and there s at least a 90 day delay before it might be agreed. and again, at the moment, there is no control. we have assisted dying in this country it s called terminal sedation. it s deeply hypocritical. if people are suffering a lot in their final death, which many people do, you give them such large doses of opiates that it speeds the end. and there s this total pretence, of, well, we are not intending to kill the patient, even though the treatment you re giving them is actually hastening their death. and the problem with this is it leaves entirely in the hands of the doctors as to when to do this. it cannot be discussed with the patient or the family openly, cos then it s against the law. so it is medical paternalism of its worst sort. you re not a religious man, are you? no. does it matter to you in any way that religious people of many different faiths find what you are advocating deeply objectionable? well, that s fine.
yes. that s horrible. no, that is the nature of medicine. you know, you can never be certain. and in retrospect, you may say, well, that wasn t right at the time. but even then. you know, there is no evidence that this is a significant problem in the many countries where this is possible. and the idea that this is kind of suicide on request. in canada, for instance the law s only come into action recently if you request assisted dying on the grounds of intractable suffering, palliative care is mandated, and there s at least a 90 day delay before it might be agreed. and again, at the moment, there is no control. we have assisted dying in this country it s called terminal sedation. it s deeply hypocritical. if people are suffering a lot in their final death, which many people do, you give them such large doses of opiates that it speeds the end. and there s this total pretence, of, well, we are not intending to kill the patient,
ithink. a mistake. yes. that s horrible. no, that is the nature of medicine. you know, you can never be certain. and in retrospect, you may say, well, that wasn t right at the time. but even then. you know, there is no evidence that this is a significant problem in the many countries where this is possible. and the idea that this is kind of suicide on request. in canada, for instance the law s only come into action recently if you request assisted dying on the grounds of intractable suffering, palliative care is mandated, and there s at least a 90 day delay before it might be agreed. and again, at the moment, there is no control. we have assisted dying in this country it s called terminal sedation. it s deeply hypocritical. if people are suffering a lot in their final death, which many people do, you give them such large doses of opiates that it speeds the end. and there s this total pretence, of, well, we are not intending to kill the patient, even though the treatment
if you request assisted dying on the grounds of intractable suffering, palliative care is mandated, and there s at least a 90 day delay before it might be agreed. and again, at the moment, there is no control. we have assisted dying in this country it s called terminal sedation. it s deeply hypocritical. if people are suffering a lot in their final death, which many people do, you give them such large doses of opiates that it speeds the end. and there s this total pretence, of, well, the intent. we are not intending to kill the patient, even though the treatment you re giving them is actually hastening their death. and the problem with this is it leaves entirely in the hands of the doctors as to when to do this. it cannot be discussed with the patient or the family openly, cos then it s against the law. so it is medical paternalism of its worst sort. you re not a religious man, are you? no. does it matter to you in any way that religious people of many different faiths find what yo