Buongiorno,
credo sia piuttosto off-topic, ma in qualche modo /sento/ (in termini di sentimento) che questo articolo sia connesso con scienza e tecnica (di morte)...
La rivista "OMEGA - Journal of Death and Dying" [1] il 28 Febbraio scorso ha pubblicato questo:
«Government Economics of Expanding Canada’s Medical Assistance in Dying to Vulnerable Populations and the Ethical Implications of Allowing the State to Control Death»
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/00302228251323299
Se c'è qualcuno che ne scrive in questi termini, significa che qualcun altro sta seriamente pensando di applicare (di nuovo) quei criteri... ma forse lo sapevate già.
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
Abstract
This study explores the potential economic savings from expanding medical assistance in dying (MAiD) in Canada, where it is currently a leading cause of death, to include vulnerable groups that cost the government more than they contribute in taxes. These groups include individuals with severe mental health issues, the homeless, drug users, retired elderly, and indigenous communities. Both voluntary and non-voluntary scenarios were analyzed, projecting total savings of up to CAD $1.273 trillion by 2047. With an estimated 2.6 million deaths in the voluntary scenario, mostly among mentally ill and elderly populations, this cost-saving measure raises significant ethical concerns. Financially incentivizing MAiD could shift healthcare priorities away from providing necessary support, potentially devaluing vulnerable lives and fostering a troubling reliance on assisted death as an economic solution. The findings highlight a need for ethical scrutiny of MAiD policy expansion.
Introduction
The Canadian government legalized euthanasia or medical assistance in dying (MAiD) for eligible citizens in 2016 (D. of J. Government of Canada, 2021). This policy change has resulted in a marked increase in the country’s mortality rate, with MAiD now constituting the fifth leading cause of death in Canada (Passifiume, 2024; W. J. Smith, 2024). MAiD was predominantly first used for patients with terminal illnesses experiencing intolerable suffering (Government of Canada, 2023b). In the last two years, however, this has been expanded to those that are not terminally ill (non-foreseeable deaths) at an accelerating rate (Government Of Canada, 2023a). Ongoing legislative proposals, seek to broaden eligibility further to include Canadians with severe mental health conditions (Dyer, 2024; D. of J. Government of Canada, 2016).
[...]
Conclusions
The study clearly shows that expanding MAiD to include vulnerable populations such as the mentally ill, homeless, elderly, and indigenous groups in Canada could lead to substantial government economic savings. For example, the cost savings associated with the mentally ill could reach up to CAD $63.076 billion, while for the retired elderly population, the savings could be CAD $54.2 billion in the voluntary scenario or as high as CAD $1.2 trillion in a non-voluntary scenario, using traditional methods of providing MAiD in both cases. For the voluntary scenario, the total savings amount to CAD $59 billion for traditional MAiD and CAD $65 billion using an outsourcing approach. Overall, the total savings across all groups in the non-voluntary MAiD scenario are CAD $1.238 trillion (traditional), and CAD $1.273 trillion (outsourcing). The total number of projected deaths in the voluntary MAiD scenario results in 2,674,080 Canadian deaths with a significant portion coming from the mentally ill and elderly groups. This creates a deeply troubling ethical dilemma. Providing such large economic incentives to have the government fund killing its own citizens could easily shift the focus of healthcare policy towards promoting MAiD as a financially attractive option, rather than ensuring that vulnerable individuals receive the care and support they need. Such a system could foster a culture where ending life is seen as preferable to providing adequate care and support, which is dangerous for any society. The government could view MAiD as a cost-saving mechanism, which could lead to policies that implicitly or explicitly encourage individuals to opt for assisted death. The expansion of MAiD in this context risks devaluing human life, particularly among those who are most at risk of societal neglect. This is a dangerous and ethically fraught direction for any policy, as it implicitly encourages a “license to kill” mentality, which is highlighted by the fact the government savings increase substantially using non-medical contract killers. In conclusion, while the potential financial benefits of expanding MAiD are considerable, the ethical costs are far too great. Allowing vulnerable populations to opt for assisted death as a means of saving money for the state undermines the core values of medical ethics and morals. Policymakers must carefully consider these implications before moving forward with any further expansion of MAiD.
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
via Marco Cosentino:
https://t.me/MarCosent/4594
Saluti, 380°
[1]
https://journals.sagepub.com/overview-metric/OME?
--
380° (lost in /traslation/)
«Welcome to the chaos of the times
If you go left and I go right
Pray we make it out alive
This is Karmageddon»
