MAiD
Assisted suicide is never really about ‘choice’: here’s why
From LifeSiteNews
Just a few years ago, we understood that suicidal ideation itself was an indication that something was seriously wrong – but our euthanasia regime has changed all of that.
Just last week, I wrote a column on the normalization of euthanasia and the sinister insistence by those who advocate for it that being killed by lethal injection is, in fact, both a good and a life-saving thing. We are seeing the complete perversion of language in order to justify medicalized killing, which is why you don’t read terms like “killing” or “suicide” in the context of the euthanasia debate in the press. Activists realized very quickly that these terms were unhelpful in the push for normalization.
Earlier this month, Canadian MP Kevin Lamoureux, a Liberal, took it a step further, stating: “MAiD [assisted suicide] legislation, even on occasion, I would ultimately argue, saves lives.”
🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯 pic.twitter.com/bFU57gKxCJ
— Michelle Ferreri (@mferreriptbokaw) February 12, 2024
What a truly insane thing to say – and the sad fact is, he likely believes it. He also likely doesn’t realize how dangerous his statement is. What message is being sent to those the government has deemed eligible for state-facilitated suicide? Euthanasia is, legally speaking, a choice. But just as with abortion, the “choice” is often a farcical one.
When women were legally granted the “choice” of abortion, it swiftly became an expectation. Sick, sad, and depressed people may be told they merely have the “choice” to be euthanized – but as we have seen, this choice often seems like a social obligation.
This point was made in a recent essay about euthanasia in Newsweek by Katherine Brodsky, who supports euthanasia in principle. She has, however, come to have doubts that a euthanasia regime in which choice is freely exercised is possible. She writes:
I am now skeptical about the true autonomy of individuals opting for assisted death, especially in a country with socialized health care. The risk of medical practitioners recommending MAiD as a cost-cutting measure to alleviate strain on the health care system is unsettling, as suggested by a 2020 analysis estimating potential annual savings of save $66 million annually in health care costs. Individuals considering MAiD are already vulnerable due to physical or mental suffering, making them susceptible to external pressures. Reflecting on my own past struggles, I recognize the unpredictability of emotions and circumstances. What seems unbearable one day may change with time and support – yet the choice to end life is a permanent one.
Fortunately, the Canadian government has delayed – for the second time – expanding euthanasia to those suffering from mental illness. But they insist that this is a delay, not a cancellation, meaning that the position of the Trudeau government is that someone suffering acute despair caused by a mental illness is clear-headed enough to choose suicide-by-doctor. This is obviously untrue, and I genuinely wonder why the government seems so hellbent on doing this. Just a few years ago, we understood that suicidal ideation itself was an indication that something was seriously wrong – but our euthanasia regime has changed all of that.
Brodsky notes that the “choice” being offered to a specific subset of Canadians who have been pre-approved for this “choice” – a choice not offered to all Canadians, but only those the government has decided have lives not worth living – is often a false one. Citing the example of Lauren Hoeve, the Dutch girl who was euthanized earlier this year, she notes:
And yet, I was struck by something in the statement put out by Lauren Hoeve’s parents. ‘Millions of people are affected by ME/CFS, with no established treatment pathways and no cure,’ they wrote on X on Feb. 2. ‘Why is their suffering acknowledged enough for euthanasia but not enough to fund clinical research?’ And herein lies the rub. Why is euthanasia offered as a viable solution to a potentially non-permanent problem, when other options are possible?
Mental health services in Canada (and elsewhere) are scarce. Psychologists are expensive and out of reach for many. Psychiatric services are free of charge, but the wait lists are even longer than those for psychologists and few people can get access. The wait to get help is usually over a year. Family physicians just end up prescribing medications based on a checklist and see what sticks.
READ: Terminally ill children in the Netherlands can now be euthanized against their will
Precisely true. We know that many people in Canada have chosen euthanasia because it was the only “choice” being offered to them at all. Cancer patients who cannot get the treatment they actually want have opted for suicide-by-doctor instead. One woman noted that her requests for additional help to deal with her chronic condition were denied, and thus euthanasia was, she felt, the only option left available. “Ultimately it was not a genetic disease that took me out, it was a system,” she wrote. “There is desperate need for change. That is the sickness that causes so much suffering. Vulnerable people need help to survive. I could have had more time if I had more help.”
