MAiD
Canada’s devastating assisted suicide regime is tearing families apart
From LifeSiteNews
The father stated that his daughter’s ‘capacity to consent to [assisted suicide] is impacted by mental illness’ and that she had likely been ‘unduly influenced by a third party.’
Last year, I noted in First Things that of all the perverse lies told by proponents of euthanasia, one of the worst is their claim that it reduces suffering in society. The precise opposite is true. We have seen this in Canada time and again; heartbroken relatives reaching out to the media to explain how the assisted suicide of a loved one has left them destroyed. Each person who dies at the end of a doctor’s needle leaves loved ones behind; many of them are deeply traumatized by the experience.
Gary Hertgers of British Columbia found out that his sister, Wilma, had died by lethal injection when her building manager called him to inform him that the coroner had just left her apartment. A doctor told the Globe and Mail that he still has nightmares about his father’s euthanasia death, which the family opposed. Two sisters in B.C. found out that their mother had died through euthanasia by text message. Another mother whose troubled son was approved for euthanasia only managed to have that approval rescinded by launching a media campaign.
The CBC is now reporting on a similar story. A desperate father has requested that Court of King’s Bench Justice Colin Feasby in Alberta examine the process that led to two of three doctors approving his daughter for euthanasia (which is referred to in Canada as “MAiD,” or medical assistance in dying). His daughter, who suffers from autism, is only 27 years old. The court has issued a publication ban to protect the identities of the family members and the doctors involved; CBC identified the father as “W.V.” and the daughter as “M.V.”
According to court proceedings, M.V. was approved for euthanasia in December – signoff by two doctors is required to meet the threshold. She was given the date of February 1 to receive the lethal injection. M.V. still lives with her father, who managed to obtain a temporary injunction halting the impending euthanasia (the CBC reported that this “prevent(ed) M.V. from accessing MAiD”) the day before her scheduled death. Her father argued to the court that “M.V. suffers from autism and possibly other undiagnosed maladies that do not satisfy the eligibility criteria for MAiD.”
The daughter’s lawyer, Austin Paladeau, countered by arguing that M.V. is “not trying to withhold or hide anything” by her failure to supply medical documents justifying euthanasia, but that “She’s saying ‘it’s none of (W.V.’s) or the public’s business, I’ve been approved by two doctors, I am entitled to this and, court, it’s none of your business either.’”
Her father, who still cares for her, feels differently; her death is very much his business. His lawyer, Sarah Miller, argued in a brief: “As it stands, AHS (Alberta Health Services) operates a MAiD system with no legislation, no appeal process and no means of review.”
Miller is asking the Calgary judge for a judicial review of M.V.’s approval for euthanasia, and W.V. submitted a 2021 report to the court from a neurologist who stated that M.V. was “normal”; the father also stated that M.V.’s “capacity to consent to MAiD is impacted by mental illness” and that she had likely been “unduly influenced by a third party.” M.V.’s lawyer argued that the issue at stake was medical autonomy itself, stating:
He’s at risk of losing his daughter and while this is sad, it does not give him the right to keep her alive against her wishes. One of the real challenging parts of this process… is what’s actually happening. I completely understand (W.V.) does not want his daughter to die… I represent (M.V.), I don’t want her to die either but that doesn’t play into account here. Even though we have or may have very strong views… at the end of the day this is (M.V.’s) decision.
The judge is grappling with the case. “As a court, I can’t go second guessing these MAiD assessors… but I’m stuck with this: the only comprehensive assessment of this person done says she’s normal,” Feasby stated. “That’s really hard.” He called the case a “vexing” one and, according to the CBC, “reserved his decision on whether he’ll set aside the temporary injunction preventing M.V. from accessing MAiD… the other part of his decision will deal with whether a judicial review will take place, which would examine how doctors came to sign off on M.V.’s MAiD application.”
I hope Feasby makes the right decision. If he does not, a father will face the horror of a doctor coming into his home and giving his daughter a lethal injection against his will – with the entire force of the state endorsing the doctor’s right to do so. At the end of the day, this case is vexing – but it really isn’t hard.
From LifeSiteNews
Alberta announced it ‘is reviewing how MAID is regulated to ensure there is a consistent process as well as oversight that protects vulnerable Albertans, specifically those living with disabilities or suffering from mental health challenges.’
The Conservative provincial government of Alberta is pushing back against the Canadian federal government’s continued desire to expand euthanasia in the nation, saying it will launch a review of the legislation and policies surrounding the grim practice, including a period of public engagement.
The United Conservative Party (UCP) government under Premier Danielle Smith in a press release said the province needs to make sure that robust safeguards and procedures are in place to protect vulnerable people from being coerced into getting euthanatized under the MAiD (Medical Assistance in Dying) program.
“Alberta’s government is reviewing how MAID is regulated to ensure there is a consistent process as well as oversight that protects vulnerable Albertans, specifically those living with disabilities or suffering from mental health challenges,” said the government Monday.
The government said a online survey regarding MAiD open to all Albertans who have opinions about the deadly practice will be available until December 20.
“We recognize that medical assistance in dying is a very complex and often personal issue and is an important, sensitive and emotional matter for patients and their families,” said Alberta’s Minister of Justice and Attorney General Mickey Amery.
Amery said it is important to ensure this process has the “necessary supports to protect the most vulnerable.”
The government said that it will also be engaging with academics, medical associations, public bodies, as well as religious organizations and “regulatory bodies, advocacy groups” regarding MAiD
The government said all information gathered through this consultation will “help inform the Alberta government’s planning and policy decision making, including potential legislative changes regarding MAID in Alberta.”
When it comes to MAiD, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government sought to expand it from the chronically and terminally ill to those suffering solely from mental illness.
