Thank you.
I am, by my nature, not overly enthusiastic about MAID, having spent 35 years trying to do the opposite, providing people with life. That's certainly one of the reasons.
I have worked a lot in developing countries. It seems to me questionably ethical that we're putting all this money into helping people to die here when so many people around the world, but for a few dollars, die in other places.
Having said that, Bill C-7 was drafted after extensive consultation, including with the disabled.
Specifically on the question of removing the reasonable foreseeability of death criteria from the law, we've heard a lot of people today who are against that. To those people, I ask, what do you say to somebody who has a high spinal cord injury and ends up quadriplegic at a young age?
Dr. Goligher, as a fellow emergency room doctor, I'm sure you've seen some horrible injuries—burns, disfiguring injuries. I certainly hope that all those people manage, and we've seen them at least with the specific injury, and we certainly hope their life remains worth living, but for some people that may not be the case. Even though we provide them with all the assistance we can, they can still decide that they don't want to live that life with those disabilities. If, God forbid, this happened to any of my six kids—and certainly if it did I would do my best to make their life worth living—at some point should they decide they don't want to live, and you love them, shouldn't we be giving them the opportunity, should they wish to end it?
What is your proposal, then? Should those people not be given the option?
I throw that to anyone out there.