WayOfTheBern

WayOfTheBern

log in
sign up
subreddits
search
sidebar

Canadian govt is contacting psychotherapists and asking them if they would be willing to recommend assisted suicide to their patients(off-guardian.org)

15 points14 points17 points submitted by MolecCodiciesCOVID-9/11 Vaccines Don’t Work

MolecCodiciesCOVID-9/11 Vaccines Don’t Work[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun 9 months ago

My psychotherapy governing body, the CRPO (College of Registered Psychotherapists of Ontario) is already putting out feelers to their membership to see if we are warming up to such an option for our patients. Some of the questions on the survey they just sent out to all of us are similar to: “If MAiD is implemented to include mental health illnesses, and you have a patient who wants to utilize the program, will you be affirming in their decision and help them through the process?” “Hell no!” was my answer. I think all of this is unconscionable. It is wicked and nefarious, especially if you are aware of what is truly behind all of this—and it ain’t to help people either, you can bet your sweet bippy on that.

NetweaselContinuing the struggle 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun 9 months ago

“If MAiD is implemented to include mental health illnesses, and you have a patient who wants to utilize the program, will you be affirming in their decision and help them through the process?”

Now, that's a more clear question than the one described in the title.

And "Hell no" would be my answer too, but not in the same way. The "be affirming in their decision" is the sticking point for me. IMO, a therapist should not be affirming, nor the opposite of affirming. A therapist should be helping the patient find the best option for the patient without any steering toward any particular option.

Here's a quick analogy: Suppose the patient just discovered that they had very recently become pregnant. At that stage, there are basically three options: 1) get rid of it now/abortion, 2) get rid of it later/adoption, or 3) don't get rid of it/keep it.

What happens if the therapist is anti-abortion, but their patient is not? Does that first option just never get mentioned or discussed, even if it happens to be the best option for that patient at that time? Just a big NO if the patient even mentions it? Or should it be discussed, neutrally, so that the therapist helps the patient figure out which of the three options is best for the patient?

Same with suicide. It's possible (theoretically) that, in some rare cases, suicide IS the best option. The therapist's role (IMO) is to help the patient make sure that the option the patient decides to take IS the best option the patient can take.

If suicide is NOT the best option in this particular case, they can figure that out together.

Also, the question removes the scenario of the therapist saying "Boy your life is rough. Have you looked into this Government Assisted Suicide thingy?" In the question, the patient is bringing it up. Therefore (IMO) it should be discussed. Without the therapist pushing for a yes or no.

And, to restate the original question, if, after all the discussion and analysis between therapist and patient, the patient is still at "yes, this is what I'm going to do".... would you as a therapist help them through the process?

Edit: Or would you refer them to someone who could actually do that?