From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

“We see a pattern of not following legislation, a pattern of not following regulation, and frankly we can’t just continue to do education to those folks if they’re directly repeating stuff that we’ve brought to their attention”

Ontario euthanasia regulators have reportedly tracked 428 cases of potential legal violations, but failed to refer a single case to law enforcement. 

According to leaked information published November 11 by The New Atlantis, the Ontario Office of the Chief Coroner has counted 428 cases of non-compliance with Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) regulations since 2017, “ranging from broken safeguards to patients who were euthanized who may not have been capable of consent.”

“We see a pattern of not following legislation, a pattern of not following regulation, and frankly we can’t just continue to do education to those folks if they’re directly repeating stuff that we’ve brought to their attention,” Dirk Huyer, head of Ontario Office of the Chief Coroner, said in the documents.  

When MAiD was first introduced in 2016, it was initially only available to those who were terminally ill, and those killing the patients had to follow a series of steps before administering the lethal drugs. Later, in 2021, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government expanded the deadly practice to be available to those who are not at risk of death but who suffer solely from chronic illness.  

The New Atlantis’ report cites documentation from 2018 which shows that Huyer, despite admitting regulations are routinely ignored, still stood by the MAiD regime, attesting  that “[e]very case is reported. Everybody has scrutiny on all of these cases. From an oversight point of view, trying to understand when it happens and how it happens, we’re probably the most robust in Canada.”  

However, in the summer of 2017, just a year after MAiD was legalized, Huyer co-authored a paper which talked about the high rate of non-compliance among euthanasia providers, a trend that only seems to have continued.

“The MAID regulations require clinicians to notify the pharmacist of the purpose of the MAID medications before they are dispensed,” the paper noted, adding that only 61% of the physicians followed the rule. 

Additionally, many physicians disregarded the 10-day waiting period between requesting MAiD and receiving the drug. Doctors argued that they expedited the process due to “persistent requests” or an “inconvenient timing of the death in relation to other familial life events.” 

By 2018, the problem had developed into what Huyer described as “a pattern of not following legislation,” causing him to implement a new system “to respond to concerns that arise about potential compliance issues.” 

But in 2023, his office raised concerns for a quarter of all euthanasia “providers” in Ontario. Concerns included offering MAiD to dementia patients and those with cognitive impairment.

In 2023 alone, the office found 178 compliance problems, an average of one every second day. Now, the total number of compliance issues sits at 428. 

While the first cases of non-compliance were brought to light in 2017, the police have never been contacted according to The New Atlantis. In fact, the numbers are rarely made public, and when they are it is often through the quiet publishing of data in obscure reports.   

As for the MAiD providers who failed to follow the regulations, instead of being reported to police by regulators, they received an “informal conversation” or an “educational” or “notice” email.   

As disappointing as it is that euthanasia providers’ disregard of patients had little to no consequences, it is in keeping with the culture of death created by legalizing MAiD in the first place.  

Since there can be no such thing as “moral” euthanasia, it comes as little surprise to pro-lifers that regulations are not followed. Indeed, in July, euthanasia provider and abortionist Ellen Wiebe  enthusiastically revealed that she has killed over 400 patients under Canada’s permissive regime, a statement that drew international headlines with people concerned about the seeming nonchalant treatment of human life.  

However, there are some doctors who have realized the dangers of MAiD and have questioned the morality of the practice, at least in certain cases, with some physicians noting that many patients  choosing euthanasia are doing so principally because they are impoverished or lonely.

The most recent reports show that MAiD is the sixth highest cause of death in Canada. However, it was not listed as such in Statistics Canada’s top 10 leading causes of death from 2019 to 2022.    

When asked why MAiD was left off the list, the agency said that it records the illnesses that led Canadians to choose to end their lives via euthanasia, not the actual cause of death, as the primary cause of death.  

According to Health Canada, in 2022, 13,241 Canadians died by MAiD lethal injections. This accounts for 4.1 percent of all deaths in the country for that year, a 31.2 percent increase from 2021.  

From LifeSiteNews

By Jonathon Van Maren

In 1956, Marian Tompson and six other women founded the La Leche League in Illinois to promote breastfeeding over bottle feeding formula. Now 94, Tompson has resigned following the ‘trans’ takeover of her once woman-oriented mission.

In 1956, Marian Tompson and six other women founded the La Leche League in Illinois. Their goal was to create an organization in which mothers could assist other mothers with breastfeeding at a time when most babies in the United States were bottle-fed with formula. The organization was, at the time, counter-cultural. It soon spread around the world. In recent years, however, the League is anything but—and Marian Tompson, now 94 years old and one of the last surviving founders, has published a letter announcing her resignation from La Leche League entirely: 

Dear Leaders of La Leche League,

I want to share some important news.

