Have you noticed that the subject of euthanasia\/assisted suicide is picking up momentum \u201d\u201d that it is, so to speak, taking on a life of its own? I mean in particular that we seem to be approaching one of those interesting tipping points in public debate where the tone of those supporting a once-shocking idea is shifting from defensive to offensive.<\/p>\n
Take for a representative example one of the \u201cletters of the day\u201d\u009d in the [National] Post\u2019s July 22 edition, from Alexander McKay of Calgary. Mr. McKay argues for assisted suicide with the conviction of one endorsing, rather than flouting, received wisdom. The notion that the individual not only has the right to control his time of departure from this Earth, but has the right to society’s complicity in a death deliberately chosen, is embedded in the calm and confident air with which Mr. McKay projects his reasons for wishing, when his \u201cwonderful life\u201d\u009d dwindles down to a putative final season of debility and suffering, to \u201cconsider my options.\u201d\u009d<\/p>\n
Mr. McKay does not wish to see his life \u201ccruelly extended\u201d\u009d (assumption: suffering and pain are unnatural add-ons to life, not as much a part of life as youth and vigour). He says, \u201clife is for the living\u201d\u009d (assumption: the terminally ill no longer hold the moral status of \u201cliving\u201d\u009d). And, of course, \u201cCanada\u2019s medical system is for those who need it\u201d\u009d (assumption: medical “need” is an entirely fungible notion).<\/p>\n