New Mexico: 170 people prescribed assisted suicide poison in 2025.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The New Mexico 2025 assisted suicide report stated that there were 170 people who received the lethal poison prescription in 2025.

The basic data in the report stated:

In 2025, 170 individuals were prescribed the medication, reflecting a decrease from 213 in 2023. Among those prescribed, three individuals had not yet ingested the medication at the time of reporting. Females represented 51% of prescriptions and males 49%...

The report indicates that 166 of the 170 people had died by assisted suicide when the report was published.

There were 26 healthcare providers who prescribed MAID medication in 2025. Of those prescribed in 2025, three individuals had not yet ingested the medication at the time of reporting, and one of them died before ingestion.

The New Mexico assisted suicide law was sold to the public based on competent adults who freely consent to "self-ingest" the poison.

The New Mexico assisted suicide report does not confirm that these conditions were met.

Social Death of Disabled Fuels Assisted Suicide Culture

Meghan Schrader

By Meghan Schrader
Meghan is a disability activists and a member of the EPC-USA board.

In 2023 and 2024 I published blog posts celebrating the anniversaries of the Americans With Disabilities Act, which was on July 26th. But I didn’t write a blog post last year; I wasn’t sure what to say.

Since 2025, there has been a year of disability access erosion. The government has strong-armed restructuring the Special Education system and attempted to eliminate bellwether disability programs and guidelines that have existed for decades. The government has reduced access to home and community care that helps prevent institutionalization. The government has attempted to reduce benefits for disabled veterans, discontinued sign language interpreters at White House press briefings, paused new regulations improving air travel for wheelchair users and much more.

One of the most radical changes to America’s disability access infrastructure is the Department of Justice’s approach to a 1999 SCOTUS precedent called Olmstead LC. Olmstead generally requires states to provide community supports to disabled people who would be unnecessarily institutionalized without them. Ie, SCOTUS held that there may be some people who do need institutionalization, like if they are homicidal, have no ability to care for themselves whatsoever or prefer to live in an institution. But within reason, states can't put disabled people in institutions because states prefer that to community support. This determination created Olmstead’s “community integration mandate.”

For 27 years, Olmstead has been interpreted to mean that states have to create as many community services as possible. Legal loopholes and structural barriers to community services continue to cause unnecessary institutionalization, but Olmstead helps many disabled people who can live safely in their communities avoid arbitrary confinement.

Recently the Department of Justice released a slip opinion saying that states don't have to follow that precedent anymore; if they want to consolidate their disability services in institutions, and thus coerce disabled people who could live safely in their communities into institutions, that's fine. The Olmstead precedent still stands, but the DOJ will not enforce it.

At the same time, the government has proposed eliminating categorical grants for the Agency For Community Living, dismantling the ACL and spreading its functions across different agencies, even though the ACL has been shown to play a crucial role in helping disabled people live in their communities. The President’s 2026 budget proposed eliminating the federal Long Term Care Ombudsman Program that helps monitor abuse in institutions, and HHS rescinded guidance requiring that nursing homes hire enough staff to prevent life-threatening neglect. These policies make it more likely that disabled people will be institutionalized and will increase the misery of those experiences.

Coercive institutionalization has a significant impact on euthanasia prevention efforts. Bear in mind that one of the ways hospital staff have tried to bully disabled Canadian Roger Foley into assisted suicide is to withhold medical equipment and procedures needed to meet his basic needs. Disabled Canadian Normand Meunier died by assisted suicide because a hospital didn’t keep an accessible mattress on hand which resulted in him developing a festering bedsore. Although our assisted suicide laws are not as expansive as Canada’s, many disabled people who would become terminal without the correct support are also at risk of being unnecessarily institutionalized. Coercing such persons into institutions makes it more likely that they will choose assisted suicide.

I think all readers can understand that people need the solace and support of their communities, and to feel that they belong there. Forcing people who do not need to be institutionalized into institutions is like an unjust prison sentence. Such situations cause despair and hopelessness, furthering the culture of death that euthanasia opponents are trying to fight.

I invite readers to consider late disability studies scholar and assisted suicide opponent Paul Longmore’s concept of “social death.” In Longmore’s memoir “Why I Burned My Book And Other Essays On Disability,” Longmore criticizes assisted suicide advocates for ignoring ableism.

