Families vs. MAID (Part 2)

A new case has arisen (A.Y. vs. N.B.) and prompted me to tackle my promised Part 2. This new case too is about love — about the desire of A.Y. to intervene on behalf of a self-destructive family member, N.B., approved for death at the hands of an enthusiastic proponent of MAID. In this case, Dr. Ellen Wiebe was served an injunction on October 27th, preventing “her or any other doctor from “causing the death” of the 53-year-old woman, N.B., “by MAID or any other means.” The notice of civil claim alleged that Wiebe had negligently approved the procedure for a patient who does not legally qualify.” Dr. Wiebe is notorious as one of Canada’s most vocal proponents of medically assisted death and its expansion to new populations, regardless of diagnosis or prospects for future recovery and healing. According to the CTV report linked above, Wiebe has stated that “diagnosis does not matter, and that only quality of life mattered, and that this was (the woman’s) right.” The law says something quite different.

Ironically, this urgent case arose the same week that the CBC’s Passionate Eye aired a compelling and heart-rending (but one-sided) documentary, No Way to Die, about two women with mental health issues who must have spent quite a few hours in front of sympathetic film crews recounting their life histories, their deep and enduring sorrows, and their frustration with a system that does not allow people dealing with mental health issues alone to access MAID [until 2027, when the system will theoretically be “ready” to handle cases in which mental disorder is the sole underlying medical condition, i.e. MAID – MD-SUMC].

TRIGGER WARNING: If you watch this documentary, please be prepared to learn that the two women are no longer alive — both died by their own hand before the documentary was completed.

I did not know and I was shocked and deeply upset about both tragic deaths! (Maybe CBC needs to think about trauma-informed programming! This was a very upsetting episode and there was no helpful trigger warning.)

Like Jane, one of the women featured in the documentary, I was deeply traumatized by the loss of my mother to cancer when I was very young. Like Jane, I experienced physical and sexual abuse at the hands of the man who was supposed to love and care for me. I was an emotional mess. However, unlike Jane, I learned something important, very early in my long process of recovery and healing. I’ll never forget my first visit to a psychiatrist’s office when I was 19 or 20: telling my story as clearly and honestly as I could, through agonized sobs and lots of tissues, but then looking up to see his bushy eyebrows and the top of his head behind his desk, where he’d sunk down in his chair in utter boredom? He told me, “I can’t change your past and I don’t believe there’s anything I can do for you now!” I was devastated of course, and stormed out before my hour was up. In the clinic bathroom, weeping and wailing ensued, but I never sought psychiatric help again. After years of trouble, angst and other (sometimes expensive!) kinds of therapy, I finally clearly understood that there was actually nothing wrong with me — that I had been the victim of a crime that had not been acknowledged — and while damage had been done to me, it was never my fault, and with hard work, it was reparable. The system that is supposed to protect people from criminals had failed me, and I needed to learn how to channel my grief and anger towards changing an unjust system. However I am now perhaps oddly grateful for that very early psychiatric experience, when I first learned that psychiatry had nothing to offer me!

Sadly Jane, in the documentary, did not find that out. Instead, like me she was failed by parents or parent surrogates, failed by the law enforcement and child protection systems of her time, and finally failed by a medical/mental health system in denial of her realities. She was treated like a patient, prescribed drugs and treatments, labelled with diagnoses, and ultimately failed by society. I wept for her when I learned what had happened.

And then I got angry. What the hell! Is this our society’s way of dealing with its old failures? Let the victims die — either by their own hands or by state-sanctioned assisted suicide? Is it okay for doctors to throw up their hands, abandon patients who display difficult and self-destructive behaviours, and authorize their suicide-by-doctor? I don’t think so!!

Awareness of sexual abuse of children was non-existent when I was a child/youth/ young woman. Then suddenly it was discovered, language was invented to talk about it, and the old systems did creak through some needed changes. Abused children are no longer routinely removed from their homes, abusers can be arrested, charged, convicted and sentenced (although too often far too lightly), children can receive helpful and life-affirming treatment. But is sexual abuse still out there, going on? Oh yes, oh yes, it is. There is much work still to be done. Meanwhile, trauma victims who never got the help they needed are left to fend for themselves, deal with their flashbacks, dissociative episodes, personality damage and dysfunctional coping mechanisms, and some of these sad souls simply don’t make it through. They are victims of unacknowledged crimes, while their abusers are too often protected by patriarchal fortresses. Jane suggested that the new approach is to try to shore up victims’ resilience — but she stated she had been as resilient as she could be for as long as she could. And at age 75, she gave up.

I have no idea why N.B. wants to die. Her problems may be entirely unrelated to harms she suffered as a child. But psychiatry has failed her. She was over-prescribed powerful drugs, then experienced extremely uncomfortable symptoms trying to get off of those drugs, and resisted medical advice on how to do so more safely. She resisted the concern shown to her by her family doc and others in her immediate circle who don’t want her to die. She resisted the love and concern of her partner, A. Y., who doesn’t want her to die. [I can totally relate to her “resistance” — I did a lot of that!]. And when the people who care about her said no to her, she hit the internet and sought out a doctor who would agree to kill her because she wants to die right now. A doctor who famously stated that “angry family members are the enemy”.

So yes, I do take MAID and its dangers personally, especially MD-SUMC, as they love to call it (Mental Disorder is the Sole Underlying Medical Condition). Although I am not vulnerable to MAID’s seductive siren songs right now, I’ve been close enough to a pretty serious state of self-loathing and despair to recognize the attraction of those siren’s voices calling out to me to end my suffering by delivering myself up to a razor blade — or now with MAID — the “love” of a physician who takes pleasure in my gratitude for being “freed” from my personal pain and agony.

But please hear me on this: Suicide is not the right answer. MAID is not the right answer. Death is not a solution — it’s the end of all potential solutions. I say, RESIST MAID!! RESIST those inner voices that tell you you’re not good enough! But don’t resist those who love you and want the best LIFE — not death — for you!

Once again, I urge you to raise hell with the Federal Ministers of Health and Justice regarding this new BC case (as well as the Alberta case, MV, which remains unresolved as far as we know) and if you live in Alberta or BC, 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 Federal government should repeal Track 2 MAiD and protect the lives of vulnerable Canadians and the well-being of their families.