I’d like to write about love, actually. No, not the movie, although it is one of my Christmas favourites, eagerly anticipated every season. No, I’ve been thinking about love in the sense of connection, belonging, attachment, enjoyment of presence, grieving of absence, shared memories of mundane, momentous and tragic events — the stuff of stories for and through generations.
Ideally family members live together or in close proximity. When you Google family images — well, you know what comes up, for the most part. Mom and Dad, 2 or 3 kids, maybe Grandma and/or Grandpa. They’re all happy, often outdoors, walking or playing, not a disability in sight. There are exceptions, of course, but you have to search for them.
Real families run a full gamut, from wonderfully loving and supportive through abusive and/or neglectful. So let’s not make the mistake of assuming they are all alike, or that they are one extreme or the other. Whatever they are, they are, by nature or adoption, for better or for worse, our original social constellation. Our mature social experiences, relationships and attachments always and inevitably, relate back to them, again, for better or for worse.
Not all families can (or choose to) stay together. Some kids are taken away from families and fostered or adopted into other families. Some are placed in institutional or custodial care. When an institution becomes a person’s proximate source of human contact, does it become their “family”? The design of the institution and its practices tend to militate against that, passively or actively. Think “residential school” and the horrific abuses we have all become aware of in those dreadful places.
Here’s a truth we would all prefer to avoid: Family members die. Never individual human beings, always family members, whether or not they are in close (or any) contact with other family members. Nobody comes into this world alone. And the death of any family member leaves a gap in any family’s structure. That’s just a fact.
So when I watch a video of a Canadian MAiD provider stating in a jocular and eye-rolling manner that “angry family members are our greatest risk” (at 20:53 in the linked tape), I find it jarring. And worrisome. Because sometimes, loving someone who has decided to end their life early, with or without talking it over with loved ones first, with or without involving professionally empowered suicide-helpers — well sometimes, that could make a person — a family member — angry. And it could make that person want to intervene on behalf of the life of the person whose death would damage the family, against a medical professional who feels entitled to end that life.
The doctor is protected by law against the family member, and advised to withdraw from the case if they feel unsafe. But what can the family member do to protect the integrity of the family unit? Or protect a member from themselves or their own worst impulses? Well, they can try talking them out of it, of course. They can try to seek out professionals who will counsel the person and steer them away from the self-destructive path. Or they can try going to court to get an injunction to prevent the MAiD doctor from proceeding.
There is an Alberta case right now, in which a father (WV) is trying to prevent his 27-year-old autistic daughter (MV) from accessing death by doctor in her home, which also happens to be his home. If he loses in court, is he required by law to open his door to a MAiD provider, let her come in and end the life of his non-dying daughter, then go away, leaving him with his daughter’s dead body? How weird is that? Beyond weird, it’s horrific!
Before I had a chance to press the “Publish” key, the Alberta Court decided that MV could proceed with her MAiD process. The judge allowed a 30-day period for her parents to appeal his decision, so the brief reprieve that has kept her alive since February 1 will continue. For now.
Unless and until a MAiD provider “helps” her to find her way out from under all that love.
********************************************************************************
There’s so much more to say about families and MAiD. Perhaps this post will be Part 1 of a series.
Meanwhile, raise hell with the Federal Ministers of Health and Justice regarding the Alberta case, and if you live in Alberta, bring the case to the attention of provincial ministers of health, justice, and anyone else you think might listen. Letters, phone calls, emails — anything, really. Remind them that Track 2 MAiD (for people who are not dying) is unwise, deadly, and NOT what Canadians want. The government should repeal Track 2 MAiD and protect the lives of vulnerable Canadians and the well-being of their families.
beautifully written.