Wednesday, November 6, 2024

Great News: West Virginia Constitutional Amendment 1. to prevent assisted suicide passes.

Pat McGeehan on the right.
Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, 
Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

I have great news. 

West Virginia Amendment 1, that prevents the legalization of assisted suicide, passed with a narrow victory with 50.4% voting YES on Amendment 1.

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition thanks Pat McGeehan for launching and successfuly carrying this initiative. Pat McGeehan also won his re-election to the West Virginia House of Delegates representing District 1.

I also thank Mary Tillman and the West Virginian Alliance for Ethical Health Care.

I had the opportunity to speak in West Virginia on October 22, 2024 in support of Amendment 1. The event featured Pat McGeehan, a six term representative from Hancock who initiated Amendment 1.

Amendment 1 stated:

“No physician or health care provider in the State of West Virginia shall participate in the practice of medically-assisted suicide, euthanasia, or mercy killing. Nothing in this section prohibits the administration or prescription of medication for the purpose of alleviating pain or discomfort while the patient’s condition follows its natural course; nor does anything in this section prohibit the withholding or withdrawing of life-sustaining treatment, as requested by the patient or the patient’s decision-maker, in accordance with State law, so long as the intention is not to kill the patient.”
At the event McGeehan explained that assisted suicide is not permitted in West Virginia but Amendment 1 will assure that it never will be permitted in West Virginia. Craig Howell, the Managing editor of the Weirton Daily Times reported McGeehan as stating that:
“The citizens of West Virginia have a chance to light a beacon,” 
“The despair of suicide will be rebuked in West Virginia’s Constitution.”

McGeehan described assisted suicide as affecting people when they lack hope or believe that they are a burden on others. McGeehan spoke about these deaths and likened them to medical bullying.  

Previous articles on this topic:
  • Assisted suicide destroys hope (Link).
  • Vote YES to Amendment 1 for protection from assisted suicide (Link).

Not Dead Yet comments on the passing of Diane Coleman.

Dear Not Dead Yet Family, Allies, and Supporters,

Diane Coleman
It is with heavy hearts and deep sorrow that we announce the passing of our beloved founder and leader, Diane Coleman. Diane’s legacy as a tireless advocate for the rights of people with disabilities, and as a fierce and unyielding voice against assisted suicide and euthanasia, will forever shape our movement and the world we strive to change.

Diane founded Not Dead Yet in 1996, establishing a national disability rights organization committed to fighting for the inherent dignity of every person with a disability. Through her vision and leadership, Not Dead Yet grew into a powerful force for justice, protecting our right to live and ensuring that disabled lives are valued, respected, and protected from discriminatory medical practices, including the non provision and forced removal of life sustaining care, QALYs, and most of all, the inherently discriminatory public policy of assisted suicide and euthanasia law. Her work was visible not only in the courts, boardrooms and legislatures the halls of legislative chambers but also on the streets, where she led protests, organized, and mobilized countless other disabled people people with disabilities from across the globe to fight for their rights.

Diane was an intellectual powerhouse, a strategist, a passionate advocate, and a mentor to so many of us. Her understanding of policy, her commitment to the principles of the social and disability justice models of disability, and her ability to cut through the ableist rhetoric surrounding assisted suicide and euthanasia were unparalleled. She spoke with clarity and conviction, both in the media and in legislative hearings, where she presented testimony before Congress, co-authored amicus briefs in state, federal and Supreme Court cases for the U.S. Supreme Court, and tirelessly worked to ensure that the voices of disabled people were heard and respected in the development and implementation of public policy.

As many of you have shared, Diane's impact on individuals—colleagues, activists, students, and friends—was profound. She shaped the lives of so many, whether through direct mentorship or through the sheer force of her example. Diane was a leader who never wavered in her commitment to the movement. Her strength was, in many ways, a beacon for all of us who continue the fight for freedom, dignity, equality and inclusion of people with all kinds of disabilities, as well as women, elders, LGBTQ+, BIPoC and other marginalized populations.

Diane’s legacy will endure through all the work that continues in her name—through the Not Dead Yet community and through the work of every person whose life she touched. She built a movement that will not stop fighting, and she taught us to mourn for the dead and fight like hell for the living.