So, what does an ill and suffering Canadian hear when an MP stands up in the House of Commons and says that euthanasia “saves lives”? They know it doesn’t save their life. As Amanda Achtman noted: “Obviously, it’s not the lives of those being killed that are being saved. Such a utilitarian calculation amounts to a war against the weak and this is dehumanizing and wrong.”
MAiD
Quebec set to take euthanasia requests in advance, violating federal law
From LifeSiteNews
Quebec has the highest rate of MAiD in Canada. The province saw a 17 percent increase in euthanasia deaths in 2023 compared to 2022, with the program claiming the lives of 5,686 people. The high figure represents a staggering 7.3 percent of all deaths in the province, putting Quebec at the top of the list worldwide.
Despite the practice being illegal at the federal level, Quebec says it plans to go ahead with taking euthanasia requests in advance.
In an October 24 post on X, Sonia Bélanger, the Quebec minister responsible for seniors, announced that the province would be moving forward with taking “advance requests” for euthanasia, called “Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD),” regardless of the policy’s violation of the Criminal Code of Canada.
As it stands, in order for a person to be killed by euthanasia in Canada, they must provide “consent” at the time of the procedure. So-called “advance requests” would allow a person to approve their killing at a future date, meaning the procedure would be carried out even if they are incapable of consenting, due to diminished mental capacity or other factors, when the pre-approved death date comes.
“Quebec has full jurisdiction to legislate in the area of health care,” Bélanger wrote in French. “The advance request for MAiD is a consensus in Quebec.”
“This is a real concern for Quebecers and on October 30, we will respect their choices by moving forward,” Bélanger continued.
In September, the province announced they would soon be taking advance requests for MAiD after the June 2023 passing of Bill 11.
In Canada, there are two euthanasia laws, those passed by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government and those passed solely in the province of Quebec. The 2023 passing of Bill 11 in Quebec expanded MAiD to those with serious physical disability, mandated that hospices offer the procedure and allowed euthanasia by advance request.
The decision to enact the legislation came after senior ministers from the provincial government said they would not “wait any longer” for Canada’s federal Criminal Code to be amended to allow the change.
While the Trudeau government has clarified that advance requests are illegal, recent comments imply Quebec will be allowed to proceed with its plan without interference.
“The Criminal Code has not changed. It is still illegal in this country under the Criminal Code to enact advance requests,” federal Health Minister Mark Holland said during an October 28 press conference before adding that he “can’t direct” how a province administers its “judicial system” and that is is “extremely important to say that we have a spirit of cooperation here, that the issue that Quebec raises is a legitimate and fair issue.”
Holland also said that the federal government will launch a countrywide consultation regarding the practice of advance requests in November, with a report due in March 2025.
Quebec has the highest rate of MAiD in Canada. The province saw a 17 percent increase in euthanasia deaths in 2023 compared to 2022, with the program claiming the lives of 5,686 people. The high figure represents a staggering 7.3 percent of all deaths in the province, putting Quebec at the top of the list worldwide.
MAiD is not just on the rise in Quebec but throughout Canada as well. Since legalizing the deadly practice at the federal level in 2016, Trudeau’s Liberal government has continued to expanded who can qualify for death. In 2021, the Trudeau government passed a bill that permitted the killing of those who are not terminally ill, but who suffer solely from chronic disease. The government has also attempted to expand the practice to those suffering solely from mental illness, but have delayed until 2027 after pushback from pro-life, medical, and mental health groups as well as most of Canada’s provinces.
Overall, the number of Canadians killed by lethal injection since 2016 stands at close to 65,000, with an estimated 16,000 deaths in 2023 alone. Many fear that because the official statistics are manipulated the number may be even higher.
MAiD
New report shows people are seeking euthanasia because they’re ‘isolated,’ afraid of being homeless
From LifeSiteNews
By Susan Ciancio, American Life League
According to Ontario’s chief coroner, ‘people asking to be killed’ through euthanasia ‘were more likely to require disability support and be socially isolated,’ and one woman in her 50s ‘asked to die largely because she could not get proper housing.’
Those of us who value the life of all human beings understand the dangers of assisted suicide, or “medical assistance in dying,” as it is euphemistically called in Canada. But now, others have begun to see the horrors of Canada’s laws. A recent article in the Frederick News-Post begins, “An expert committee reviewing euthanasia deaths in Canada’s most populous province has identified several cases where patients asked to be killed in part for social reasons such as isolation and fears of homelessness.”