On November 6, 2024, I resigned from the LLLI Board of Directors and from LLL itself, an organization that has become a travesty of my original intent.

From an organization with the specific Mission of supporting biological women who want to give their babies the best start in life by breastfeeding them, LLL’s focus has subtly shifted to include men who, for whatever reason, want to have the experience of breastfeeding despite no careful long-term research on male lactation and how that may affect the baby.

This shift from following the norms of Nature, which is the core of mothering through breastfeeding, to indulging the fantasies of adults, is destroying our organization.

Despite my efforts these past two years as a Board member, it has become clear that there is nothing I can do to change this trajectory by staying involved.

Still, I leave the door open to come back when La Leche League returns to its original Mission and Purpose.

I thank each of you for your years of making this world a healthier and happier place by being there for all mothers needing help with breastfeeding their babies.

With much love,

Marian Tompson

Founder of La Leche League

Tompson’s resignation is, I suspect, a long time coming. La Leche League has been slowly taken over by trans activists for some time, and the international board recently directed its affiliates in the UK to permit trans-identifying males to attend meetings once restricted exclusively to mothers. Miriam Main, a Scottish breastfeeding advocate, also announced that she is leaving La Leche League this week for similar reasons. Main noted, in her resignation letter, that she has tried to get leaders to listen to her concerns, but that she has been entirely ignored: 

In LLL publications and materials I noticed ‘mother’ being replaced with ‘parent’, ‘breastfeed’ being replaced with ‘chestfeed’, and women constantly being referred to as ‘breastfeeding families’. But these language changes very quickly evolved into a complete departure from LLL’s philosophy and mission, led by a group of zealots from within the organization. Leaders who expressed concerns about clarity of language – for example for women for whom English is not their first language – were ridiculed and abused.

We began to be told that as an inclusive organization we would have to welcome trans identifying men who wished to breastfeed to our meetings. Leaders then began to raise legitimate concerns about safeguarding issues. For example, the physical safety of a baby being breastfed by a man; the social and physiological safety of a mother separated from her baby so a man can breastfeed; the psychological safety of women in the room where a man is present; the need for privacy for women with certain religious beliefs. In raising such concerns, we were told we were transphobic, and we were compared to racists and Nazis – by other Leaders!

LLL’s leaders, Main wrote, have “shown that theoretical male lactation trumps the needs of real women living in the U.K.,” adding that the “grief I feel at losing LLL from my life is huge.” Neither Tompson nor Main have thus far responded to media requests outlining their positions further, but a survey of LLL websites highlights how far the rot of gender ideology has spread within the organization.  

LLL International’s site has an entire section on “transgender and non-binary parents” that provides step-by-step instructions for how males might be able to produce milk. This is despite the fact that there is no medical evidence that this is safe for the child—but LLL, like so many other hijacked institutions, is placing the desires of gender dysphoric men over the needs of children. La Leche League Canada has a section featuring a giant rainbow flag and the question “What is Chestfeeding?” in which they explain: 

Chestfeeding is a term used by some parents who identify as transmasculine and non-binary to describe how they feed and nurture their children from their bodies. A person who uses the term chestfeeding may, or may not, have had any surgery on their breast tissue. Other words that may be used are: ‘nursing’, ‘feeding’, ‘breastfeeding.’

Once again, we see that when trans activists talk about “inclusion,” in practice their demands mean precisely the opposite. By including men in female-only spaces, women who no longer feel safe are excluded. By including an entirely new set of organizational premises, the organization excludes the original founders and champions of that organization who cannot support the new vision. LLL is not the first organization to fall to trans activists, and it won’t be the last—but I believe that the pushback by women like Tompson and Main is truly making a difference in this debate.  

Jonathon Van Maren

Jonathon’s writings have been translated into more than six languages and in addition to LifeSiteNews, has been published in the National Post, National Review, First Things, The Federalist, The American Conservative, The Stream, the Jewish Independent, the Hamilton Spectator, Reformed Perspective Magazine, and LifeNews, among others. He is a contributing editor to The European Conservative.

His insights have been featured on CTV, Global News, and the CBC, as well as over twenty radio stations. He regularly speaks on a variety of social issues at universities, high schools, churches, and other functions in Canada, the United States, and Europe.

He is the author of The Culture War, Seeing is Believing: Why Our Culture Must Face the Victims of Abortion, Patriots: The Untold Story of Ireland’s Pro-Life Movement, Prairie Lion: The Life and Times of Ted Byfield, and co-author of A Guide to Discussing Assisted Suicide with Blaise Alleyne.

Jonathon serves as the communications director for the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform.