Great Reset
Assisted suicide activists should not be running our MAID program
From the MacDonald Laurier Institute
By Shawn Whatley
We should keep the right-to-die foxes out of the regulatory henhouse
The federal government chose a right-to-die advocacy group to help implement its medical assistance in dying legislation. It’s a classic case of regulatory capture, otherwise known as letting the foxes guard the henhouse.
In the “Fourth annual report on Medical Assistance in Dying in Canada 2022,” the federal government devoted several paragraphs of praising to the Canadian Association of MAID Assessors and Providers (CAMAP).
“Since its inception in 2017, (CAMAP) has been and continues to be an important venue for information sharing among health-care professionals and other stakeholders involved in MAID,” reads the report.
With $3.3 million in federal funding, “CAMAP has been integral in creating a MAID assessor/provider community of practice, hosts an annual conference to discuss emerging issues related to the delivery of MAID and has developed several guidance materials for health-care professionals.”
Six clinicians in British Columbia formed CAMAP, a national non-profit association, in October 2016. These six right-to-die advocates published clinical guidelines for MAID in 2017, without seriously consulting other physician organizations.
The guidelines educate clinicians on their “professional obligation to (bring) up MAID as a care option for patients, when it is medically relevant and they are likely eligible for MAID.” CAMAP’s guidelines apply to Canada’s 96,000 physicians, 312,000 nurses and the broader health-care workforce of two-million Canadians, wherever patients are involved.
The rise of CAMAP overlaps with right-to-die advocacy work in Canada. According to Sandra Martin, writing in the Globe and Mail, CAMAP “follow(ed) in the steps of Dying with Dignity,” an advocacy organization started in the 1980s, and “became both a public voice and a de facto tutoring service for doctors, organizing information-swapping and self-help sessions for members.”
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau tapped this “tutoring service” to lead the MAID program. CAMAP appears to follow the steps of Dying with Dignity, because the same people lead both groups. For example, Shanaaz Gokool, a current director of CAMAP, served as CEO of Dying with Dignity from 2016 to 2019.
A founding member and current chair of the board of directors of CAMAP is also a member of Dying with Dignity’s clinician advisory council. One of the advisory council’s co-chairs is also a member of Dying with Dignity’s board of directors, as well as a moderator of the CAMAP MAID Providers Forum. The other advisory council co-chair served on both the boards of CAMAP and Dying with Dignity at the same time.
Overlap between CAMAP and Dying with Dignity includes CAMAP founders, board members (past and present), moderators, research directors and more, showing that a small right-to-die advocacy group birthed a tiny clinical group, which now leads the MAID agenda in Canada. This is a problem because it means that a small group of activists exert outsized control over a program that has serious implications for many Canadians.
George Stigler, a Noble-winning economist, described regulatory capture in the 1960s, showing how government agencies can be captured to serve special interests.
Instead of serving citizens, focused interests can shape governments to serve narrow and select ends. Pharmaceutical companies work hard to write the rules that regulate their industry. Doctors demand government regulations — couched in the name of patient safety — to decrease competition. The list is endless.
Debates about social issues can blind us to basic governance. Anyone who criticizes MAID governance is seen as being opposed to assisted death and is shut out of the debate. At the same time, the world is watching Canada and trying to figure out what is going on with MAID and why we are so different than other jurisdictions offering assisted suicide.
Canada moved from physician assisted suicide being illegal to becoming a world leader in organ donation after assisted death in the space of just six years.
In 2021, Quebec surpassed the Netherlands to lead the world in per capita deaths by assisted suicide, with 5.1 per cent of deaths due to MAID in Quebec, 4.8 per cent in the Netherlands and 2.3 per cent in Belgium. In 2022, Canada extended its lead: MAID now represents 4.1 per cent of all deaths in Canada.
How did this happen so fast? Some point to patients choosing MAID instead of facing Canada’s world-famous wait times for care. Others note a lack of social services. No doubt many factors fuel our passion for MAID, but none of these fully explain the phenomenon. In truth, Canada became world-famous for euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide because we put right-to-die advocates in charge of assisted death.
Regardless of one’s stance on MAID, regulatory capture is a well-known form of corruption. We should expect governments to avoid obvious conflicts of interest. Assuming Canadians want robust and ready access to MAID (which might itself assume too much), at least we should keep the right-to-die foxes out of the regulatory henhouse.
Shawn Whatley is a physician, a Munk senior fellow with the Macdonald-Laurier Institute and author of “When Politics Comes Before Patients: Why and How Canadian Medicare is Failing.”
MxM News
Quick Hit:
PepsiCo is the latest major U.S. company to adjust its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies as 47th President Donald Trump continues his campaign to end DEI practices across the federal government and private sector. The company is shifting away from workforce representation goals and repurposing its DEI leadership, signaling a broader trend among American corporations.
