Draft: Repeal "Dignified End of Life Choices"

[Glen-Rhodes]

When it passed, I said I would spearhead the repeal attempt. With Ambassaor Tyvok's repeal attempt of Studly Penguins delegation's "Stem Cells For Greater Health" well on its way, I think it's the appropriate time to take on this second flawed resolution from that delegation.

Text of "Dignified End of Life Choices" can be found here.

Repeal "Dignified End of Life Choices"

TROUBLED with the lack of attention to bioethics in “Dignified End of Life Choices”,

CONCERNED that “Dignified End of Life Choices” does not employ devices to ensure that requests for assisted suicide are genuinely voluntary, operating entirely under an honor system subject to the whims of corruption,

FURTHER CONCERNED that “Dignified End of Life Choices” does not employ proper consideration of vulnerable populations, ensuring that requests for assisted suicide are genuine and not the result of clinical depression, a treatable mental disorder, or other treatable mental disorders and illnesses,

APPALLED that patients requesting assisted suicide are not required to undergo psychiatric or psychological evaluations, unless they repeatedly submit and rescind assisted suicide requests, but are merely required to attain two witnesses who testify towards their mental competency, even if they are not psychiatric professionals able to give an expert evaluation,

FURTHER APPALLED that attending physicians and consulting physicians are not subject to evaluations of ethical conduct, unless nations enact independent legislation, which is an irresponsible oversight of bioethical protocols,

The World Assembly repeals “Dignified End of Life Choices”.

[float=left]Dr. Bradford William Castro

Ambassador-at-Large,
Permanent Chief of Mission for World Assembly affairs,
the Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes[/float][float=right][/float]

[Absolvability]

I'm sure the good Doctor recalls my advocacy of the original Dignified Ends of Life Choices, however, what I wasn't so vocal about was my displeasure with some of the abrupt changes made to the finally submitted draft.

As a result, and honestly because it would amuse me to actually be on Dr. Castro's side in a campaign for once, I'd like to announce my support for this measure, though I'm sure we can begin splitting hairs after our mutual short-term goal has been reached.

Oh... and, as an afterthought, I'm back. -grin-

[Unibot]

I'm sure the good Doctor recalls my advocacy of the original Dignified Ends of Life Choices, however, what I wasn't so vocal about was my displeasure with some of the abrupt changes made to the finally submitted draft.

As a result, and honestly because it would amuse me to actually be on Dr. Castro's side in a campaign for once, I'd like to announce my support for this measure, though I'm sure we can begin splitting hairs after our mutual short-term goal has been reached.

Oh... and, as an afterthought, I'm back. -grin-

Ambassador, welcome back to err... the madhouse. It's good to see a familiar face around here.

May I buy you a drink at the Strangers' Bar, to catch up on old times, and where you've been? King Adrian de Saint-Clair has got to be here somewhere too, he'll certainly want to join us....

APPALLED that patients requesting assisted suicide are not required to undergo psychiatric or psychological evaluations, unless they repeatedly submit and rescind assisted suicide requests, but are merely required to attain two witnesses who testify towards their mental competency, even if they are not psychiatric professionals able to give an expert evaluation,

Ahem... what classifies as a 'psychiatric professional', and what if there are none in Unibot? Would those people have to travel to a psychiatric professional outside of the country -- and if they are too sick to travel, would they have to spend money to pay for a psychiatric professional's travel fees? (COCR) Also, there is a degree of variety between psychiatric professionals, a standardized WA mental competency testing, would probably be needed as well.

Its of my nation's own opinion, that the only professionals at determining another's sanity, is those who have been close to them their whole lives. Such closeness reveals insanity as sanity, and can shed light on one's sanity as insanity.

Yours
Commander Zhildigio

OOC: Welcome back, Abe.

[Glen-Rhodes]

Ahem... what classifies as a 'psychiatric professional', and what if there are none in Unibot? Would those people have to travel to a psychiatric professional outside of the country -- and if they are too sick to travel, would they have to spend money to pay for a psychiatric professional's travel fees? (COCR) Also, there is a degree of variety between psychiatric professionals, a standardized WA mental competency testing, would probably be needed as well.

What if there are none? If this repeal passes, it won't matter, unless some misguided delegation seeks to reestablish the legitimacy of assisted suicide. Anyways, 'psychiatric professional' is self-explanatory, in any case.

If another assisted suicide resolution is passed, and if the author made the changes suggested by my repeal, Unibot would have to start educating some psychiatric professionals. If Unibot truly doesn't have any at the moment, that's rather appalling and dismaying.

But, I am not going to write a replacement, so I'd rather not side-track the discussion with questions assuming that I've committed to that.

On a side note, it's certainly... news that you've returned, Ambassador Veloci.

[float=left]Dr. Bradford William Castro

Ambassador-at-Large,
Permanent Chief of Mission for World Assembly affairs,
the Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes[/float][float=right][/float]

[Unibot]

Unibot would have to start educating some psychiatric professionals. If Unibot truly doesn't have any at the moment, that's rather appalling and dismaying.

Traditionally when one suspects someone is mentally ill, they report them to the Church, there the truly enlightened ones can heal them... psychiatry offers none of such wisdom offered by the Clergy.

[Bears Armed]

Ahem... what classifies as a 'psychiatric professional', and what if there are none in Unibot? Would those people have to travel to a psychiatric professional outside of the country -- and if they are too sick to travel, would they have to spend money to pay for a psychiatric professional's travel fees? (COCR) Also, there is a degree of variety between psychiatric professionals, a standardized WA mental competency testing, would probably be needed as well.

