If people want to ensure MAID is not requested because of poverty, the solution is not to ban MAID (or even worse, ban MAID for poor people, as you point out!) but to ban poverty. Universal basic income, guaranteed access to housing in good condition, etc.
A few points why I think you are underplaying the role of poverty as a driver of desire for MAID
1. While only 3.5 pc of MAID deaths reported to date are track 2 it’s well recognised that assessors switch cases from track 2 to 1 for reasons like : they threaten suicide ( allegedly ) or state an intention to stop eating & drinking. ( ? For how many hours ??) . Some assessors almost certainly game the system altogether to give their patients “ what they want “ . Cases who were “ ever track 2” simply aren’t recorded / reported and so are almost certainly very very underreported . So track 2 cases are significantly higher than 3.5 pc . No-one is interested in correcting this reporting error which is disgraceful and lacking in transparency .
2. You can’t really assume that only 25pc of approved track 2 cases live in poverty . Yes we don’t know . It could be much higher and it probably is . People with chronic illnesses who are impoverished and so can’t afford housing ,supports and care or equipment that might help them to keep wanting and being able to live longer are likely to choose MAID earlier than someone with resources who has these needs met
3. Amir Farsoud is a well known media case who says he told his MAID assessor it wasn’t suffering from his chronic pain syndrome that was driving his MAID request - it was homelessness . So he is an example of what you claim is rare .When he got $60000 after fundraising his MAID request was cancelled . The question is why did his MAID assessor approve him for MAID when his suffering was not from his medical condition ? He should have been declared ineligible . Why wasn’t he ? Has the assessor been sanctioned ? Why not ? If the law isn’t followed MAiD is unlawful. Yes he’s still alive but it’s no thanks to his “ compassionate “ assessor .
4. Why do MAID laws include intolerable suffering when not a single person can be said to NOT be suffering ? It’s just to make politicians feel better . We all know it’s just about “ choice “ . Suffering like faecal vomiting is just thrown in by activists to win support .
5. Many people do oppose MAID “ wholesale “ as you say -because if you allow it for the terminally ill then very soon after there are eligibility expansions beyond this group
6. In abortion requests yes women can be coerced by poverty but many are also coerced into the TOP by an abusive partner or unsupportive spouse . Yes it’s not all rampant autonomy in the abortion world even though the media run silent on this issue. Coerced abortions are common.
8. Finally, MAID isn’t healthcare . It restores no-one to health . It kills a patient . It’s a procedure . That’s it. Few doctors want anything to do with it . Maybe ethicists could help out . It’s not hard to. Tick a few boxes and push a plunger. The end result is death . This way people who advocate for MAID can’t be said to be all talk and no action on this topic .
Thanks for the comments. If you're right about this, then banning track 2 is even less useful, since it means providers will just switch people to track 1. So what's your preferred option?
2. Farsoud is one of a few cases that get brought up each time. The lack of other cases is some evidence that they aren't that common. Media love covering these stories, so if they were happening a lot, we'd hear about it more often. But even then, as I've written, that doesn't mean banning MAID is the answer: https://valuejudgments.substack.com/p/lack-of-housing-is-a-housing-issue
4. I think suffering is really bad! MAID is a way of preventing suffering. Since I've argued explicitly that MAID should be just about choice, I'm happy to agree that the suffering condition is unnecessary.
8. I support making MAID non-medical so it doesn't require physician participation. Of course, as you know, there are prominent MAID advocates who also provide MAID. Some of them have written books about it. But someone needs to do the talking to address all the bad arguments out there. Medicine is as much about what we should do as what we can. I'm in the 'should' business.
Very well said ! Thank you
If people want to ensure MAID is not requested because of poverty, the solution is not to ban MAID (or even worse, ban MAID for poor people, as you point out!) but to ban poverty. Universal basic income, guaranteed access to housing in good condition, etc.
Looking forward to your review of Liz Carr’s documentary - Better off dead .
Working on it!
A few points why I think you are underplaying the role of poverty as a driver of desire for MAID
1. While only 3.5 pc of MAID deaths reported to date are track 2 it’s well recognised that assessors switch cases from track 2 to 1 for reasons like : they threaten suicide ( allegedly ) or state an intention to stop eating & drinking. ( ? For how many hours ??) . Some assessors almost certainly game the system altogether to give their patients “ what they want “ . Cases who were “ ever track 2” simply aren’t recorded / reported and so are almost certainly very very underreported . So track 2 cases are significantly higher than 3.5 pc . No-one is interested in correcting this reporting error which is disgraceful and lacking in transparency .
2. You can’t really assume that only 25pc of approved track 2 cases live in poverty . Yes we don’t know . It could be much higher and it probably is . People with chronic illnesses who are impoverished and so can’t afford housing ,supports and care or equipment that might help them to keep wanting and being able to live longer are likely to choose MAID earlier than someone with resources who has these needs met
3. Amir Farsoud is a well known media case who says he told his MAID assessor it wasn’t suffering from his chronic pain syndrome that was driving his MAID request - it was homelessness . So he is an example of what you claim is rare .When he got $60000 after fundraising his MAID request was cancelled . The question is why did his MAID assessor approve him for MAID when his suffering was not from his medical condition ? He should have been declared ineligible . Why wasn’t he ? Has the assessor been sanctioned ? Why not ? If the law isn’t followed MAiD is unlawful. Yes he’s still alive but it’s no thanks to his “ compassionate “ assessor .
4. Why do MAID laws include intolerable suffering when not a single person can be said to NOT be suffering ? It’s just to make politicians feel better . We all know it’s just about “ choice “ . Suffering like faecal vomiting is just thrown in by activists to win support .
5. Many people do oppose MAID “ wholesale “ as you say -because if you allow it for the terminally ill then very soon after there are eligibility expansions beyond this group
6. In abortion requests yes women can be coerced by poverty but many are also coerced into the TOP by an abusive partner or unsupportive spouse . Yes it’s not all rampant autonomy in the abortion world even though the media run silent on this issue. Coerced abortions are common.
8. Finally, MAID isn’t healthcare . It restores no-one to health . It kills a patient . It’s a procedure . That’s it. Few doctors want anything to do with it . Maybe ethicists could help out . It’s not hard to. Tick a few boxes and push a plunger. The end result is death . This way people who advocate for MAID can’t be said to be all talk and no action on this topic .
Thanks for the comments. If you're right about this, then banning track 2 is even less useful, since it means providers will just switch people to track 1. So what's your preferred option?
2. Farsoud is one of a few cases that get brought up each time. The lack of other cases is some evidence that they aren't that common. Media love covering these stories, so if they were happening a lot, we'd hear about it more often. But even then, as I've written, that doesn't mean banning MAID is the answer: https://valuejudgments.substack.com/p/lack-of-housing-is-a-housing-issue
4. I think suffering is really bad! MAID is a way of preventing suffering. Since I've argued explicitly that MAID should be just about choice, I'm happy to agree that the suffering condition is unnecessary.
8. I support making MAID non-medical so it doesn't require physician participation. Of course, as you know, there are prominent MAID advocates who also provide MAID. Some of them have written books about it. But someone needs to do the talking to address all the bad arguments out there. Medicine is as much about what we should do as what we can. I'm in the 'should' business.