Latimer: Criminal or not?

[EGO]

How about something different than Michael?

Is Latimer:

A) A merciful man, who acted in the best interest of his suffering daughter, sparing her a lifetime of pain and suffering? Is he someone who should be seen as compassionate and brave?

B) A selfish man, who only spared himself pain and suffering by killing his daughter. Do his actions de-humanize the disabled, or somehow put the disabled at a level below the rest of us making it easier to decide whether they are worthy of living or dying.

C) Somewhere in between or completely different?

[Laurel]

In Latimer's case, I think that the whole family was suffering by watching the daughter suffer. Could his daughter communicate to him that she didn't want to suffer anymore? or did he take it totally into his own hands to end her suffering. Did the rest of the family agree with him? She had no Quality of life and no chance of ever improving . Was he to slowly watch her die? He could have starved her...(slow painful death) poisoned her (again probably a slow painful death) Killed her with CO ( difficult to set up as accidental), but no. But he chose to end her suffering quickly and is paying the price for it . Some elderly people kill a suffering spouse, and they do not necessarily get a harsh sentence ( on compassionate grounds) Is it because she was a child that the court is outraged and hands down a harsh sentence? Was Latimer prepared to spend time in jail so that his daughter wouldn't suffer any longer? Who Knows?........ I know I've raised a lot of other thoughts, and questions, but I do believe that he was acting in his daughter's best interest and was expecting to face the consequences of his actions.

[EGO]

My opinion: I think he probably felt he was acting in his daughter's best interest, and knowing what I know about the case, I think he loved his daughter. This was probably the most difficult decision he has ever made. I think he knew the possible consequences, and is now paying the consequences, though I qualify that with the fact that he would like to get out of jail earlier.

Having said all of that, I think the court made the right decision, looking at the bigger picture. I'm sure Latimer felt trapped, and that there were no other options. Maybe there really weren't any other options. Parents of disabled kids are not supported nearly enough. But at the end of the day, with the bigger picture in mind, making the decision to take another's life devalues that person's life, and in this case, if the court were to go easy on Latimer, you would basically have the Supreme Court of Canada agreeing that it is OK to de-value the lives of disabled people. We already have provincial governments that do that, the court should stand firm. Were the court to treat him differently, there would be precedent, and where would it stop? I don't think anyone has the right to actively take another human being's life, disabled or not. The harsh reality is, life is never fair, and you have to deal with what you've been dealt, sometimes through no fault of your own. We all make choices, and we all have to deal with the consequences of our choices. Latimer is currently doing just that, as is the rest of his family. Letting him off would be the easy way out, and would not be in the best interests of others like Tracy. People need to take more interest in this case and others like it, and hopefully come to the conclusion that while he was wrong, this highlights the fact that the families are not supported enough, and they are burning out. The services the government provides are not enough and what is there is mis-managed. I'm sure if these parents and family members were not so burned out from having to work and support their family, as well as look after very high needs dependents, they would find it easier to be more vocal about their needs and rights.

Just my two cents worth.

[EGO]

My opinion: I think he probably felt he was acting in his daughter's best interest, and knowing what I know about the case, I think he loved his daughter. This was probably the most difficult decision he has ever made. I think he knew the possible consequences, and is now paying the consequences, though I qualify that with the fact that he would like to get out of jail earlier.

Having said all of that, I think the court made the right decision, looking at the bigger picture. I'm sure Latimer felt trapped, and that there were no other options. Maybe there really weren't any other options. Parents of disabled kids are not supported nearly enough. But at the end of the day, with the bigger picture in mind, making the decision to take another's life devalues that person's life, and in this case, if the court were to go easy on Latimer, you would basically have the Supreme Court of Canada agreeing that it is OK to de-value the lives of disabled people. We already have provincial governments that do that, the court should stand firm. Were the court to treat him differently, there would be precedent, and where would it stop? I don't think anyone has the right to actively take another human being's life, disabled or not. The harsh reality is, life is never fair, and you have to deal with what you've been dealt, sometimes through no fault of your own. We all make choices, and we all have to deal with the consequences of our choices. Latimer is currently doing just that, as is the rest of his family. Letting him off would be the easy way out, and would not be in the best interests of others like Tracy. People need to take more interest in this case and others like it, and hopefully come to the conclusion that while he was wrong, this highlights the fact that the families are not supported enough, and they are burning out. The services the government provides are not enough and what is there is mis-managed. I'm sure if these parents and family members were not so burned out from having to work and support their family, as well as look after very high needs dependents, they would find it easier to be more vocal about their needs and rights.