"A 'standardized WA mental competency testing' that would work equally well for the members of all the differing cultures -- and even differing species -- that are represented here?!?"

[Le Port]

From the original resolution:

C) “Consulting physician” means a health care provider who is qualified by specialty or experience to make a professional diagnosis and prognosis;

3) Prior to legally prescribing lethal medication, the Attending and Consulting Physician must confirm the diagnosis and verify that the patient's request is voluntary. Physicians must also perform the following:

Does this not already cover the necessary psychiatric evaluation? This section from the original resolution does seem somewhat vague, so it may be necessary to clarify this. Would a repeal and then a modified version of the original resolution be necessary?

Étienne Valmont, WA Delegate for Le Port

[Charlotte Ryberg]

I am rising in support of this repeal, Dr Castro. The issues addressed in the resolution concerned may be best left to national level.

Yours etc,

[Glen-Rhodes]

Traditionally when one suspects someone is mentally ill, they report them to the Church, there the truly enlightened ones can heal them... psychiatry offers none of such wisdom offered by the Clergy.

I wonder how Unibot is in compliance with the current resolution, in the first place. It required psychiatric evaluations of patients that frequently submit and rescind assisted suicide requests.

From the original resolution:

C) “Consulting physician” means a health care provider who is qualified by specialty or experience to make a professional diagnosis and prognosis;

3) Prior to legally prescribing lethal medication, the Attending and Consulting Physician must confirm the diagnosis and verify that the patient's request is voluntary. Physicians must also perform the following:

Does this not already cover the necessary psychiatric evaluation? This section from the original resolution does seem somewhat vague, so it may be necessary to clarify this.

I highly doubt it. The consulting physician is merely a specialist that isn't the patient's primary doctor. For example, you have primary doctor who regularly manages your illness and will manage the assisted suicide process, and you have a specialist that will confirm that you actually have cancer, so that you're not offing yourself for no reason. I do not think the "consulting physician" was ever intended to encompass psychiatrists, nor do I think it can be interpreted that way, considering psychiatrists are independently and explicitly stated further in the resolution.

Would a repeal and then a modified version of the original resolution be necessary?

I would hope not.

[float=left]Dr. Bradford William Castro

Ambassador-at-Large,
Permanent Chief of Mission for World Assembly affairs,
the Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes[/float][float=right][/float]

[Unibot]

I wonder how Unibot is in compliance with the current resolution, in the first place. It required psychiatric evaluations of patients that frequently submit and rescind assisted suicide requests.

I see.. so what's your problem with the resolution again?

And, for the record, Unibot is not in compliance with the current resolution.

[Serbian_Soviet_Union]

The Dignified End of Life Choices was the reason why FSSU left the WA in the first place.

[Glen-Rhodes]

I see.. so what's your problem with the resolution again?

Oversight of bioethics is what I am arguing here, but I generally believe assisted suicide is immoral. The bioethics issues are laid out in the repeal.

[float=left]Dr. Bradford William Castro

Ambassador-at-Large,
Permanent Chief of Mission for World Assembly affairs,
the Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes[/float][float=right][/float]

[Gobbannium]

The Dignified End of Life Choices was the reason why FSSU left the WA in the first place.

...after so many months of waving shoes and shouting "Nyet!" that most of us thought it already had. Honestly, ambassador, it was a wonder you had any office supplies left.

Our largest objection to this repeal proposal is that it is fundamentally dishonest. Dr Castro's comments have made it clear that the stated arguments are largely irrelevant to him (and thus our observations that they are at best tenuous would be wasted); his actual reasons are simply that he dislikes the concept of euthanasia. Since we are of exactly the opposite opinion in all respects, he can count on our vigorous opposition.

[Gop-Conservatives]

I am supporting this appeal as well.

[Glen-Rhodes]

Our largest objection to this repeal proposal is that it is fundamentally dishonest. Dr Castro's comments have made it clear that the stated arguments are largely irrelevant to him (and thus our observations that they are at best tenuous would be wasted); his actual reasons are simply that he dislikes the concept of euthanasia. Since we are of exactly the opposite opinion in all respects, he can count on our vigorous opposition.

I think the good Prince assumes too much.

The bioethics issues are still worrying problems for me. It's simply that my most ardent opposition arises from the fact that I believe assisted suicide to be completely immoral. If there was any possibility of a repeal passing simply based on me declaring that assisted suicide is immoral, then that is what I would have concentrated on. But morality is largely a toothless argument in the World Assembly, so I'm instead focusing on bioethics, which is far less ambiguous and not as passionate an issue for me, but an issue with original resolution nonetheless.

[float=left]Dr. Bradford William Castro

Ambassador-at-Large,
Permanent Chief of Mission for World Assembly affairs,
the Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes[/float][float=right][/float]

[New Olwe]

We here in New Olwe support the right of nations to legalize euthanasia, but would prefer to see it less regulated (in other words, here we just shoot them) than the original resolution. Also, the original resolution only allows for adults to be euthanized, which is blatant age discrimination. So, while we have qualms about the legitimacy of the stated reasons for the repeal, in the hopes of eventually seeing a better euthanasia resolution we support this proposal to repeal the first one.

Alyssa Locke, Olwean ambassador to the WA

[Chezchopoland]

if you are unahppy with it leave the WA

[Flibbleites]

if you are unahppy with it leave the WA

How about you not gravedig?