While we grieve her loss, we also celebrate her extraordinary life and the powerful mark she left on the world. Diane was a friend, a teacher, and a champion of justice. Her spirit, her intellect, and her fierce commitment to disability rights will live on in each of us who continue the work she began.

Our deepest condolences go out to Diane's family, her colleagues, and to all who loved her. We stand united in our grief, but also in our commitment to carry on Diane’s work. Rest in power, Diane. Your legacy is eternal, and the fight for the rights of disabled people will continue in your name.

With Love and Solidarity,

The Board of Not Dead Yet

Emily Wolinsky, Chair
Samantha Crane, Treasurer
Lydia Nunez Landry, Secretary
Horacio Esparza
Amy E. Hasbrouck
Germaine Martin
Michael Volkman

Monday, November 4, 2024

Netherlands woman (33) dies by euthanasia based on anorexia

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Esther Beukema with her mother.
Poppy Bilberbeck wrote an article that was published by Unilad.com on November 4 about the Netherlands euthanasia death of Esther Beukema (33) who died on December 10, 2021. Beukema was approved for euthanasia based on mental illness. Her condition was anorexia.

Bilberbeck's article describes Beukema's euthanasia death for anorexia in a positive manner. The article interviews the family and suggests that they were supportive of Esther's death and happy that she didn't die alone.

The article states that there was no other choice, when euthanasia is done for mental illness, and in this case for anorexia. Bilberbeck writes:

The Dutch Termination of Life on Request and Assisted Suicide (Review Procedures) Act of 2002 states someone can be permitted euthanasia for psychiatric as well as physical illnesses if there is 'no reasonable alternative' and the patient's suffering is 'unbearable with no prospect of improvement'.

For people with anorexia there is always a reasonable alternative.
A landmark study by Chelsea Roff and Catherine Cook-Cottone titled: Assisted death in eating disorders: a systematic review of cases and clinical rationales, was published by Frontiers in Psychiatry on July 30, 2024.

The authors of the study responded by promoting a Joint Statement Against Assisted Suicide for Eating Disorders. The Joint Statement says:

Eating disorders are treatable conditions that require timely and comprehensive treatment. Yet many cannot access care due to cost, inadequate insurance coverage, extensive wait times, and a shortage of specialist services. The notion that they are incurable or terminal is scientifically unsupported and dangerously misleading. The term “terminal anorexia” is not recognized by any formal medical body, has been widely rejected by researchers and clinicians, and represents a profound misunderstanding of these conditions.

People with eating disorders need access to evidence-based and inclusive treatment, not lethal medications. Poor outcomes, including deaths, are nearly always preventable.We categorically reject the argument that assisted suicide is a form of compassionate care for individuals with eating disorders. Compassionate care involves consistent, effective treatment — not facilitating suicide. Together, we call on governments to act to ensure that every individual with an eating disorder receives the care, compassion, and treatment they need to recover.
The statement by the National Association of Anorexia Nervosa & Associated Disorders (ANAD) in June 2024 concerning euthanasia and anorexia stated:

We must not confuse ‘chronic’ with ‘terminal.’ Being labeled with a terminal illness has the potential to become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I reject the concept that eating disorders are a terminal condition.

I am convinced that Esther Beukema was abandoned by the medical system. Her family would have wanted her to be happy, but in fact Esther was abandoned to death.

The great Diane Coleman has died. She has left an amazing legacy.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

It is very sad news to announce that the great Diane Coleman has died. Diane founded Not Dead Yet in 1996 and was the President and CEO of Not Dead Yet until her death. The fact that other Not Dead Yet organizations world-wide were founded in conjunction with Not Dead Yet in America proves that her activities had world-wide significance.

I have always had incredible respect for Diane's direction, understanding of the issues and her leadership skills. Diane led a group of people who differed greatly and yet she effectively enabled them to work together.

Not Dead Yet, under Diane's leadership, was the most effective organization in preventing the spread of assisted suicide in America.