Longmore asserts:

“One wades through reams of this suicide rights advocacy without finding any real acknowledgment of the intense social stigma and discrimination that segregate people with disabilities…deny them opportunities for education, employment, marriage, and family, rob them of social dignity and self-esteem, and inflict on many of them what can only be called "social death." One searches in vain for even a passing reference to the civil-rights movement of disabled Americans that has been battling this discrimination for generations. One finds no mention and, one concludes, no knowledge of the independent-living movement of people with major physical disabilities. Apparently, none of this has attracted the attention or interest of suicide rights activists.”

Collectively, the aforementioned policy changes and proposals inflict the “social death” that Longmore talked about. Weakening the requirement that states provide support in the most integrated setting possible will rob unjustly institutionalized persons of hope. That’s the impact of weakening disability access laws in general: robbing disabled people of hope for a happy, dignified life.

So, euthanasia opponents, embrace your full potential as human dignity advocates: honor euthanasia prevention and the 36th anniversary of the Americans With Disabilities Act by supporting policies that help disabled people thrive.

Author Note 1: I did an interview with moral theologian Charlie Camosy about how coerced institutionalization and assisted suicide are connected to one another. It can be read here.

Author Note 2: For a detailed list of the extensive disability policy changes that have been implemented or attempted in the past year, see this link.

Euthanasia Prevention Coalition needs your support.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition (EPC) exists to build a well-informed, broadly-based network of groups and individuals supporting measures that will create an effective social barrier to euthanasia and assisted suicide.

Canada created the term (MAiD) - medical assistance in dying, to make us feel better about killing, but the reality is that Canada legalized euthanasia in 2016 and expanded the law in 2021 by removing the requirement that a person be terminally ill to be killed.

In January EPC released the Life Worth Living film that explains what has happened in Canada while featuring important personal stories related to euthanasia. This is a powerful award winning film. You can watch the trailer or purchase the film at: https://lifeworthlivingfilm.com/

Canada is currently scheduled to extend euthanasia to people with a mental illness alone in March 2027.

On May 5, 2026, we spoke to the Parliamentary Committee that was examining the extension of euthanasia to mental illness alone. The position of EPC is to demand that Canada fully review it's euthanasia law rather than further expand the law. On June 17, the parliamentary committee advised the federal government to not extend euthanasia to people with mental illness alone. We await the government's response.

EPC is intervening in a court case concerning euthanasia for mental illness alone. Claire Brosseau and the euthanasia lobby launched an emergency court case that would approve Brosseau for death by euthanasia based on mental illness alone. In essence, the euthanasia lobby want the court to legislate from the bench by approving death for Brosseau as the Canadian government continues to debate this issue.

The cost of intervening in the Brosseau case is excessive. We need your financial support to cover the legal costs. (EPC Donation Link).

EPC supports Bill C-218 which is a private members bill that will prevent euthanasia for mental illness alone in Canada. The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition urges Canadians to sign our petition in support of Bill C-218. (Petition Link).

For more information you can read our newsletters (newsletters link) or you can read more of our blog articles (EPC Blog Link). The EPC blog has more than 6300 articles and has had more than 17 million pageviews.

EPC has many more activities. We need your support to continue our work. Donations can be made at: (credit card online Link) or (Paypal donation Link) or send an E-transfer to info@epcc.ca or call EPC at: 1-877-439-3348.

Alicia Duncan's Book Launch in Abbotsford and Vancouver BC - August 20/21.

Join Alex Schadenberg and attend the book launch for the powerful - The Other Side of the Straightjacket, by Alicia Duncan.

EPC is promoting the Book Launch Celebrations on: August 20 in Abbotsford and August 21 in Vancouver.

August 20, 2026 - The book launch is at: The Reach Gallery Museum, 32388 Veterans Way, Abbotsford BC V2T 0B3 from 6:30 - 9:00 pm (Link to register).

August 21, 2026 - Author presentation and book signing is at Suite Genius, 225 W 8th Ave Vancouver BC V5Y 1N3 from 6:30 - 8:00 pm (Link to register).

 

Purchase the book from the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition for $25 (plus shipping) (Purchase Link).

