Controversial Policies and the Usefulness of Nonprofit, Private and Public Sector Partnerships: Introducing An Assisted Suicide Service in Ontario
Keywords:
assisted suicide, euthanasia, public-private-nonprofit sector partnerships, health policy, policy legitimacy, symbolic politics, horizontal governanceAbstract
This article addresses whether a partnership between the public, non-profit, and private sectors represents a feasible solution for dealing with contentious and symbolic public policy issues in the provision of assisted suicide service in Ontario. The first section outlines key characteristics of mature and integrated relationships among the three sectors. The second determines the parameters of acceptable policy by exploring the intersection between economic drivers and public opinion on assisted suicide:the Ontario government is intent on reducing health care expenditures, while public opinion increasingly favours end-of-life options but is wary of state pressure upon individuals to choose an early death in order to save on costly medical interventions. The third section demonstrates how a trisectoral partnership could build a model of an assisted suicide policy and service in Ontario by incorporating design elements from the Dignitas Clinic in Switzerland. This model would reduce the intensity of public opposition and gain public confidence by providing citizens with robust end-of-life options and the assurances they require. Finally, the paper argues that trisectoral policy partnerships are an appealing means for dealing with controversial policies imbued with symbolic meaning. Cet article analyse la faisabilité d'un partenariat réunissant les secteurs public, sans but lucratif et privé dans le but de gérer les questions controversées et symboliques que soulève la mise en place d'un service de suicide assisté en Ontario. Dans un premier temps, nous présentons les principales caractéristiques des relations solides et intégrées qui existent entre ces trois secteurs. Puis, nous définissons les paramètres d'une politique acceptable. Pour cela, nous examinons le point de convergence entre les moteurs de l'économie et l'opinion publique sur le suicide assisté : le gouvernement de l'Ontario est résolu à réduire les dépenses de santé, tandis que l'opinion publique se montre de plus en plus favorable aux options de fin de vie, mais craint que l'État ne fasse pression sur les malades pour les inciter à choisir une mort prématurée et ainsi éviter des interventions médicales coûteuses. Nous nous appuyons ensuite sur la structure de l'établissement suisse Dignitas pour démontrer comment un partenariat entre les trois secteurs pourrait servir de modèle en vue d’une politique et d’un service de suicide assisté en Ontario. Un tel modèle permettrait d'atténuer l'opposition du public et d'accroître la confiance des citoyens, grâce à des options de fin de vie fiables assorties des garanties requises. Pour conclure, nous avançons que les partenariats entre les trois secteurs constituent un moyen intéressant de gérer les politiques à forte charge litigieuse et symbolique.Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
1-The author guarantees that the manuscript is an original work not published elsewhere in print or electronically in whole or in part, except in abstract form, that the author has the full power to make this contribution, and that the manuscript contains no matter libelous or otherwise unlawful or which invades the right of privacy or which infringes any proprietary right.
2-The author guarantees that the manuscript has not been previously published in print or electronically and that if the manuscript contains any tables, figures or images fully reproduced or closely adapted from previously published material, the author must obtain the necessary permission from the author/publisher holding the original copyright prior to publication in CRSP. The author may be required to produce evidence of permission granted to CRSP’s editors.
3-As a condition of publication in CRSP, the author assigns all copyright to CRSP, including but not limited to the right to publish, republish, and otherwise distribute this manuscript in print, electronic, or other formats. As CRSP is a non-profit interdisciplinary scholarly journal, the author will receive no royalty or other monetary compensation for the assignment set forth in this agreement.
For the purpose of full disclosure, CRSP will not normally use the content provided by the author in a commercial venture, but for the purpose of disseminating the author’s content to as many readers as possible. For distribution, third parties engaging in commercial activities may be contracted to distribute the content globally, and such parties may make a profit out of the author’s content in their normal course of business. CRSP will not pay the author or reimburse the author in any form based on such commercial activities because the conduct of such commercial activities is outside the control of CRSP.
Any future reference to or use of this published material by the authors must acknowledge CRSP as the original place of publication.
PERMISSION REQUEST/ARCHIVING
Permission is given to author(s) receiving funding via Tri-Council Agencies, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC), to make their publications freely available in an Open Access repository within the stated deadline by the Tri-Council Agencies (12 months following publication). Archiving of publication must be a manuscript copy bearing none of the CRSP headers, footers or any other distinguishing marks. No links to the article on the CRSP website is permitted.
Permission requests from third parties to reproduce articles in part or full in academic/educational publications can be directed to the managing editor of CRSP, and will not be unreasonably denied.