The Doer Makes the Difference
Support for every policy must account for the incompetence of the state bureaucrats implementing it.
When Canada was about to introduce legislation to legalize medically-assisted suicide, I was all for it. It seemed to me that there were many situations in which death was preferable to life, and we were depriving those who needed this help from the dignity we afford our pets. I thought Dr. Kavorkian was a hero, and his imprisonment was unjust.
I still believe all of this, but in the ensuing years, I have been forced to update my stance not only on medically-assistance in dying (MAID as it has become known in Canada) but on a plethora of issues. What I was missing, in thinking so theoretically about whether MAID was a good thing or not, was accounting for the incompetent actors who would be in charge.
When I envisioned what MAID would look like, I was thinking about Dr. Kavorkian and how he helped his patients die. His relationship with his patients was exactly what you would hope from a doctor-patient relationship. He knew them, he had a relationship with them, he understood their pain, and he knew their wishes. Once MAID was legalized in Canada, however, it was inevitable that instead of this personal relationship between a doctor and the patient, it was going to be the government bureaucracy that would make decisions of life and death.
In hindsight, the speed with which MAID went from something to grant dignity to those suffering from incurable diseases to being an abhorrent and disgusting practice being actively encouraged by the Canadian government should have surprised nobody. Today, our perpetually encumbered and poorly-run health care system is trying to lighten its load by suggesting suicide to anyone who will hear it. We've had morbid, grotesque TV advertisement glorifying choosing death over life even in circumstances where treatments clearly exist and suicide is not the patient's choice. And the list of conditions for which suicide is an appropriate suggestion by the physician has consistently grown. Are you a veteran with chronic pain? We'll help you kill yourself. Do you have cancer and the wait times to get treatment are too long? We'll help you kill yourself. Are you mentally ill – a designation that our health establishment gladly hands out like candy? We'll help you kill yourself.
This is the crux of the matter: no matter how sensible a policy sounds in a vacuum or in theory, you must always account for the fact that it will be implement by the inept central-planner-wannabes of the state. And once you realize this, you'll soon realize there is only one question that really matters on any given legislation or policy issue: does it add to the powers of these parasites or reduce it?
You might, like me, imagine that giving people greater liberty or autonomy over their bodies is a good thing. But you must also account for the reality that the implementation of such a policy will ultimately be held tightly by government bureaucrats. Then you might gain more sympathy for the folks who talk about the sanctity of life. Sure, that policy doesn't grant dignity to some people in pain, but if you hand the power of death the bureaucracy, you might soon see your suicide numbers inflate like your currency.