Diane and Stephen Drake
Diane Coleman and Stephen Drake spoke at some of the earlier EPC conferences that Not Dead Yet co-sponsored.

Not Dead Yet were incredibly successful in helping defeat the Massachusetts assisted suicide voter initiative in 2012. Diane worked with John Kelly to establish Second Thoughts Connecticut as the disabilitity rights voice - voting NO on question 2. This decision was a decisive factor in the defeat of the assisted suicide voter initiative in 2012.

Diane and Not Dead Yet effectively lobbied state legislators in multiple jurisdictions. Just to mention a few, Diane and Not Dead Yet, lobbied politicians in New Hampshire to defeat SB 170 in 2013, she supported attempts to reverse assisted suicide Baxter decision in Montana, opposed assisted suicide bills in New Jersey, opposing an assisted suicide court decision in New Mexico, assisted suicide bills in California, (California 2), opposing New York assisted suicide bills, and New York assisted suicide court cases, Deleware assisted suicide bills, Hawaii assisted suicide bills, Maine assisted suicide bill

Diane wrote articles that were published in newspapers throughout American. Here is are links to some of those articles: (Link 1), (Link 2), (Link 3), (Link 4), (Link 5), (Link 6), (Link 7), (Link 8).

Diane and Not Dead Yet continued to organize protests. One of the more memorable protests was the one at the World Federation of Right to Die Societies Conference in Chicago in September 2014. Not Dead Yet organized an effective protest of the Me Before You disability snuff film and a protest against the Colorado assisted suicide bill.

Diane lobbied the American Medical Association to maintain its policy opposing assisted suicide. She explained to medical students why assisted suicide was wrong, she lobbied the US federal government, and provided expert analysis of assisted suicide laws in America.

Diane and Not Dead Yet were involved with the discriminatory Covid 19 rules. Links to the articles (Link 1), (Link 2).

Not Dead Yet is also a central part of the litigation to overturn the California assisted suicide law (Link).

Diane Coleman was involved with much more than I have linked to in this article, but I decided to limit it for readability.

Not Dead Yet will continue to be a key group opposing assisted suicide. Diane Coleman will be a hard act to follow, but her leadership and focus enabled future generations of Not Dead Yet leaders to follow the direction that has been established.

Rita Marker, the Great Anti-Assisted-Suicide Champion, Has Died at 83

This article was published by National Review online on November 1, 2024

Wesley Smith
By Wesley J Smith

The great anti-euthanasia warrior, Rita Marker, has died at 83 after a long illness.

Rita was in Europe in the mid 1980s and, out of curiosity, attended an international right-to-die convention. She was so alarmed by what she heard, she and her late husband and soulmate Mike Marker, formed the nonprofit International Anti-Euthanasia Task Force (later renamed the Patients Rights Council). Along with a loyal staff, Rita began decades of work pushing against that dark agenda.

Not every great public-policy activist becomes a household name. Rita wasn’t interested in notoriety or fame. Effectiveness was her lodestar, that and personal sacrifice. For as long as she was physically able, she gave all she had to the cause.

Rita Marker
Rita had stage fright, but she spoke countless times to venues large and small.

Rita was terrified of flying. But she traveled the country and the world, speaking against euthanasia and in favor of compassionate care.

Rita was a devout Catholic. But she insisted that the task force’s opposition to assisted suicide be focused through a human-rights and secular lens.

Rita did not have a professional degree — until she decided that she would be most effective by becoming a lawyer. She attended a mail-in law school while still working more than full time for the task force and passed the California bar exam — the nation’s toughest — on her first attempt.

Unlike organizations on the other side of this issue, anti-assisted-suicide work doesn’t have the backing of billionaires like George Soros. The task force mostly depended on smaller donations and grants, so the finances could sometimes be iffy. As a result, Rita was woefully underpaid, particularly given her indefatigable exertions, sometimes even skipping paychecks to ensure that the work continued.

Rita could have a brittle exterior, but underneath, her heart was ripe and tender. When Ann Humphry — co-founder of the Hemlock Society with her husband, Derek Humphry — contracted breast cancer, Derek separated from her. Then, her compatriots in the right-to-die movement shunned her. Ann reached out in despair to the old enemy, Rita Marker. Rita spread her arms and welcomed Ann as a close friend.

