Editor:
Re: Online poll on assisted death only results in uneducated opinions, letter to the editor, Nov. 5
Nancy Macey stated that the Delta Optimist’s poll on whether medical assistance in dying (MAiD) should be offered in hospice is meaningless because, basically, the public is providing an “uneducated opinion” on the topic. This sounds like sour grapes to me.
The poll results, as I’m writing this, show 77 per cent in support of MAiD provision in hospice. Knowing the difference between end-of-life vs. palliative vs. hospice care is a red herring. Whether you are a church goer or not, the concept is really quite simple: needless human suffering is cruel.
Both palliative care and assisted dying are essential options on a spectrum of care for people navigating their end-of-life choices. Both have the support of an overwhelming majority of Canadians. They are informed by the same values: treating suffering individuals with compassion, respecting their personal autonomy and recognizing their inherent worth as human beings.
The reality is that as people are becoming more familiar with MAiD, support has grown. Back in the 1990s, in the era of Sue Rodriguez, support for MAiD was around 60 to 65 per cent. As the topic moved into the media spotlight and legalities around individual rights expanded due to the Charter of Rights & Freedoms, support grew to 70 to 75 per cent by 2011. The passing of Bill C-14 in 2016 has led to further public education, with poll results now showing between 80 and 85 per cent support for MAiD.
Choosing MAiD is an end-of-life decision, with all of the accompanying emotion. It is cruel to put dying patients and their families through the pain and turmoil of a transfer. When someone moves into hospice, it is their expectation that this is where they will receive comfort and care, leading to a peaceful death.
Individuals who qualify for MAiD are among the most physically compromised patients in the healthcare system. In general, they are not young and not mobile. Because Bill C-14 requires patients to provide consent to MAiD immediately before it is provided, requiring a patient to transfer off-site increases the chance they will lose capacity before their wish for a peaceful death can be honoured. Thus, a forced transfer puts a patient’s right to MAiD at risk.
The transfer itself can be very tricky, requiring appropriate medication of the patient to avoid a painful journey, and adequate facilities at the receiving end. Unlike most medical procedures, there is no specialized equipment required in providing MAiD, so wouldn’t it be logistically easier and cheaper to bring the practitioner to the patient rather than the other way around?
Fraser Health Authority, which provided 44 per cent of Delta Hospice Society’s total revenues last fiscal year and just under 50 per cent the year before, has a publicly stated policy against forced transfers from non-denominational facilities like Irene Thomas (Delta) Hospice. However, they allow this practice to continue while continuing to provide taxpayer dollars.
It is disappointing and morally wrong that they aren’t using the financial clout they have at their disposal to end this practice across the region. Forced transfers need to end.
Alex Muir
