Roger Foley: A Passion to Live

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Amanda Achtman, who is leading a project called Dying to Meet You, visited Roger Foley in London Ontario. Roger lives with Cerebral Ataxia and says that he has been pressured on several occasions to ask for euthanasia. (Link to the youtube video)

In the video, Foley gives Achtman context from his life concerning his disability. Foley states that as a child he was always uncoordinated and very tired. He was not diagnosed with his condition, so he thought that he could work through it.

Roger said that he is bedridden and has severe pain levels every day. He needs to take medications or he can't even function.

Amanda Achtman

Achtman asked him why he is living in a hospital and not a home. Roger responds:

Unfortunately we live in a country where persons with disabilities aren't allowed to choose who's around them.

You're worked at; not worked with.

Foley then gave the example of a care worker who helped him get into the bath tub. He washed himself but when he needed help getting out of the tub, he called but got no answer. So he crawled out of the tub over the slippery floor, without full control of his limbs. As he was crawling down the hallway he hears snoring. He finds the caregiver stretched out on one of his chairs in a deep sleep. When he reported it to the agency, the care-giver confessed to the act but they didn't care.

Achtman asked him if he has been offered euthanasia? Roger replied:

Yeah, multiple times.

A nurse asked him if he had thoughts of self-harm? Foley responded honestly that he has thought about ending his life because of what he is going through. Out of nowhere, the nurse told him that he could apply for an assisted... you know what I mean.

Achtman asked him what is the impact on him, as a patient, of having euthanasia suggested? Foley responded:

It's completely traumatized me. Now it's this overlying option, where, in my situation, when I say I'm suicidal, I'm met with, Well, you know, the hospital has a program to help you with that, if you want to end your life.

That didn't exist before MAiD was legalized, but now it's there.

Roger says that he is having flash backs from this experience and that this has devalued him and all that he is.

Achtman asks about the accusation that it is only religious people who are trying to prevent euthanasia. Foley responds:

That's the ultimate gas lighting statement. Like, I'm not religious. I respect people who are religious. Saying that its just religious persons who oppose euthanasia and assisted suicide are completely wrong. And these people who usually say it have an ableist mindset and they look at persons with disabilities and see us as just better off dead and a waste of resources.

Foley has hope is that one day he will be able to break through the wall of the system and get access to the services he needs.

Foley wants to live at home with workers who want to work with him as a team.

Foley concludes the interview by saying:

I have a passion to live.
I don't want to give up on my life.

Previous articles about Roger Foley: 

• UN disability envoy demands protection for people with disabilities from euthanasia in Canada (Link).
• People with disabilities oppose expansion of MAiD in Canada (Link).
• Canada is getting comfortable with killing people with disabilities (Link).

A Warning from Canada to Hungary about Euthanasia

Dear Hungarians,

Amanda Achtman

I visited your country this time last year and was deeply impressed and inspired by it. Now that I hear Hungary is considering legalizing euthanasia, I must issue a warning to you about this from my home country of Canada.

Canada legalized euthanasia nationwide in 2016. Since then, with the criteria expanded and safeguards eroded, euthanasia now accounts for 4.1% of all deaths and is the fifth leading cause of death.

In fact, the number of Canadians who have died by euthanasia since legalization is commensurate with the total number of Canadians who died of Covid.

Having monitored the debate and expansion of euthanasia closely for the past several years, I have some important information to share with you that will hopefully prevent Hungary from going down the same path.

Euthanasia will not be limited.

Initially, euthanasia was legalized for those whose deaths were deemed “reasonably foreseeable.” Patients were required to have a “grievous and irremediable” condition. But soon, this was seen as discriminatory against those who were suffering but not imminently dying. And so, a second track (literally named “Track 2”) was created to qualify for euthanasia those whose deaths were not imminent. Initially, this was for those suffering from physical pain but then this was seen as discriminatory against those who were suffering from psychological pain. So, euthanasia was expanded to those not imminently dying and to those with psychological suffering rather than physical all under the rubric of equality. As long as euthanasia is seen as a reasonable solution to suffering, then there is no limit as to who should quality for this relief. For this reason, euthanasia activists have advised euthanasia for children who, when speaking before parliamentary committess, they refer to as “mature minors.” As soon as euthanasia is seen as a good for society and for suffering persons, any rationale to limit it will be arbitrary and considered unjust by at least some of those who are excluded by the criteria.

