The enthusiastic embrace of legalized euthanasia by the Canadian medical establishment has been shocking and appalling.
Now, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario–the official provincial medical association–has betrayed doctors who have a conscientious objection to committing euthanasia.
To keep from suffering professional discipline, all Ontario doctors will have to be complicit in homicide.
From the ethics opinion:
Where a physician declines to provide medical assistance in dying for reasons of conscience or religion, the physician must not abandon the patient.
An effective referral must be provided. An effective referral means a referral made in good faith, to a non-objecting, available, and accessible physician, nurse practitioner or agency. The referral must be made in a timely manner to allow the patient to access medical assistance in dying…
The federal legislation does not compel physicians to provide or assist in providing medical assistance in dying. For clarity, the College does not consider providing the patient with an ‘effective referral’ as ‘assisting’ in providing medical assistance in dying.
In other words, all doctors must become death doctor pimps. Think about what the College has told their doctors: “Violate the Hippocratic Oath–or else!”
This, even though such “effective referrals” are not required by law. The ethics opinion also would also permit medicalized killing beyond what the statute allows, not requiring death to be “foreseeable” in order to be given a lethal jab.
In other words, Ontario MDs have to participate–at least by referral–in the euthanasia of disabled people who are not dying.
The medical establishment of Canada has turned its back on what it really means to be a doctor.
In Ontario, Canada, the debate over medical assistance in dying (MAID), commonly known as euthanasia or assisted suicide, has taken a new turn with the requirement for all physicians to be complicit in the process. This mandate has sparked intense controversy, raising ethical questions about the rights of healthcare providers, patient autonomy, and the sanctity of life.
The Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons (CPSO) issued a policy that mandates all doctors who conscientiously object to providing MAID must provide an “effective referral” to a willing and available healthcare provider. This means that even if a physician morally opposes euthanasia, they are obligated to refer patients to another doctor who will facilitate the procedure.
Proponents of the CPSO policy argue that it ensures access to MAID for patients who have made an informed decision to end their lives due to intolerable suffering. They contend that conscientious objection should not impede a patient’s right to access legal medical procedures. Furthermore, they argue that effective referrals are necessary to prevent patients from being abandoned or denied care based on a physician’s personal beliefs.
However, critics of the policy argue that it violates the fundamental right to freedom of conscience and religion. Forcing doctors to act against their deeply held beliefs undermines their autonomy and professional integrity. Additionally, some physicians argue that facilitating MAID goes against the Hippocratic Oath and the ethical principle of “do no harm.”
Furthermore, the CPSO policy has sparked concerns about the slippery slope of medical ethics. Critics fear that mandating physician complicity in MAID could lead to further erosion of ethical boundaries, potentially pressuring healthcare providers to participate in procedures that conflict with their moral or religious convictions.
The issue becomes even more complex when considering the broader societal implications. In a diverse and pluralistic society like Canada, where values and beliefs vary widely, it is challenging to establish policies that balance individual rights with societal norms. The CPSO policy attempts to navigate these complexities by prioritizing patient autonomy while also recognizing the rights of healthcare providers.
Moreover, the Ontario government’s approach to MAID reflects broader shifts in attitudes towards end-of-life care and medical ethics. As more jurisdictions legalize euthanasia and assisted suicide, questions about the role of healthcare professionals in these procedures become increasingly relevant.
Ultimately, the debate over the CPSO policy underscores the delicate balance between respecting individual freedoms and protecting ethical standards in healthcare. Finding common ground on such contentious issues requires thoughtful dialogue, respect for diverse perspectives, and a commitment to upholding the principles of medical ethics. As Ontario and other jurisdictions grapple with these complex ethical dilemmas, the need for robust ethical frameworks and conscientious decision-making becomes more pressing than ever.
Chelsea Garcia is a political writer with a special interest in international relations and social issues. Events surrounding the war in Ukraine and the war in Israel are a major focus for political journalists. But as a former local reporter, she is also interested in national politics.
Chelsea Garcia studied media, communication and political science in Texas, USA, and learned the journalistic trade during an internship at a daily newspaper. In addition to her political writing, she is pursuing a master's degree in multimedia and writing at Texas.