After Ann killed herself, Rita authored a moving book about their relationship. Deadly Compassion: The Death of Ann Humphry and the Truth About Euthanasia remains a classic in the genre.

Ann came to see the wrongness of the assisted-suicide movement she had helped spawn, and in a final note to Rita before her death, she urged, “Do the best you can.”

Rita always did. I am convinced that in her time, Rita was the most effective anti-assisted-suicide/euthanasia champion in the world.

Rita’s life was full. She is survived by seven children, 29 grandchildren, and 13 great-grandchildren.

So, rest in peace, Rita. You fought the good fight. You finished the race. You kept the faith. You served your purpose. The world is better for your having been in it.

Friday, November 1, 2024

Has Dr Wiebe killed people who did not qualify for euthanasia?

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Dr Ellen Wiebe
A British Columbia judge halted the euthanasia death of a woman from Alberta who was scheduled to be euthanized by Dr Ellen Wiebe on Sunday October 27, 2024. (Link to the injunction decision).

The court has a publication ban on this case. The common-law husband is referred to as A.Y. and the woman is referred to as N.B.

1. The case is based on A.Y arguing that N.B. does not qualify
 to be killed by euthanasia because she does not have an irremediable medical condition.

2. The case suggests that Dr Wiebe inappropriately approved the death of N.B. How many people have been approved for death in a manner that skirts the practice of the law?

3. How many people has Dr Wiebe killed by lethal poison (MAiD) who did not have an irremediable medical condition or fit the criteria of the law?

[Please read my previous article: BC Judge halts euthanasia deaths scheduled by Dr Wiebe (Link).]

This case has not been heard in court. I am quoting from the decision by Justice Simon R Coval who granted a 30-day injunction.

Question 1: Did the woman qualify to be killed by euthanasia in Canada?

A.Y.’s position is that N.B. does not meet the legal criteria for MAID because her condition is one of mental illness or disability, rather than a physical malady, and because it is not an “irremediable” medical condition but in fact one that can be treated in a relatively short period of time.

N.B. had begun to explore MAID in January or February 2024. A.Y.’s evidence is that N.B.’s own doctors in Alberta would not approve it and so she began to search online for doctors who might. She eventually learned of the defendant, Dr. Wiebe, who has a clinic in Vancouver, and she contacted Dr. Wiebe in mid-July.

A.Y. stated that N.B. is living with "akathisia" a condition associated with changing doses of psychotropic or antipsychotic medication. "Akathisia" is a treatable condition but A.Y. states that N.B. was not following the advice of the specialists. A.Y. stated that:

We ([N.B.], Anna Maclnnes and myself) scheduled a second (emergency) consultation with Dr. Horowitz on October 17, where he reiterated his view that she might recover from her akathisia. He again told her to pause her medication tapering and let her body adjust. He said her akathisia might go away in a matter of months. Probably 2 to 6 months. Then, if she followed his advice, she could finish weaning off the drugs without akathisia. Dr. Horowitz appeared surprised that akathisia would justify a MAiD procedure, and gently attempted to discourage [N.B.] from pursuing this goal by suggesting for her to wait another 6 months.

Akathisia has significant chronic side-effects including suicidal ideation, but it is not an irremediable medical condition, which is what the Canadian law requires for MAiD approval.

Question 2: What did Dr Ellen Wiebe do to approve N.B. for death by euthanasia?
N.B. had begun to explore MAID in January or February 2024. A.Y.’s evidence is that N.B.’s own doctors in Alberta would not approve it and so she began to search online for doctors who might. She eventually learned of the defendant, Dr. Wiebe, who has a clinic in Vancouver, and she contacted Dr. Wiebe in mid-July.

To A.Y.’s understanding, N.B. had at least two video calls with Dr. Wiebe in July and August and Dr. Wiebe approved her for MAID at the end of their first call. His evidence is that Dr. Wiebe did not speak directly with N.B.’s doctors, though N.B. provided her with some of her medical records. Dr. Boodhoo has advised A.Y. that his records were not requested for delivery to Dr. Wiebe.

