Publicly funded hospitals should respect patients’ rights on endof-life care

Regarding the letter from Hans Visser on May 16 (“Why deny St. Michael’s the right to its principles”).

Members of Dying With Dignity Canada indeed have the right to an opinion regarding end of life. So do St. Michael’s Health Centre employees. And members of neither group have the right to force their views on others.

The difference, however, is that although Dying with Dignity is an organization devoted solely to giving those who choose the right to end their lives a voice, a hospital is a publicly funded facility whose employees must provide services to all residents. I’m sure in the hospital environment there are different opinions on end-of-life care, just as there are in other sectors of society.

The hospital can and should continue providing end-of-life care to those who believe in prolonging life as long as possible. But as a publicly funded facility it must also offer options available under the law to those whose views differ from those of hospital employees, even if the majority of employees might prefer to follow the practise of prolonging life against the will of the person being treated.

Each human has the right to decide his or her fate when it comes to the end of one’s life. If one person believes God requires him to live out his life at all costs, the hospital has the obligation under the law to offer treatment to fulfill that belief. If another person believes in self-determination at the end of her life, the hospital has the obligation as defined by the law to fulfill that request.

While some believe ending one’s life is evil, others, including myself, believe the right to choose whether or not to prolong one’s own life is a fundamental human right. And within the restraints of the law, I hold that publicly funded hospitals must respect my rights just as they would those who believe in prolonging life at any cost.

Brian Pauls

Taber