In 2021, Alicia’s mother, Donna Duncan, died by Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD), a death that sparked national controversy and led to the first police investigation into a MAiD death in Canada. What began as a daughter’s search for answers became years of advocacy, legal action, and a mission to expose troubling gaps in the systems mean't to protect vulnerable people.

Donna’s story has been featured by major media outlets, including the BBC documentary Better Off Dead? and CBC’s The Fifth Estate. Alicia has since become a recognized voice in the national and international conversation around assisted dying, most recently providing testimony to Canada’s Special Joint Committee on Medical Assistance in Dying (AMAD).

More than anything, these events are about the story behind the book: why Alicia felt compelled to write it, what she learned in the process, and why these conversations matter now more than ever.

• Article: How the narrative control is narrowing Canada's MAiD debate (Read).
• Article: Alicia Duncan, History will remember the lives saved or lost (Read).

Once euthanasia or assisted suicide are legal, the death lobby will pressure to expand the law.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, 
Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

New York officially instituted their assisted suicide law on August 5 (yesterday). The assisted suicide lobby pressured New York legislators for 10 years before New York finally legalized death by lethal poison.

The assisted suicide lobby will soon begin to lobby New York politicians to expand the law.

Kevin Dias, an assisted suicide lobby leader told Katelyn Cordero in an article published in Politico on August 5 that:

while they were disappointed by additional safeguards added through negotiations — such as the residency requirement and mental health evaluation — his organization has worked closely with the state on the implementation process.

Dias is referring to the fact that the original New York assisted suicide bill: 

• did not have a residency requirement, meaning anyone from anywhere could die by assisted suicide in New York,
• did not have a reflection period, meaning it allowed a same day death,
• did not have a mental health evaluation, meaning, depressed people could die by assisted suicide.

Based on the comments by Kevin Dias the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition expects that the assisted suicide lobby will demand expansions to the assisted suicide law, likely in 2028.

The assisted suicide lobby knows that it is more difficult to legalize assisted suicide than it is to expand the law once it is legal.

In 2019 Oregon passed Bill SB 0579 which expanded the assisted suicide law by giving doctors the right to waive the 15 day waiting period when a person is considered near to death.

In 2021 California passed Bill SB 380 which expanded the assisted suicide law by reducing the waiting period from 15 days to 48 hours. It forced doctors who oppose assisted suicide to be complicit in the act and it forced all medical institutions to post their policy on assisted suicide. 

In March 2022 a group of California doctors launched a court case designed to protect the conscience rights of medical professionals. In September 2022 US District Judge Fernando Aenlle-Rocha ruled that the California End of Life Options Act that was amended by Bill SB 380, violated First Amendment rights of doctors by requiring them to participate in assisted suicide.

In 2022 Vermont expanded their assisted suicide law by removing the 48 hour waiting period, (allowing same day death), removing the requirement that examinations be done in person, (allowing approvals by telehealth), and extending legal immunity to anyone who participates in the act.

In 2023 Washington State expanded their assisted suicide law by allowing physician assistants and advanced practice registered nurses to approve and prescribe lethal poison, reducing the waiting period to 7 days and forcing healthcare institutions and hospices to post their assisted suicide policies.

In 2023 Hawaii expanded their assisted suicide law by reducing the waiting period from 20 days to 5 days, it allows the waiting period to be waived if the person is considered near to death and it allows advanced practice registered nurses to approve and prescribe lethal poison.

In 2023 Oregon expanded their assisted suicide law by passing House Bill 2279 which removed their state assisted suicide residency requirement.

In 2023 Vermont also expanded their assisted suicide law by passing Senate Bill 26 which removed their state assisted suicide residency requirement.

Oregon and Vermont removed their assisted suicide residency requirements in response to assisted suicide lobby legal challenges. By removing the state residency requirement assisted suicide has become a national issue since anyone in America can die by assisted suicide in Oregon and Vermont.

In 2024 Colorado passed Senate Bill 24-068 which allowed advanced practice registered nurses to approve and prescribe assisted suicide, reducing the waiting period from 15 days to 7 days, and allowing the doctor or advanced practise registered nurse to waive the waiting period if the person is deemed to be near to death (same day death).

In 2025 Maine passed bill LD613 which expanded the state assisted suicide law by reducing the waiting period from 15 days to 5 days.

