Of 2,025 medical specialists who answered a poll on the subject, 75 per cent said they were “certainly” or “probably” in favour of legalizing euthanasia, as long as the practice were strictly regulated.

The president of the federation of medical specialists, Dr. Gaétan Barrette, said doctors already see some form of euthanasia in the course of their work.

“Eighty one per cent of doctors do see the practice of euthanasia given the circumstances in their practice,” Barrette said. “They hear their patients, they see their patients, asking for it.”

The Fédération’s president, Dr. Gaétan Barrette, claims that the polling data demonstrates that, “the specialists are in step with Quebec society”; however, a recent poll by by Angus Reid demonstrates that the Fédération’s position may well be applicable far more widely than just in Quebec.

In the September 2009 poll, Angus Reid compared attitudes on euthanasia between Canadians, Britons, and  Americans and concluded that there is a strong majority (71%) of Canadian who support legalizing euthanasia in some form and that those attitude cohere with those held by respondents in the UK, but are divergent from opinions of respondents in the US.

Even more striking is how stable the numbers remain when compared across a cross-section of age ranges,

In the prostrations of my adult life, I’ve always found myself drawn to the “right to die with dignity” argument about terminally ill individuals having an inherent right to self-determination in an existential (as opposed to political) sense. My life has been, in many regards, populated by instances of death from an early age including the two grandfathers I never had the chance to meet, to my father who died when I was nine,  the death of one of my grandmothers six years ago, the impending passing of my remaining grandmother. As such, cliched though it is, I can’t but see death as a wholly natural component of existence itself and not something to be shut out from discussion or consideration around the trajectory of one’s life.

It is, to my mind, regrettable that we only really have a discussion about euthanasia and it’s appropriate (or inappropriate, depending on your view) place within society in the wake of controversial and high profile circumstances such as Robert Latimer here in Canada and, of course, Terri Schiavo in the US (ironic the outcomes of those two cases given the attitudinal differences between the two countries). So I can’t help but see the debate absent any highly-charged attending/impending decision as a positive and healthy step rather than attempting to parse arguments and considerations on-the-fly (pace Schiavo) or after the fact (pace Latimer).

Obviously strong opponents to euthanasia are likely to stand athwart any proposed legislation. Any willingness to discuss details of such legislation would be, de facto, an admission of some kernal or moral integrity in the arguments of euthanasia proponents. That said, I wonder if the overwhelming support that the issue seems to have in Canada is a good indicator that, rather than boycotting the issue and potential resulting process altogether, euthanasia opponents would be best served to ensure that the “strict regulations” qualifying the Fédération’s members’ support are up to the task of properly shaping appropriate application.

If the writing is on the wall in regards to euthanasia in Canada based on public opinion, I think it makes sense a.) to have legislation directing all related activities in a dispassionate manner (at the time) and b.) to ensure that the legislation as comprehensive as possible and informed by the arguments and ideas of all sides, or at least having had those arguments/ideas considered.

Related posts...

• The End of the Popularity Contest
• Same-Sex Marriage and Divorce, By the Numbers
• Mashup Part Deux – Quote of the Day + Chart of the Day