The ancient Greek myth of Pandora’s Box is often cited by those who oppose ideas or policies they fear will generate unwise consequences far beyond the scope of what is being contemplated. A cursory examination of the excesses of Canada’s inexorable march toward all-out government-supported euthanasia – which started at “death with dignity” and has now turned into “Can’t afford the rent? Have we got a solution for you ” – ably captures the essence of the historic warning.
Yet for the progressive Boston Globe, the largest newspaper in all of New England, the wisdom of the ages must always take a back seat to the spirit of the times. The Globe on Dec. 18 called for legalized euthanasia in Massachusetts in a firmly worded editorial that deliberately ignored the massive global attention Canada’s excessive Medical Assistance in Dying program has attracted in recent months.
The Globe had to bury its head to what is occurring not very far to its north to utilize the classic emotive weapon of cultural and political leftists: emphasizing worst-case scenarios to endorse proposed solutions they know will eventually be implemented on a much greater scale. It’s the ten-year-old rape victim means all abortions should be legal argument, euthanasia version.
The Traffic in Euthanasia Will Be Permitted, but Controlled
“[W]hy shouldn’t the state allow a terminally ill patient to end their own life?” The Globe asks. “What interest could the state possibly have in preventing a patient suffering from an incurable illness, someone who could live their last few months in extreme pain, from peacefully dying on their own terms?”
This line of thought is directly taken from pro-euthanasia arguments made before the Massachusetts State Supreme Judicial Court earlier this year. Dr. Roger Kilger, a retired physician, suffers from stage four prostate cancer. WBUR-Radio in Boston reported in March:
“Attorney John Kappos, with the California law firm O'Melveny and Myers, and co-counsel with the group Compassion & Choices, argued on behalf of Kilger....
“Kappos said that doctors would only write the prescriptions for the drugs and would not administer them. He also pointed to statistics showing that 30% of patients with such prescriptions never use them and those who do use them are close to death. What's legally different is that doctors are not intending to harm the patient, he said.
“‘Usually the people who are eligible and who actually self-ingest the medication are within days or weeks of dying, which is a situation where the harm from that is much diminished,’ Kappos said. ‘We would argue there's an attenuated state interest at that point, when you get that close to death. And so that the harm we would submit is much diminished at that point.’”
Kappos makes it all sound so restrained, with plenty of safeguards naturally baked in due to the inherent qualities of the medical profession. The Globe agreed, assuring readers there is no snowball rolling down the slope and slowly growing into an avalanche. “If a patient chooses to end their life via medically assisted death, they are not in any way, shape, or form devaluing their lives or the lives of others — they just believe that living in extreme pain is not worth it — for themselves. Denying them that choice is inhumane.”
Let’s check back with Canada and see how that no “devaluing the lives of others” part is working out.
‘They Can Have Me Dead in 90 Days’
From an Oct. 8 report by Canadian news outlet Global News:
“‘Hello, you’ve reached the provincial health services authority telephone line for medical assistance in dying…’
This is the automated recording Joannie Cowie got when she called the government to see if she would be eligible for medical assistance in dying, commonly known as MAiD.
It’s an unmistakable message from the government: if you want to end your life, we’ll help you.
‘If you call the number on the government website, they will provide doctors that will sign off for you,’ says the 52-year-old resident of Windsor, Ont.
‘They can have me dead in 90 days. That’s what I was told.’”
(Photo by Tayfun Coskun/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images)
Cowie has a litany of serious health problems that qualify her for state-issued death in the Great White North, but she is also plagued by another concern that serves as a central motivational factor as she contemplates a Final Exit: poverty.
She is not alone.
“Dr. Naheed Dosani says... poverty and stress is making people sicker, and driving a lot of Canadians with disabilities to consider ending their lives,” Global News explained. “We’re hearing about people who are choosing medical assistance in dying or thinking about it more because they don’t have money to live,” the doctor told the news site. Which brings us back to Pandora’s Box, and the most grievous aspect of state-sponsored euthanasia.
The website Greek Boston explains how an angry Zeus wanted to punish humanity “for accepting the gift of fire from Prometheus” against his wishes:
“As a wedding present, Zeus gave Pandora a box... but warned her never to open it. Pandora, who was created to be curious, couldn’t stay away from the box and the urge to open the box overcame her. Horrible things flew out of the box including greed, envy, hatred, pain, disease, hunger, poverty, war, and death.
All of life’s miseries had been let out into the world. Pandora slammed the lid of the box back down. The last thing remaining inside of the box was hope. Ever since, humans have been able to hold onto this hope in order to survive the wickedness that Pandora had let out.”
Amid all the catastrophes released into the world, hope remained secure within human hearts. In offering death as a permanent answer to worldly problems, Canada is extinguishing the sole treasure to be found amid the horrors of Pandora’s Box. And in turning a blind eye to how government euthanasia has turned out to its north, The Boston Globe is pushing Massachusetts towards a similar dystopian future devoid of hope.