Euthanasia expansions also happened in Canada, where euthanasia and assisted suicide were legalized in June 2016 (Bill C-14) and then expanded with Bill C-7 in March 2021. Bill C-7 removed the terminal illness requirement, removed the 10-day reflection period, allowed euthanasia for incompetent people who were previously approved and extended euthanasia to mental illness alone. The implantation of euthanasia for mental illness alone has been delayed until March 2027.

Groups that support euthanasia will state that Bill C-7 was based on the Truchon court decision in Quebec, but Bill C-7 expanded the law further than Truchon required. 

Expansion occurs for many reasons

When  examining the expansions of assisted suicide laws in America we recognize several key themes. There is the removal of waiting periods, allowing non-physicians to do the act, and allowing non-residents to die by assisted suicide. 

Assisted suicide laws have also been expanded by redefining the language of the law.

In December 2017, Fabian Stahle, a Swedish researcher asked the Oregon Health Authority how they define terminal illness. Stahle learned that the Oregon Health Authority defined the six month terminal illness prognosis as including someone who may have a six month prognosis even if they reject effective medical treatment. This was clearly an expansion of the law based on redefining the language of the law. 

Once assisted suicide is legal, restrictions on the law are seen as discriminatory. 

Before assisted suicide is legal, everyone is equal under the law. Everyone is equally protected from being killed or equally protected from suicide. 

 

Once legal, people who do not "qualify" under the assisted suicide law will claim that the current law lacks equality and is discriminatory because it doesn't equally apply to all people. 

 

We oppose killing people. 

We don’t just oppose killing people who are terminally or chronically ill, but we oppose killing people. 

We always support caring for people and never support abandoning them to death.

RFK Jr. Decertifies Kentucky Organ Procurement Organization

This article was published by National Review online on August 5, 2026.

Wesley Smith

By Wesley J. Smith

Say what you will about Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., but he definitely cares about ensuring that organ transplant medicine remains ethical, and unlike many government functionaries, he and his department are actually doing something about it. Thus, on the back of Medicare decertifying a Florida organ procurement organization for cause in 2025, the government is now decertifying the Network for Hope that operates in Kentucky and a few other states.

The government warned the network last year that its procurement procedures were ethically deficient. But the organ procurement organization never cleaned up its act despite knowing it was being scrutinized, including, apparently, for seeking to procure organs from people who had not died.

The unethical cases involve a procedure sometimes known as heart death (as opposed to brain death). In a heart-death donation, the donor is usually receiving intensive care. That medical support is withdrawn with consent and if cardiac arrest occurs — sometimes it doesn’t and the patient is then to be returned to care — after three or so minutes the patient is declared-dead because cardiopulmonary function has irreversibly stopped. After that, the procurement commences.

The case that caused the government to intervene is a real horror story as described by the New York Times:

In Kentucky, scrutiny began when a congressional committee heard testimony about the case of Anthony Thomas Hoover II, who had an overdose in 2021. After family members were told that he would not recover, they authorized donation.

As coordinators arranged for the surgery, Mr. Hoover began to stir, at one point “thrashing on the bed,” according to records reviewed by The Times. Still, Network for Hope, then called Kentucky Organ Donor Affiliates, tried to move forward. Finally, on the way to the operation, Mr. Hoover cried, pulled his knees to his head and shook his head, and a hospital doctor refused to withdraw life support.

Mr. Hoover eventually recovered, although he has lingering neurological injuries.

Good grief.

Despite that case, Network for Hope avoided punishment. But then:

A federal investigation last year determined that the group had similarly ignored signs of growing alertness in more than 70 other patients. Although the organ removals were eventually cancelled, the investigation said multiple patients exhibited pain or distress as they were being readied for surgery. Overall, more than 100 cases had “concerning features,” the investigators said, noting that the majority of transplants arranged by the Kentucky group were from circulatory-death patients.

Good for Kennedy and the government for moving on this. This is important. The people’s trust in organ transplant medicine is already shallow as unwise efforts to loosen ethical standards advocated by prominent bioethicists — such as allowing living people to be harvested — threaten to further erode public confidence. If we want to maximize the number of organs donated, people have to believe that their lives are deemed more important than their organs.