However, in February, after pushback from pro-life, medical, and mental health groups as well as most of Canada’s provinces, the federal government delayed the mental illness expansion until 2027.
Alberta’s Minister of Mental Health and Addiction Dan Williams said that the UCP government has been “clear” that it does not “support the provision of medically assisted suicide for vulnerable Albertans facing mental illness as their primary purpose for seeking their own death.”
“Instead, our goal is to build a continuum of care where vulnerable Albertans can live in long-term health and fulfilment. We look forward to the feedback of Albertans as we proceed with this important issue,” he noted.
The Alberta government said that as MAiD is “federally legislated and regulated” it is main job will be to try and make sure that it protects “vulnerable individuals” as much as possible.
Alberta’s Minister of Health Adriana LaGrange reaffirmed that the Alberta government “does not support expanding MAID eligibility to include those facing depression or mental illness and continues to call on the federal government to end this policy altogether.”
The number of Canadians killed by lethal injection under the nation’s MAiD program 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.
To combat Canadians being coerced into MAiD, which LifeSiteNews has covered, the combat pro-life Delta Hospice Society (DHS) is offering a free “Do Not Euthanize Defense Kit” to help vulnerable people “protect themselves” from any healthcare workers who might push euthanasia on the defenseless.
From LifeSiteNews
Politicians claim that moral opposition to assisted suicide (or suicide in general) and euthanasia is religiously motivated and then make the leap to insisting that this means such opposition should be ignored.
Euthanasia activists are currently doing what they do best: the bait and switch.
As the debate heats up in the U.K., all of the familiar tactics are on display. First, of course, there is the relentless lying. Despite the case study of Canada, the Netherlands, and Belgium – and despite disability activists, judges, palliative physicians, and the secretaries of health and justice warning that no “safeguards” will hold – U.K. euthanasia activists are insisting that this time everything will be different.
The response to these critiques has been predictable but infuriating. Euthanasia activists insist that all of this is about religion – that those nasty Christians are, once again, seeking to impose their suffering-based theology on the country. (This despite the fact that even Ann Furedi, who heads up the U.K.’s second largest abortion provider, opposes the proposed assisted suicide law.) One good microcosmic example of this tactic comes from UK writer Julie Street, who posted to X (formerly Twitter):
Just walked out of Mass bloody fuming – our priest used the homily to read a letter from the Catholic bishops telling people to oppose the Assisted Dying Bill then handed out cards with our local MP’s details on to lobby them. Religion has no place in politics or women’s rights.
There is much to say in response, of course. Why is Street so surprised to discover that her Catholic priest and bishops are, in fact, Catholic? Is she ignorant of the religion that she at least appears to practice? How airtight does one’s mind have to be not to see assisted suicide and euthanasia as religious issues? Indeed, “euthanasia” is Greek for “good death” – the theological premises are baked right into the term. Or does Street think that religious people should shut their mouths in the political arena and voluntarily disenfranchise themselves as the fates of the weak are decided?
Is Street also ignorant of the fact that it was largely due to the Catholic Church’s public opposition that Adolf Hitler moved the Nazi’s euthanasia operation underground? (We now know, of course, that the Nazis only claimed to have disbanded the T-4 program.) I thought progressives wanted a Church that stood up for the weak, vulnerable, and dispossessed – and who qualifies more than the sick, elderly, and those with disabilities? Christians are accused of not being loving enough, and then rebuked when they stand up for the victims the political class deems expendable – first the unborn, now those on the other end of life’s spectrum.
But there’s more to this tactic than grating ignorance. Progressives like to play both sides of the fence. Take abortion, for example. Politicians like to claim that it is a religious issue, and that thus they cannot legislate against it due to the fact that we live in pluralistic societies. Many religious leaders are quite happy to follow this logic, claiming that since abortion is a political issue, it cannot be discussed in church. And all the while, the countless corpses of the aborted unborn pile up in the No Man’s Land between.
The assisted suicide debate is unfolding along similar lines. Politicians claim that moral opposition to assisted suicide (or suicide in general) and euthanasia is religiously motivated and then make the leap to insisting that this means such opposition should be ignored. Meanwhile, because politicians are debating the issue, folks like Street can claim that because this is now a political issue, priests and pastors should keep their traps shut. See what they did there? It’s a neat trick, and despite how farcical and illogical it is, it seems to work with maddening regularity.
In fact, the priest Julie Street had the good fortune to hear was standing in the tradition of the clergy who stood up against Adolf Hitler and his eugenicist gang – and fighting the same evil being advanced under many of the same premises, to boot. She should be grateful. If she can’t manage that, she should at least be better educated.
COP 29 leaders demand over a $1 trillion a year in climate reparations from ‘wealthy’ nations. They don’t deserve a nickel.
What Will Be the Future of the Keystone XL Pipeline Under President Trump?
Health Care Update: Province will deliver health services regionally in seven “health corridors”
Trump Energy Policies will be executed by New York Rep. Lee Zeldin and North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum
-
Brownstone Institute2 days agoThe Most Devastating Report So Far
-
Business2 days agoCarbon tax bureaucracy costs taxpayers $800 million
-
ESG2 days agoCan’t afford Rent? Groceries for your kids? Trudeau says suck it up and pay the tax!
-
John Stossel1 day agoGreen Energy Needs Minerals, Yet America Blocks New Mines
-
Daily Caller2 days agoLos Angeles Passes ‘Sanctuary City’ Ordinance In Wake Of Trump’s Deportation Plan
-
Alberta1 day agoProvince considering new Red Deer River reservoir east of Red Deer
-
Addictions1 day agoBC Addictions Expert Questions Ties Between Safer Supply Advocates and For-Profit Companies
-
Aristotle Foundation1 day agoToronto cancels history, again: The irony and injustice of renaming Yonge-Dundas Square to Sankofa Square