A.Y. saw N.B.’s MAID form, which she submitted on August 30, 2024. The form stated akathisia as her reason for seeking MAID. Because she could not get anyone she knew to witness her form, a volunteer from Dr. Wiebe’s clinic did so for her. A.Y.’s evidence is that, because N.B. did not have a second doctor to provide the requisite second MAID assessment, Dr. Wiebe arranged the second assessor, Dr. Elizabeth Whynot, whom N.B. met in a video call on September 23, 2024.

In October 2024, N.B. had another online appointment with Dr. Wiebe, which A.Y. attended. A.Y.’s evidence about what was said is this:

Sometime in Oct 2024, [N.B.] had another appointment with Dr. Wiebe. I attended that meeting. As I am concerned that akathisia is not an irremediable condition, I asked Dr. Wiebe if she had ever carried out MAiD on someone with akathisia. Dr. Wiebe said that she did not. During the same Zoom session, I also attempted to describe [N.B.] as a person with unresolved mental health problems which were probably not considered during the MAID assessment. Dr. Wiebe responded by stating that diagnosis does not matter, and that only quality of life mattered, and that this was her [N.B.’s] right.

According to the A.Y. affidavit Dr Wiebe approved N.B. for euthanasia even though N.B. does not have an irremediable medical condition. Dr Wiebe was told that N.B.'s "wish to die" may be related to unresolved mental health problems. Dr Wiebe responded to the concern by stating that the:

diagnosis does not matter, and that only quality of life mattered, and that this was her [N.B.’s] right.
Question 3: How many people has Dr Wiebe killed who did not qualify for euthanasia?

I can't answer this question but a full investigation must be done. 

Dr Wiebe has been featured in several articles about Canada's euthanasia law.

Maria Cheng and Angie Wang reported for the Associated Press on October 16, 2024 that Ellen Wiebe stated:

while poverty inevitably exacerbates suffering, improved housing and social situations have never changed a patient’s mind.

“The idea that because I’m disabled, I should lose my rights that undisabled people have is outrageous,” said Wiebe, who suffers from heart disease and uses a wheelchair.

She predicted legal consequences if officials introduce more safeguards for euthanasia: “We’ll just be back in court with somebody saying, ‘You interfered with my basic human rights.’”
In a research article by Alexander Raikin titled: Canada How death care pushed out health care, Raikin reports Dr Wiebe commenting in a MAiD training video in response to a hypothetical question about a person who cannot consent at the point of death but shows signs of resistance. Raikin reports:
The moderator, Ellen Wiebe, is one of Canada’s most prolific “MAID providers” and a leader in the MAID community. On request, she has hastened the deaths of at least 400 people, including some cases that other assessors believed were illegal. She offered an answer: “I’m guessing I would bring in one of their other providers, you know, palliative care or, or whatever, and get them sedated. But what would you say?”
Another article by Alexander Raikin published by The New Atlantic in December, 2022 tells how Ellen Wiebe provided euthanasia to a man who had been rejected for euthanasia in his own city. Raikin reports:
In another CAMAP seminar recording, we learn of a man who was rejected for MAID because, as assessors found, he did not have a serious illness or the “capacity to make informed decisions about his own personal health.” One assessor concluded “it is very clear that he does not qualify.” But Dying with Dignity Canada connected him with Ellen Wiebe, a prominent euthanasia provider and advocate in Vancouver. She assessed him virtually, found him eligible, and found a second assessor to agree. “And he flew all by himself to Vancouver,” she said. “I picked him up at the airport, um, brought him to my clinic and provided for him,” meaning she euthanized him.
Amy Hasbrouck reported in May 2020 on a case of a woman who decided to stop eating and drinking, and was euthanized by Dr Wiebe. Hasbrouck wrote:
In June of 2016, just as medical aid in dying (MAiD) was adopted in Canada, a British Columbia woman known as Ms. S. who had Multiple Sclerosis was evaluated for MAiD by Dr. Ellen Wiebe. According to Jocelyn Downie, Dr. Wiebe concluded that Ms. S. met most of the eligibility criteria (incurable condition, advanced state of decline in capability, and enduring and intolerable suffering) but the doctor did not believe Ms. S. would die “in the foreseeable future,” so she was determined ineligible.

