there are whole TV series based around it, and that you have bipartisan support for such extreme laws, everywhere from Canada to the Pays-Bas. It's insane.
Makes you wonder - if we're at this point now, where are we going to be on this issue (and abortion, and "gay rights") in another 20 years? Are we unironically headed for Futurama-style suicide booths. Because hell, at the rate we're trending, that doesn't feel all that far off, sadly...