Euthanasia will undermine suicide prevention efforts.

Though we have gone through many euphemisms, nothing can change the reality that euthanasia is simply suicide with an accomplice. The euthanasia lobby stopped using the terms euthanasia and assisted suicide because it is bad for public relations. And so, we have gone from “euthanasia” to “assisted suicide” to “physician-assisted suicide” to “medical aid in dying.” Now in law, politics, and journalism, the English acronym for the latter is used universally. This deadens people’s consciences so that they do not realize that premature killing is precisely what is meant by “MAID.” As George Orwell said, “As language corrupts thought, so thought also corrupts language.” Many people who work in palliative care believe that palliative care is the true assistance in dying; they would never dream of killing their patients. But now, these lines are becoming blurred. Unfortunately, we now have a two-tier society where some people get suicide prevention and others get suicide assistance. This is terribly unjust because everyone deserves suicide prevention.

Euthanasia will devalue the lives of people with disabilities.

Many people with whom I speak tell me they think euthanasia is reasonable for persons with a certain illness or disability. They will usually name a particular condition that, in their mind, justifies premature death. Yet, even if they would say that euthanasia should never be coerced, suggesting that there is any threshold at which a person’s life is not worth living denigrates their life and sends the message that their life is less valuable. Furthermore, many persons with disabilities attest that they are being de facto coerced to consider euthanasia due to lack of adequate supports to live. I cannot stand by idly when my fellow citizens with disabilities attest that they are tempted to seek euthanasia because they lack housing, money for food, accesibility provisions, or even family, friends, or visitors who care about them. This is clearly an urgent cry for help, not death.

Euthanasia will threaten the doctor-patient relationship.

When a doctor raises euthanasia with a patient, it already deflates them. Simply put, it is dehumanizing to tell someone that they qualify to die. In Canada, many advocates tried to ensure that euthanasia would only ever be patient-initiated. At least, this way, patients would not be counselled to consider suicide in a moment of weakness, vulnerability, or pain. But now it is the complete opposite. Doctors are being compelled to present “MAID” as an option to all eligible patients which, as you can see, is many of them. Even if someone does not choose euthanasia for themselves, it takes a toll to even have it suggested or to know that the phsyician has euthanized other patients or referred them to their deaths. This makes it harder to trust that the doctor will truly do everything for the sake of preserving health. Euthanasia is an easy way out and, since it is legal and commonplace, there is next to no investigation of the abuses which often leaves grieving family members traumatized.

Euthanasia will cut short our opportunities to love.

Premature death cuts short the capacity to show and receive kindness in the world. Every euthanasia death short circuits our opportunities to love. And if someone is asking for euthanasia because they do not feel loved in first place, then the right response is not lazy indifference (sometimes masqueraded as “support”) but rather a loving and urgent intervention. Those who are in need make an appeal to us. It is so important that we do not miss the opportunity to respond to them. It is the very basis of our humanity to be responsible in this way -- to care and be cared for.

To avoid descending into a euthanasia society, my recommendations are to:

1. Provide the supports that people across diverse demographics need to live.
2. Bolster self-harm and suicide prevention efforts across all generations.
3. Work toward ever-better inclusion of persons with disabilities.
4. Insist on the role of doctor as healer, not killer.
5. Affirm the value of those suffering and caregiving heroically by letting them know that it’s good they exist. Notice the challenge that it is to suffer, die, and caregive well and praise those who are doing it for their courage.