Dr. Wiebe exchanged correspondence with Ms. S. in December of 2016 and January of 2017, to the effect “that the patient’s life expectancy was not short enough to qualify for medical aid in dying.” Then in mid-February of 2017, “Ms. S decided to starve herself to death at home, with the support of palliative-care nursing.”

Her husband called Dr. Wiebe two weeks later, and Dr. Wiebe visited Ms. S. on March 3. At that time, Dr. Wiebe determined that she met all eligibility criteria, and she was euthanized on March 6, 2017.
Dr Wiebe has a history of controversial euthanasia cases. She is the doctor who entered a Jewish care home to complete a euthanasia death, even though she knew that the Jewish care home had a policy of not permitting euthanasia on the premises.

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition urges authorities in British Columbia to conduct an in-depth review of Dr Wiebe's euthanasia practice. If they are unwilling to provide the necessary oversight of the law then the RCMP must be brought in to review the questionable acts of euthanasia performed by Dr Wiebe.

Until an investigation is completed, Dr Wiebe's medical license should be temporarily suspended in order to protect her patients. It is necessary to provide effective oversight of the law and to protect people from doctors, like Ellen Wiebe, who considers "euthanasia to be the best work" she has ever done.

Euthanasia is being used to kill people in poverty, isolation and social suffering.

What real choice does a person have who’s already suffering from mental illness, doesn’t have caring people nearby, isn’t getting adequate medical attention and social supports and may already be contemplating suicide?
Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, 
Euthanasia Prevention Coalition
Article: Ontario MAiD Death Review Stories. Do you have a MAiD death story? (Link).
Andrew Phillips, a staff columnist with the Toronto Star wrote an excellent opinion article titled: Assisted suicide is being used to relieve people of poverty, isolation and social suffering. This is not OK. Yes this article published in the Toronto Star.

Phillips is writing about the report issued by the Ontario chief coroner’s office on how medical assistance in dying (MAID) is being carried out in this province. Phillips refers to two of the six cases that were outlined in the report.
Mr. A, “a male in his 40s,” was suffering from inflammatory bowel disease. He also had “a history of mental illness, previous episodes of suicidality, and ongoing alcohol and opioid misuse.” No one offered him treatment for his addictions, but a psychiatrist gave him information about MAID. He was approved for death under what’s known as “Track 2” — cases where death is not reasonably foreseeable. A MAID provider personally drove him to the place where he was given an assisted death.

Mr. B, “a male in his late 40s,” was suffering from severe ulcers. He also “presented with multiple mental illnesses, namely depression, anxiety, narcissistic personality disorder, and bipolar mood disorder type 2. He had chronic suicidal ideations” — and indeed had attempted suicide a year earlier. Mr. B also applied under Track 2 and became one of 116 Ontarians to die that way last year.
Phillips then writes:
I spell out those details because the two recent reports on MAID from Ontario’s chief coroner are like that: detailed, clinical, dispassionate. They’re the opposite of sensational, at least in style.

But what they reveal ought to be shocking. Some patients are being euthanized while suffering from untreated mental illnesses and addictions. They’re more likely to come from poor areas (those with “high levels of marginalization,” as the reports put it) and be suffering from inadequate housing, a lack of social supports and simple loneliness.
Phillips, who supports euthanasia, states that 2.6% of the 4644 Ontario euthanasia deaths in 2023 were Track 2 deaths, meaning, the person wasn't terminally ill. Phillips then states:
But somehow we’ve turned a system that Canadians thought was supposed to spare people in the last stages of life from needless pain and suffering (a laudable goal, and one I share), to a system in which some people are being nudged toward death as a way to escape poverty, isolation and social suffering.
Phillips states that some members of the Ontario MAiD Death Review committee are not bothered by the cases outlined in the report. Philips writes:
they appear to think they are rare outliers and what should matter above all is a person’s individual autonomy — “my death, my choice.”
Phillips responds by stating:
What real choice does a person have who’s already suffering from mental illness, doesn’t have caring people nearby, isn’t getting adequate medical attention and social supports and may already be contemplating suicide?
Dr Sonu Gaind
Psychiatrist, Dr Sonu Gaind, is then interviewed by Phillips:
Dr. Sonu Gaind, a psychiatrist who’s deeply involved in the issue, says all this shouldn’t be surprising because Canada’s MAID system has been shaped by advocates wedded to the “right to die” mantra of individual choice. They’re constantly pressing to expand the criteria for MAID to include more and more people, leading to the slippery slope that opponents of assisted death warned of years ago.

