This topic frustrates me.
I 100% beleive that more needs to be done to improve accessibility, resources, services and more, for various different disabilities and health realted issues. Someone who wants to live, could enjoy their life if they had what they needed, shouldn't feel pressured to choose MAiD say because their provincial government won't fund enough care spaces. Or one legislative body thinks you should be out their earning a wage and not receiving as much assistance due to ideological BS reasons.
However, someone who has endevoured and continued to survive, who honestly with legitimate effort has explored their options, then self assesses they want to pursue MAiD via the track 2 route, with sound mind and decision making, should have that option.
I also take issue with the comparison of MAiD as currently written to Germany during the Nazi regime. I think there is a massive ethical difference between someone choosing which other individuals should live or be made to die via physical/pharmacological methods based off of discriminatory extremist ideology reasons VS someone, of sound mind, deciding and consenting for themselves if they wish to explore and pursue MAiD options. Surely, there is a better way to explore the ethical and moral dilemmas that can arise with MAiD in which we are comparing apples to apples.
I think we can use guidelines, recommendations, well explained criteria, effective and robust training, and safety measures to address concerns with the application of current legislation.