Next, the government should prohibit the use of a relatively new organ procurement procedure called “normothermic regional perfusion,” which allows cardiac arrest, cuts off circulation to the brain to induce brain death, and then restarts the heart before procurement. It seems to me — and I am far from alone in thinking this — that if someone is resuscitated successfully, he or she is not dead. Moreover, making patients brain-dead on purpose seems little different to me than actively killing them.

Assisted Suicide for people with eating disorders.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

On July 30, 2026 we published an article about the Colorado 2025 assisted suicide data. There were three key take-aways from the Colorado data.

1. Colorado does not know how many people died by assisted suicide. 
2. Colorado has missing data concerning how many lethal poison prescriptions were filled.
3. 
   The number of people who were approved for assisted suicide for eating disorders in Colorado has grown substantially. In 2024, 19 people with eating disorders were approved for assisted suicide and in 2025, 17 people with eating disorders were approved for assisted suicide.

During the assisted suicide bill debate in the UK, Eat, Breathe, Thrive, an organization that specializes in the treatment of eating disorders produced a video about the threat of legalizing assisted suicide for people with eating disorders. 

The video features Ailidh, who lives with an eating disorder and says:

I'm worried. My concerns lie with people like myself who are still in the throws of anorexia right now and what the assisted dying bill could mean for them and the families.

The film shows an anthropologist speaking to the UK assisted dying bill committee claiming that only one or two people have died by assisted suicide for eating disorders in America.

Considering the fact that Colorado alone approved 19 people in 2024 and 17 people in 2025 for assisted suicide based on an eating disorder, clearly the comments to the committee were wrong.

Chelsea Roff

Chelsea Roff, the founder of Eat, Breathe, Thrive, explains the study that they did on assisted death for eating disorders and found that at least 60 people died by an assisted death based on having an eating disorder.

People with eating disorders are living with a serious but treatable condition. 

They are not terminally ill.

Event in Jordon Ontario - Exposing Assisted Suicide / Euthanasia in Canada (August 13)

Lessons on opposing MAiD in Canada

Rachel Parker Live and the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition are sponsoring an important event in Jordan Ontario

Date: Thursday, August 13 at 7 pm.

Location: The Jordan Hotel

(Purchase tickets) 

Use discount code: RP FOLLOWER 

An evening with: Euthanasia Prevention Coalition Executive Director, Alex Schadenberg, podcaster Rachel Parker and author / activist Jonathon Van Maren.

The evening provides excellent speakers and an incredible opportunity to focus-on and share what needs to be done to change Canada's future. 

(Purchase tickets) 

 

Reflecting on the legalization of assisted suicide in New York.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Today (August 5) is the day that New York state implements their assisted suicide law. 

This is a day of great sadness as we recognize the reality of the decision to legalize assisted suicide and we reflect on the fact that many lives will be ended by this decision.

Assisted suicide laws give doctors (in some states, (also) physician assistants and nurses) the right in law to be directly involved with causing the death of their patients and they provide total legal coverage for the medical staff who are willing to participate, even when the death that they facilitated was questionable.

Assisted suicide is sold to the culture as a form of freedom, choice and autonomy whereas the assisted suicide law actually gives doctors, the right in law, to agree that a persons life is not worth living and to prescribe lethal poison that will kill that person.

There is a misunderstanding about the nature of the assisted suicide act. Assisted suicide is sold as a self-killing, whereas the law is concerned about the rules that the doctor must follow in order to prescribe the lethal poison. Assisted suicide deaths are not always quick, peaceful and painless.

Further to that, there will be "legally" inappropriate deaths. A key problem with identifying deaths that are considered "outside" the parameters of the law is that one of the key witnesses is dead and the other key witness approved the death.

Assisted suicide changes the nature of medical treatment and care. One reason is that killing when sold as a treatment for medical conditions, normalizes killing and justifies it as a "medical option." Another reason is that some physicians will make assisted suicide a central part of their medical practice. These physicians will sometimes become cavalier with assisted suicide leading to a practical expansion of the law.

I oppose killing people. This is not just a statement but rather an understanding of our common human experience. Human persons are not just physical beings but rather we have an intertwined psychological and emotional nature. Offering death, at a person's lowest time, is not about autonomy but rather abandonment. Abandoning a person to death.