Just my two cents worth.

[EGO]

Sorry, didn't mean to post that twice...

[pend]

I think he did the right thing. We waste far too many resources keeping people alive when there is no quality of life. Fortunately we are starting to look at legal statements that indicate an individual does not want to be kept alive when the their life quality is zero. I find it strange that people have no problem having a pet put to sleep when its life has run its course, but feel it is different when applied to a human being. It was nice to see that the majority of people who answered the poll thaught he had done the right thing.

[krock]

Who gets to decide what quality of life is? Have you spent any time with a person with severe disabilities? Someone who doesn't communicate with speech? They too experience joy and sadness, and for people that are not educated in this area, this may be difficult to determine. I would never want to be the judge of whether someone has a "zero" quality of life, thus deciding to end it, or condoning someone who has. There are many different kinds of life that we have been given, and because some of us cannot imagine living; without speech, or movement, or the ability to feed ourselves, or the ability to hear, or a great intelligence, i don't think we should pass judgement on whether that person has a quality of life.

As someone who has worked in this field for many years, I find it a constant struggle to try to educate people on this matter. People with disabilities deserve to be accepted in our communities. They are not to be feared or de-valued because of their differences. They are real people with love and happiness, and struggles. They communicate and live in different ways than most of us, which scares many people. I think what scares people most, is the thought of one day finding ourselves in that position, and living as we do now, that would be unthinkable, and we can't imagine it. How many people have said to their spouses: "If I ever end up like that.....Pull the plug". You see, that is the difference; YOU have made that choice. Someone hasn't decided that for you.

And as an aside; Most people put their pets to 'sleep' when they are diseased, or dying due to old age, or in chronic pain. People with disabilities are not dying, they are not in constant physical misery or pain. Cerebral palsy causes no pain, it is a disability, not an illness or sickness. They are not being kept alive by machines, so there is no "plug" to pull.

Thanks for reading.

[EGO]

Well said krock.

Pend, I find it interesting that you compare a pet to a child. But I guess everyone is entitled to their opinion. I think if I was one of your loved ones, and I got in a serious accident, I would ban you from visiting me in the hospital for fear of being un-plugged.

("I'm OK, really, it's only a flesh wound...nothing to see here...)

[MyParentsHouse]

I agree there had to be a price to pay for him but in compassion I say that he did probably what I would have done but who is to say because I was not in his shoes.....This is in Saskatchewan...we had a case here not too long ago...But instead of just doing in their disabled son they took their own lives with him. They could not bear the burden anymore and knew that he wasn't going to last much longer and had no help readily available to them....they were on constant burn out. With no help, burn out, with burn out comes depression with that who knows what can happen. Well we saw what burn out did to a local family here. We lost 3 beautiful lives because of it. I agree there is VERY LITTLE help for those people who may need it most. These were very CARING and giving people...who loved people AND their family...Belva, Morris and Reese will always live in my memory for what they gave to us as people...constant giving and sharing of what htey had their love, their home and their love. It is comming up on the anniversary of losing them.....and we still miss them, but in saying that...I wish they had of asked for help from those of us still willing to help out....but in pride and in a depressed state(they wouldn't even answer the door anymore to ANYONE including family) I guess the mind does strange things. They fell asleep looking at pictures of friends and family with him just like they did any other night....so sad.

[pend]

I respect your opinion Ego, but it is in the event that we were in a serious accident that both my wife and I have signed living wills so that we would not be a burden to society. I could think of nothing worse than being in a hospital bed unable to feed myself, go to the bathroom and having to rely on other people for maybe years. The will simply stipulates that no heroic steps be taken to prolong my life in the event that my condition should worsen. ie no restarting my heart, no prolonged medical treatment in the event of pneumonia etc etc.
We are getting away from Latimer but I sort of remember that he did what he did because his daughter was in extrteme pain and it was not just a matter of being disabled. I agree that being disabled is not the end of everthing and there can still be some quality of life. It is up to the individual to say when enough is enough. Too bad we can not go to a vet!!