Key Details:
-
PepsiCo will end DEI workforce representation goals and transition its chief DEI officer to focus on associate engagement and leadership development.
-
The company is introducing a new “Inclusion for Growth” strategy as its five-year DEI plan concludes.
-
PepsiCo joins other corporations, including Target and Alphabet-owned Google, in reconsidering DEI policies following Trump’s call to end “illegal DEI discrimination and preferences.”
Diving Deeper:
PepsiCo has announced significant changes to its DEI initiatives, aligning with a growing movement among U.S. companies to revisit diversity policies amid political pressure. According to an internal memo, the snacks and beverages giant will no longer pursue DEI workforce representation goals. Instead, its chief DEI officer will transition to a broader role that focuses on associate engagement and leadership development. This shift is part of PepsiCo’s new “Inclusion for Growth” strategy, set to replace its expiring five-year DEI plan.
The company’s decision to reevaluate its DEI policies comes as President Donald Trump continues his push against DEI practices, urging private companies to eliminate what he calls “illegal DEI discrimination and preferences.” Trump has also directed federal agencies to terminate DEI programs and has warned that academic institutions could face federal funding cuts if they continue with such policies.
PepsiCo is not alone in its reassessment. Other major corporations, including Target and Google, have also modified or are considering changes to their DEI programs. This trend reflects a broader corporate response to the evolving political landscape surrounding DEI initiatives.
Additionally, PepsiCo is expanding its supplier base by broadening opportunities for all small businesses to participate, regardless of demographic categories. The company will also discontinue participation in single demographic category surveys, further signaling its shift in approach to DEI.
As companies like PepsiCo navigate these changes, the debate over the future of DEI in corporate America continues. With Trump leading a campaign against these practices, more companies may follow suit in reevaluating their DEI strategies.
From LifeSiteNews
The decision was otherwise roundly condemned on X as “horrific,” “horrendous,” the hallmark of a “dictatorship,” and even “the biggest breach of privacy Western civilization has ever seen.”
Apple Store on New York’s Fifth Avenue.
Apple pulled its highest-level security feature in the U.K. after the government ordered the company to give it access to user data.
The U.K. government demanded “blanket access” to all user accounts around the world rather than to specific ones, a move unprecedented in major democracies, according to The Washington Post.
The security tool at issue in the U.K. is Advanced Data Protection (ADP), which provides end-to-end encryption so that only owners of particular data – and reportedly not even Apple – can access it.
“Apple can no longer offer Advanced Data Protection (ADP) in the United Kingdom to new users and current UK users will eventually need to disable this security feature,” an Apple spokesman said.
According to Apple, the removal of ADP will not affect iCloud data types that are end-to-end encrypted by default such as iMessage and FaceTime.
The nine iCloud categories that will reportedly no longer have ADP protection are iCloud Backup, iCloud Drive, Photos, Notes, Reminders, Safari Bookmarks, Siri Shortcuts, Voice Memos, Wallet Passes, and Freeform.
These types of data will be covered only by standard data protection, the default setting for accounts.
Journalist and Twitter Files whistleblower Michael Schellenberger slammed the U.K.-initiated move as “totalitarian.”
The decision was otherwise roundly condemned on X as “horrific,” “horrendous,” the hallmark of a “dictatorship,” and even “the biggest breach of privacy Western civilization has ever seen.”
Elon Musk declared Friday that such a privacy breach “would have happened in America” if President Donald Trump had not been elected.
Jake Moore, global cybersecurity adviser at ESET, commented that the move marks “a huge step backwards in the protection of privacy online.”
“Creating a backdoor for ethical reasons means it will inevitably only be a matter of time before threat actors also find a way in,” Moore said.
Britain reportedly made the privacy invasion demand under the authority of the Investigatory Powers Act of 2016.
Germany’s Shocking War on Online Speech: Armed Police Raids for Online “Insults,” “Hate Speech,” and “Misinformation”
Riots and hijackings — why ICE cuffs and shackles some deportees
Dr. Deborah Birx Makes Two Shocking COVID Admissions
Canada badly misjudged the future of LNG
-
Carbon Tax2 days agoMark Carney has history of supporting CBDCs, endorsed Freedom Convoy crackdown
-
Indigenous15 hours agoTrudeau gov’t to halt funds for ‘unmarked graves’ search after millions spent, no bodies found
-
Censorship Industrial Complex2 days agoBipartisan US Coalition Finally Tells Europe, and the FBI, to Shove It
-
Health2 days agoTrump HHS officially declares only two sexes: ‘Back to science and common sense’
-
Business1 day agoFederal Heritage Minister recommends nearly doubling CBC funding and reducing accountability
-
International2 days agoSenate votes to confirm Kash Patel as Trump’s FBI director
-
Business1 day agoArgentina’s Javier Milei gives Elon Musk chainsaw
-
Business2 days agoGovernment debt burden increasing across Canada