Cultural safety requires it's citizens and especially it's medical care-givers to be committed to caring and never killing. 

Giving doctors the right in law to kill creates a social inequality that becomes a threat to the lives of many in their time of need.

Response to: The Paradox of Assisted Suicide.

Mara Buchbinder's thesis: The Paradox of Medical Aid in Dying suggests that legalizing assisted suicide is popular because the practice is rare. Buchbinder also asserts that legalizing assisted suicide improves the death experience because patients can plan and discuss their death.

Dr's Pies, Geppert, Komrad and Hanson respond.

Dear Colleagues,

As psychiatrists and medical ethicists, we strongly disagree with anthropologist Mara Buchbinder, Ph.D.’s “Perspective” in the New England Journal of Medicine. [1] We believe Buchbinder’s thesis ignores the central, ethical issue underlying physician-assisted suicide (PAS) and offers several fallacious justifications for PAS.

First: nowhere in Buchbinder’s analysis is there any discussion of whether PAS is ethically justified, or consistent with the values of Hippocratic medicine. Many prominent medical organizations have repeatedly said it is not. [2,3,4]

Furthermore, it is a morbid irony to assert that an "unintended benefit" of MAID laws is to help "…start new conversations about what matters most to patients in the final stages of serious illness…” Does Buchbinder seriously believe that such intimate physician-patient conversations require legislation authorizing medically-assisted suicide on demand?

In truth, discussing MAID with a terminally ill patient narrows the conversation and orients the patient toward death as the preferred option. Responsible palliative care identifies options based on the patient’s actual goals and values [5]

Equally fallacious is Buchbinder’s reference to “this potential of MAID to control uncertainty” stemming from “the current historical moment.” The implication that a patient’s anxiety over “political unrest, economic instability, [and] climate change” is appropriately addressed by offering medically assisted suicide is stunning in its perversity.

As medical ethicist Dr. Leon Kass has observed, “We must care for the dying, not make them dead.” [6]

Respectfully,

Ronald W. Pies, MD 
Cynthia M.A. Geppert, MD, PhD, MA, MPH, MSBE, DPS, MSJ 
Mark S. Komrad, MD 
Annette Hanson, MD

References

1. Buchbinder M. The Paradox of Medical Aid in Dying. NEJM 395;5 July 30, 2026 [attached]

2. Snyder Sulmasy L, Mueller PS; Ethics, Professionalism and Human Rights Committee of the American College of Physicians. Ethics and the Legalization of Physician-Assisted Suicide: An American College of Physicians Position Paper. Ann Intern Med. 2017 Oct 17;167(8):576-578

3. American Medical Association Code of Ethics. https://code-medical-ethics.ama-assn.org/ethics-opinions/physician-assisted-suicide

4. WMA Declaration on Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide. (2019). https://www.wma.net/policies-post/declaration-on-euthanasia-and-physician-assisted-suicide/

5. Geppert CM. Futility in Chronic Anorexia Nervosa: A Concept Whose Time Has Not Yet Come. Am J Bioeth. 2015;15(7):34-43. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2015.1039720. PMID: 26147264.

6. Kass L. Dehumanization Triumphant. First Things. Aug. 1, 1996. https://firstthings.com/dehumanization-triumphant/

UK Prime Minister seeks to delay assisted suicide debate

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Prime Minister Andy Burnham

The new UK Prime Minister, Andy Burnham, while speaking with reporters after a speech at a Jewish Care facility about social care reform commented on the upcoming assisted suicide debate. Burnham stated at (11:34):

"I take the view that the debate, and I don't say that there shouldn't be a debate at some point about those issues, personally I think that there is something that needs to happen first and that's the fixing of the funding of palliative care and social care. 

I think it is very challenging to introduce that wider debate in a context of people not receiving that care and having the peace of mind about that care.”

Burnham did not say that he opposes assisted suicide but he did say that improvements to end-of-life care should be dealt with first, before the UK considers assisted suicide.

These comments are important because on June 17, 2026 Labour MP Lauren Edwards introduced a similar version of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill that recently died in the British House of Lords. MPs are scheduled to vote on the Edwards assisted suicide bill at second reading on September 11, 2026.