Gaind notes some advocates are dismissing the troubling cases cited in the coroners’ reports because, they say, marginalized people already die at a higher rate than others so it should come as no surprise that more of them die from MAID as well. “Claiming that state-facilitated death fuelled by social deprivation is acceptable since more marginalized people die from social deprivation and structural inequities anyway is indistinguishable from eugenics,” he writes in the Conversation.

“My death, my choice” sounds good but it doesn’t let us off the hook as a society. We have a decision to make: do we ensure vulnerable, suffering people have the support they need to live decently? Or do we collectively decide that’s too complicated and expensive and usher them gently towards an early death?
Previous articles on this topic:
  • Canadians with disabilities are needlessly dying by euthanasia (Link).
  • Euthanasia for post Covid-19 syndrome (Link).
  • Ontario Coroner's euthanasia report - Poor at risk of coercion (Link).
  • Some euthanasia deaths are driven by homelessness, fear and isolation (Link).

Have you lost someone you love to euthanasia? November 20th healing retreat.

Have you lost someone you love to euthanasia?

Join us for a healing retreat, Project Anna and Simeon, which includes supper followed by a talk on grieving and providing an opportunity for sharing and memorial service. 

The first of its kind in Canada, this event will be on Wednesday November 20th, 2024, and will begin at 4:30 p.m.

This is a collaboration with St. John the Compassionate Mission, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, St. Mary’s Refuge, and Compassionate Community Care. It will be at St. John the Compassionate Mission (155 Broadview Ave in Toronto). Please register in advance to assist@stmarysrefuge.org or call Compassionate Community Care at: 519-439-6445.

Please share this event and its details widely with your contacts and friends.

Wednesday, October 30, 2024

BC Judge halts euthanasia death scheduled by Dr Weibe.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition is seeking to intervene in this legal case. Donate to the EPC legal fund (Donation).

On October 27, 2024 I reported on the BC judge who granted a 30-day injunction to prevent the euthanasia death of a woman. I was the first one to report on the case but I did not share the information that I had based on a publication ban. I did promise to provide information as soon as it was available.

On October 29, Lisa Steacy reported for CTV news Vancouver that Justice Simon R. Coval signed an injunction on Saturday October 26 which prevented Dr Ellen Wiebe from killing an Alberta woman on Sunday October 27. Wiebe is known to be Canada's most active euthanasia doctor. Steacy writes:

The injunction, signed by Justice Simon R. Coval, is the first of its kind issued in the province and was issued on Saturday, the day before the woman was scheduled to die.

It prevents Dr. Ellen Wiebe or any other doctor from “causing the death” of the 53-year-old woman “by MAID or any other means.” It followed a notice of civil claim alleging Wiebe negligently approved the procedure for a patient who does not legally qualify.
The injunction prevented Wiebe from killing the woman. Steacy explains:
“If the defendants proceed with MAID, the death will constitute a battery of (the patient), wrongful death and, potentially a criminal offence,”
Canada's euthanasia law does not provide a mechanism for challenging a negligent approval but the judge establishes the role of the court by stating:
“It is within the inherent jurisdiction of this honourable court to enjoin allegedly criminal conduct, in this case the termination of a patient's life where it appears that legislative criteria has not been met, and/or the protection of a patient from injury,”
Dr. Ellen Wiebe
The woman who was approved for euthanasia by Dr. Wiebe remains anonymous. The woman was refused approval in Alberta but went to British Columbia because Wiebe approved her death. Steacy reports:
“She could not get approval from her own doctors (in her home province), and so started looking online for other doctors who might be open to her request. She eventually found Dr. Ellen Wiebe,” the application says, adding that the woman had several Zoom meetings with the B.C. doctor and outspoken MAID advocate.

