When a political leader suggests that we should ‘chat about’ having a cull on humans in order to fix our economic woes, it’s dangerously deceptive and reflects ignorance about each person’s God-given right to life.

A cull on Canada geese is at times implemented to limit the mess and the expense created by their numbers increasing in a particular area. It’s no more ridiculous to say that we are giving a Canada goose ‘a right to die with dignity’ than it is to say we’ll give a Canadian a lethal injection for the same reason. Yes, the reason is certainly the same but if politicians were to suggest that we kill humans to cut back on medical expenses, they’d have to be a lot more tactful wouldn’t they?

Alex Schadenberg with Euthanasia Prevention Coalition reminds us that it will be those guilty of economic mismanagement who will be pushing the Euthanasia solution under the false premise that it’s all about eliminating human suffering, or one’s ‘right to die with dignity’.

Can this really be all about money problems? Let’s have a look. The Ontario government report issued by Don Drummond on government cost savings states that doctors need to engage middle-aged people on end-of-life decisions…that it’s not a cheerful thought, but in bold economic terms, the older you get, the more you cost the health-care system. Don’t forget, Drummond’s report was about saving money — not lives.

Then you have the Associate Director of Health Policy Studies with the Fraser Institute, Mark Rovere, reporting that “Despite having one of the highest levels of health spending worldwide, Canada’s health insurance system is not providing Canadians with the same levels of access to medical resources and services as most other comparable countries,”

Then last week, Sun News reported Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne as saying we need to have a chat about "end-of-life" decisions—such as the euthanasia debate Quebec Premier Pauline Marois ignited in her province recently.”

It is well understood that the last few months of a person’s life can consume the largest percentage of his or her lifetime medical cost. So it’s really a matter of dollars and cents that causes law makers (money spenders) to overlook common sense and put a morbid spin on human dignity.

The Christian Heritage Party of Canada, on the other hand, recognizes euthanasia and assisted suicide as bad public policy and would reject any laws established to this end.

CHP Canada views euthanasia and assisted suicide as unacceptable responses to any situation, whether it is a terminal or incurable illness or a chronic condition. CHP Canada recognizes that changing the law to allow physicians to terminate the life of any individual (with or without consent) could result in some people feeling pressured to “take the needle or the pill”. It could tempt people to consider themselves or their loved one ‘better-off dead.’ Others may feel obliged to justify why they want to continue treatment and consider it their ‘duty to die.’

CHP Canada will not put older Canadians at risk by creating new paths to elder abuse as well as putting at risk the lonely and those living with disabilities.

CHP Canada policies advocate a return to intimate and strong family relationships, which promote hope and significantly reduce the pain of dying alone and lonely.

All Canadians should have access to quality pain control—no matter where they live. CHP Canada believes in killing the pain, not the patient. Pain control and palliative care should be given a much higher priority in medical training so that every Canadian can benefit.

To conclude, finding ways to quickly reduce the baby boomer bubble, the demographic group who have now entered retirement age is not where the economic solutions lie. Rather, sound morally and fiscally responsible solutions will be found by reducing the number of parliamentarians who have misspent our healthcare dollars and replacing them with prudent, life-affirming CHP MPs.

Comment on this Communiqué