On November 29, 2024; the UK House of Commons voted 330 to 275 at second reading to support Kim Leadbeater's assisted suicide bill, which was nearly identical to Edwards bill

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition is convinced that Edwards introduced a nearly identical assisted suicide bill as the Leadbeater bill in order to invoke The Parliament Acts, which allows the House of Commons to forgo approval from the House of Lords when passing two nearly identical bills within consecutive parliamentary sessions.

The Parliament Acts has only been used seven times since 1911 for Government legislation, and it has never been used for a Private Members’ Bill. Edwards assisted suicide is a private members bill.

Prime Minister Burnham's comments along with the fact that he has given members of his Labour party the right to vote with their conscience means that the Edwards assisted suicide bill will more likely be defeated on September 11.

Is MAiD Medical Murder? A Podcast Discussion

Podcast exposes red flags regarding MAiD in Canada

Viviana Runstedler
Staff Writer, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Dr Christopher Shaw

*The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition refers to (MAiD) euthanasia as medical homicide.

We are pleased to share information on a podcast episode that exposes the truth about (MAiD) euthanasia in Canada that mainstream podcasts avoid discussing.

On an episode aired July 17th 2026, the Children’s Health Defense (Canada Chapter) interviewed two medical professionals about (MAiD) euthanasia in Canada. 

Dr Christopher Shaw is a neuroscientist and professor at the University of British Columbia as well as the co-chair of the scientific and medical advisory committee of the Canadian Citizens Care Alliance. Dr York N. Hsiang is a professor emeritus of surgery also at the University of British Columbia and a member of the scientific and medical advisory committee of the Canadian Citizens Care Alliance. Together, these two doctors presented a helpful overview of the current state of MAiD in Canada and shared eye-opening information concerning the ongoing execution of MAiD.

Dr York N. Hsiang

Dr Hsiang began by reminding listeners that MAiD is now the 5th leading cause of death in Canada and is an effective way to recoup healthcare costs. He briefly reviews recent discussions to expand Canadian MAiD approvals for mental illness and for minors. He went on to discuss issues within the current MAiD system.

One major issue presented by Dr Hsiang involves the misuse and misunderstanding of the drugs used in MAiD. The drugs used in Canada are essentially anesthetics used in very high doses to cause death. He referenced a 2022 article in the Canadian Medical Association journal that “only 21% of the physicians who are actively giving MAiD can be said to fully understand the drugs that they are giving for MAiD” (timestamp 8:30)

Dr Hsiang continues:

“about a quarter of patients took over an hour to die. And this is, clinically, this meaning you no longer have a heartbeat. Your brain could still be functioning, but you no longer have a heartbeat and so you are then deemed to be dead. The shocking thing is that when you actually look at the drugs that are being used, many of the drugs, in particular being the kill shot, the cardio-toxic drugs, in one quarter of those patients was not given. Why was that? Was that the reason why patients were taking over 1 hour to die? At the same time when MAiD is explained to be a painless procedure, less than one percent of the patients actually received a true medication for pain, in other words a narcotic. Very very surprising. And so, I have concerns that as the program gets expanded even more there’s going to be more practitioners that want to get on to this because it is lucrative and the majority of them don’t have any training. Nobody has training in how to kill a patient, our whole training is how to save a patient and keep them alive.” (timestamp 10:15)

Dr Hsiang is not the first doctor we have heard expressing concern about the administration of euthanasia and how the drugs may actually affect the person experiencing a euthanasia death. EPC has previously reported on euthanasia deaths which caused great distress to the deceased and family members present at the death. 

The National Post also covered this issue in 2022, recognizing that until euthanasia was legalized, doctors had never given doses this large of these particular drugs. The National Post article included a quote from Dr Joel Zivot suggesting that euthanasia could “feel like drowning” and that he “worries paralytics could mask an unpleasant death.” Zivot’s conclusions were based on his work studying capital punishment via lethal injection in the US which uses a common sedative to Canadian euthanasia protocol.

Another red flag that Dr Hsiang has identified in Canada is:

“physician zealots who contact family practitioner offices, and this I have heard from discussing this with family doctors, that they want to know on each family doctor’s list how many patients are eligible for MAiD. There is a financial incentive for these doctors since they are reimbursed quite well for a very short procedure.” (timestamp 9:08)

This quote highlights the pressure being placed on many Canadians to accept and utilize euthanasia. Discussion also turned to the Dying with Dignity Canada “Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) Activity Book” created for children. This child-centric material is especially dark considering the context of possible expansion of MAiD eligibility to impressionable minors.

