If you're asking me whether we try things without purpose, or let's see if it works because we have nothing to lose, the answer is no. I never get to that point. I have standard treatments that work, and it takes a long time to get there. The process of healing is slow. If you are asking me whether I think people should try experimental treatments, to me that's a matter of subjective choice. I'm not pressuring anyone to do anything. I'm offering standard treatments, and the standard treatments work.
It's an astonishing thing to me that if the treatment isn't available, and Dr. Wiebe is saying you can't get to see someone.... I'm wondering whether any of you would say “I'm going to die because I can't get the right care”, or are we people in a position of privilege, where we say, “I'm going to go to the States, or I'm going to pay for it somewhere else”? It's actually been said out loud, we'll let people die. We've seen in the news: Let people die because they can't get an apartment. Irremediability, on my understanding of the Supreme Court ruling and subsequent legislation, had nothing to do with psychosocial resources. We were talking about diseases. These were medical diseases—brain diseases we're talking about now—where we couldn't medically treat them.
Boy, has the barn door been opened wide here if that counts as irremediable. I'm going to cite this as a specific example of my great fear of the abuses that are going to follow with this legislation, because there's no oversight. There's no requirement that there be prospective judgment of what the doctors and nurse practitioners are doing. If Dr. Wiebe is going to let someone die because they can't get a treatment that will help them, then I'm frankly just shocked. That is not what this law is about, nor should it be. If we as a Canadian society are willing to let people die over apartments, I'm frankly just disgusted. Forgive my passion here, but you're parliamentarians with a duty to preserve life.