Through promoting these actions and attitudes, we can create a society where dying naturally is not shameful or “undignified”, but rather a supreme occasion for realizing what is significant in life. All of this is what the dying person deserves. And for all of us, one day that dying person will be us.

Amanda Achtman recently served as the senior advisor to a Canadian parliamentarian working to prevent the expansion of euthanasia on the basis of disability and mental illness. She currently works with Canadian Physicians for Life on ethics education and cultural engagement. Amanda is also the founder of Dying to Meet You, a project dedicated to preventing euthanasia and encouraging hope.

@AmandaAchtman / DyingToMeetYou.com

Euthanasia cannot be "culturally safe"

Medical killing obviously undermines cultural preservation.

 

By Amanda Achtman

 

Amanda Achtman

Health Canada is currently conducting a survey of Indigenous perspectives on Canada’s euthanasia program.

These are some examples of the highly leading questions the Government is using in its attempt to solicit support for euthanasia from Indigenous respondents:

• What supports should be in place to allow Indigenous people to make decisions about MAID?
• What supports should be in place to help someone preparing for their MAID journey? What supports should be in place to help their families and caregivers?
• If you have supported or are supporting a loved one who has chosen MAID, what was your experience with the process?

The purported intent of collecting such data is to ensure “cultural safety” which the Government defines as: 

“A way of being that is created by a trusting and respectful environment. Culturally safe practices are actions in colonized spaces where Indigenous Peoples, families and communities feel respected, included, welcomed and comfortable expressing all aspects of who they are as Indigenous Peoples.”

I am reminded of Cardinal Robert Sarah’s critique of an ideological colonialism that persists today which he described as “the imposition of a false morality and deceitful values.”

Premature death through medical killing is precisely this kind of imposition.

According to a Statistics Canada report, 

“Suicide rates among First Nations people, Métis and Inuit were significantly higher than the rate among non-Indigenous people. The rate among First Nations people (24.3 deaths per 100,000 person-years at risk) was three times higher than the rate among non-Indigenous people (8.0 deaths per 100,000 person-years at risk). Among First Nations people living on reserve, the rate was about twice as high as that among those living off reserve.”

Killing, whether through suicide or euthanasia, obviously undermines cultural preservation insofar as it destroys persons, the bearers of culture.

Despite having high rates of suicide, this is not a sign that it is an Indigenous value. On the contrary, suicide is a sign of distress, trauma, and inadequate support to live.

If Canada euthanizes Indigenous persons, this will go down in national shame like the forced sterilizations and other dehumanizing eugenic practices perpetuated due to “deceitful values.”

I hope more Indigenous persons will speak out against the Government’s euthanasia regime and the explicit targeting of First Nations support for it.

In case you missed it, I invite you to check out the short film I produced about Eulalia Running Rabbit, a Blackfoot elder, on why she opposes euthanasia.

Canada requires doctors to falsify death certificates.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

An essay by Amanda Achtman was published by lawliberty.org challenging the fact that Canadian doctors are required to falsify death certificate. 

Achtman wrote her article in response to the fact that the Ontario College of Physicians is soliciting feedback on a draft policy, concerning euthanasia which includes a section concerning death certificates.

Achtman writes:

Physicians who provide MAID must complete the medical certificate of death.

When completing the medical certificate of death, physicians: must list the illness, disease, or disability leading to the request for MAID as the cause of death; and must not make any reference to MAID or the medications administered on the certificate. (emphasis mine)

Here we have the deliberate directive by a governing professional body to falsify medical records. A doctor’s administration of midazolam, propofol, and rocuronium is undeniably the cause of his or her patient’s premature death.

Achtman then states that:

However, despite euthanasia lobbyists insisting that “medical assistance in dying is a legal, federally regulated end-of-life choice, driven by hope and autonomy,” the mandating of professional cover-up betrays the pangs of conscience that still admit there is something fundamentally wrong with it. 

I agree. Read Amanda's essay (here). 

You can respond to the Ontario College of Physicians Draft Policy on MAiD (here).