Dr Hsiang and Dr Shaw also speculate that since euthanasia is used to facilitate organ donation, the expansion of eligibility to minors would increase accessibility to “younger” organs for donation and this may be a contributing factor behind these criteria expansions. We have covered several of these issues on the blog over the years; our posts related to organ donation can be found here.

Drs Hsiang and Shaw are currently working on a book about euthanasia, expected to be published next year. The portion of the podcast regarding euthanasia ends at timestamp 16:40. We thank these doctors for working independently of mainstream discussions to bring these issues to light in an open forum.

New York Sisters obtain temporary order protecting them from participating in assisted suicide

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

I have good news. 

The Beckett Fund reported that a temporary order was obtained preventing the state of New York from forcing Catholic Sisters and Catholic healthcare from participating in the assisted suicide law while the federal lawsuit by Catholic healthcare proceeds in the court. 

The New York assisted suicide law will come into effect on August 5

Article: Catholic sisters challenge New York state assisted suicide law (Link).

The lawsuit was filed on July 16 to overturn the New York assisted suicide law based on the language in the law that, among other things, requires Catholic healthcare to inform patients that they can have assisted suicide, requires them to refer patients who request assisted suicide and the law conflicts with the federal law that prohibits federal funding for assisted suicide.

The temporary order was agreed to by US District Court Judge Anne M. Nardacci enabling Catholic healthcare to not participate in assisted suicide until a court decision is made in the full case. The order states that Catholic healthcare is temporarily protected from:

• providing information and counseling about assisted suicide,
• establishing policies and procedures about how counseling for assisted suicide will be done,
• arranging for other physicians or nurse practitioners who will provide information about counseling about assisted suicide or refering patients to other physicians or nurse practitioners who are willing to assist suicide,
• documenting requests for assisted suicide,
• assessing, evaluating or otherwise assisting patients in being qualified for assisted suicide,
• permiting assisted suicide or refering for assisted suicide.

The Judge assigned a time-line for the State of New York if they decide to appeal the emergency motion.

This is a temporary order until the court hears the full case. EPC believes that the court needs to recognize the conscience rights of care-givers and strike down the New York assisted suicide law based on federal assisted suicide funding restrictions.

For those who believe that assisted suicide is a choice, then they should also acknowledge the choice of others to not participate in assisted suicide. Participation is wider than the actual act of prescribing or directly assisting the suicide.

Further to that, assisted suicide is not about "autonomy" since it requires the direct involvement of medical professionals who are complicit with a person's suicide.

Medical professionals should never be involved with killing or assisting suicides since it changes the nature of care. For ethical healthcare to survive, there must be a commitment to always care and never kill.

More articles on this topic:

• Catholic sisters challenge New York state assisted suicide law (Link).
• New York is opening a pandora's box with assisted suicide (Link).
• New York Governor to sign assisted suicide bill (Link).

Free online film screening of Prescription Poison on August 4.

Register for the free online screening of Prescription Poison: Averting Assisted Suicide in America 

(Today) August 4 at: 2 pm (Eastern Time) / 11 am (Pacific Time).

The Prescription Poison film is produced by Alex Schadenberg, Executive Director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition and Frank Panico with Xs in the Sky films.  

Topic: Prescription Poison

Tuesday Aug 4, 2026 2 PM Eastern Time/11 am Pacific Time.

Register in advance for this meeting: (Registration Link). 

Prescription Poison is 43 minutes long. The screening will be followed by a discussion.

Prescription Poison is ground-breaking documentary exposing the expansion of assisted suicide in America.

Prescription Poison seeks to awaken America to the growth of assisted suicide and is a warning to Americans that, unless stopped, the Canadian system of killing will become a reality in America.

Purchase the Prescription Poison film for $10 US (download) or $15 DVD at: Prescriptionpoison.com

Watch the Prescription Poison Trailer:

Topic: Prescription Poison - Averting Assisted Suicide in America.

Tuesday, Aug 4, 2026 2 pm Eastern Time/11 am Pacific Time.

Register in advance for this meeting: (Registration Link).