“At the end of the first meeting, Dr. Wiebe approved (the woman) for MAID.”
The claim, that was filed by her common law husband, states that the woman does not qualify for euthanasia, not even for a Track 2 approval. Track 2 approvals are based on a person who is not terminally ill but is suffering and living with an irremediable medical condition. Steacy reports:

According to the notice of civil claim, the woman has been diagnosed with “rapidly cycling bipolar 2 disorder.” However, she sought MAID on the basis of “akathisia,” a condition that is associated with changing doses of psychotropic or antipsychotic medication. According to the American Psychiatric Association, it manifests as “extreme restlessness characterized by an inability to sit or stand still and by fidgety movements or jitteriness, as well as a subjective report of inner restlessness.”

In October of 2023, the woman was prescribed a high dose of Quetiapine but soon after sought to reduce the dosage.

“As she was reducing her medication, (she) began describing distressing side-effects. She described having ‘the horrors’ or an inner sense of terror all day long, the inability to sleep at night, nightmares, the inability to lie down during the day due to a feeling of falling, the inability to sit or remain still, suicidal thoughts,” the application for the injunction says.

“At the same time, (she) continued to express her desire to die. She did not want to do it herself, and regularly begged (her partner) to end her life.”

According to the court documents, the woman and her partner – at an emergency consultation with a doctor in their home province 11 days before the medically assisted death was scheduled – were told that the condition is treatable and that the symptoms could resolve within months.
The claim states that the woman is being actively treated by a physician and yet was approved for euthanasia by Dr Wiebe. Steacy continues:
“This case raises serious questions about whether (the woman) in fact qualifies for MAID Track 2. Particularly concerning is that akathisia appears to be a cluster of symptoms connected to the changes in usage of drugs used to treat a psychiatric condition. It is treatable but (the woman) has not followed treatment recommendations.”
The case alleges that Dr Wiebe did not fulfill the requirements of the law. Steacy explains: 

In addition to arguing that the woman was seeking MAID based on a condition that disqualifies her from receiving it, the lawsuit raises a number of concerns about the process by which MAID was approved in this case.
According to the court documents, the woman’s partner allegedly questioned whether akathisia is “irremediable” and questioned Wiebe’s willingness to sign off on the procedure during a Zoom call.

“(The partner) asked Dr. Wiebe if she had ever carried out MAID on someone with akathisia. Dr. Wiebe said that she had not. During the same Zoom session, (the partner) also attempted to describe (the woman) as a person with unresolved mental health problems which were probably not considered during the MAID assessment,” the notice of application says.

“Dr. Wiebe responded by stating that diagnosis does not matter, and that only quality of life mattered, and that this was (the woman’s) right.”
The lawsuit alleges that Wiebe did not directly speak to any of the woman’s doctors, did not request her medical records, and only reviewed partial records provided by the patient via email.

Further to that the case alleges that Wiebe did not consult or have a second independent physician sign off on the euthanasia application. The case alleges that Wiebe arranged for a second doctor to speak to the woman and approve her death by Zoom. The case also claims that there was not an independent witness who signed the euthanasia. Steacy explains:
“The litigation seeks to address potentially serious failings in the application of the MAID regime,” the court documents say, summarizing the arguments.
This case will potentially set precedent related to the approval system for euthanasia in Canada, how a determination is made when the applicant is not terminally ill and establish some possible oversight of the law, which is currently lacking.

As I stated on October 27 - Similar to the WV / MV case in Calgary where a father was granted an injunction in the euthanasia approval of his 27-year-old autistic daughter because he claimed that his daughter didn't have an irremediable medical condition, this case the woman's husband sought an injunction claiming that his wife does not have an irremediable medical condition.

This case goes further because the woman's husband is also challenging the shoddy nature of euthanasia approvals in Canada.