The article examines reports issued by Ontario’s chief coroner, who reviewed the euthanasia deaths of those who did not have an allegedly terminal illness. It explains that “Canada’s legal criteria require a [purported] medical reason for euthanasia—a fatal diagnosis or unmanageable pain—but the committee’s reports show cases where people were euthanized based on other factors including an ‘unmet social need.’”
A doctor on this expert committee said she feels vindicated that people are seeing the horrors of what Canada’s laws are doing to people. She stated, “We’ve been gaslit for so many years when we raised fears about people getting MAiD because they were poor, disabled or socially isolated.”
Two such cases were discussed in the article. One was a man in his 40s who suffered with a bowel disease and who had a history of both mental illness and substance abuse. The report described him as “socially vulnerable and isolated.”
The second was a woman in her 50s who was “suffering from multiple chemical sensitivity syndrome” and who had a history of PTSD and mental illness. The report states that “she was socially isolated and asked to die largely because she could not get proper housing.”
This report emphasizes what those of us in the pro-life field have been saying for years. Euthanasia is a slippery slope. For example, when a country or a state allows a sick or dying person to end his life prematurely, we open the door for ambiguity of the word “sick.”
Indeed, what is most disturbing about the findings of this report is that the Ontario coroner found that the “people asking to be killed were more likely to require disability support and be socially isolated.”
What does that say about us as a society when people would rather die because they feel they have no one to help take care of them?
Our society puts more emphasis on what a person can do than on who a person is. Human beings have become like commodities that we discard when they are no longer useful.
Caring for others should not be something we are forced to do. It should be something we lovingly do. That doesn’t mean it’s easy. In fact, it can be incredibly difficult to care for someone who is sick or dying. That’s why it should never be something done alone. It takes a team of caregivers – from family, to friends, to sometimes paid staff in facilities or those who make house calls.
For years, I have seen this loving care firsthand with my uncle, whose wife passed away last week after battling dementia. He cared for her at home until he was physically unable to do so. The disease made her combative, and for his health and her safety, he moved her into a care facility.
But unlike some facilities that have staff who leave residents alone in their rooms or in chairs in large common rooms, those at this facility cared for her. My uncle visited her daily, and he always had glowing remarks about how kindly the staff treated her.
My uncle is a model of self-giving love that is increasingly uncommon in today’s world. He didn’t stop loving his wife when she became ill. He didn’t think she was better off dead. He didn’t find her to be a burden. On the contrary, he continued to love her because of who she was. The disease stole her memory, but it did not steal his love for her.
This is the epitome of loving care. This is what it means to be Christ’s hands on earth and to see people with His eyes.
Suffering is never easy, but walking with someone in their suffering is what we are called to do. My uncle did that beautifully, and he is a model to other struggling caregivers.
If everyone who was sick or suffering had people to lovingly care for and protect them, I daresay that the desire for assisted suicide would greatly diminish. After all, who would want to hasten death when they feel loved and cherished?
Susan Ciancio is a graduate of the University of Notre Dame and has worked as a writer and editor for over 20 years; 15 of those years have been in the pro-life sector. Currently, she is the editor of American Life League’s Celebrate Life Magazine—the nation’s premier Catholic pro-life magazine. She is also the director and executive editor of ALL’s Culture of Life Studies Program—a pre-K-12 Catholic pro-life education organization.
-
C2C Journal1 day ago
Mischief Trial of the Century: Inside the Crown’s Bogus, Punitive and Occasionally Hilarious Case Against the Freedom Convoy’s Tamara Lich and Chris Barber, Part I
-
Bruce Dowbiggin2 days ago
Why Canada’s Elites Are Captives To The Kamala Narrative
-
Business1 day ago
Premiers fight to lower gas taxes as Trudeau hikes pump costs
-
Agriculture1 day ago
Sweeping ‘pandemic prevention’ bill would give Trudeau government ability to regulate meat production
-
Economy2 days ago
Gas prices plummet in BC thanks to TMX pipeline expansion
-
Alberta2 days ago
Another Blow To The Carbon Tax
-
Economy2 days ago
One Solution to Canada’s Housing Crisis: Move. Toronto loses nearly half million people to more affordable locations
-
Business2 days ago
Trudeau government spends millions producing podcasts