Canada's euthanasia law - We've already gone too far.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

John Ivison

John Ivison, who is a columnist with the National Post, wrote a scathing column on January 23, 2024 concerning the impending expansion of euthanasia to include Canadians with mental illness alone titled: We’ve already gone too far on MAID. Parliament can still stop us going further, that he subtitled: The government should end the domino effect that will almost certainly see the extension of MAID to mature minors become the next frontier.

Ivison begins his column with outrage concerning an article by euthanasia academic activist Jocelyn Downie. Ivison writes:

I appear to have reached the stage in life where I am prepared to write outraged epistles to publishers and threaten to cancel my subscription after reading something with which I vehemently disagree.

That was the initial reaction when I read an opinion article on the National Newswatch website on the subject of the expansion of medically assistance in dying (MAID) to people suffering mental disorders.

The article in question by Jocelyn Downie offended on multiple levels.

Ivison continues:

Downie, the James S. Palmer Chair of Public Policy and Law at Dalhousie University’s Schulich School of Law, argued that “the courts have spoken” on the issue of cases where mental disorders are the sole underlying medical condition (MAID MD-SUMC), effectively denying Parliament any agency in the matter.

In effect, she said, the government should get out of the way and allow those with mental issues access to MAID from this March a move that was initially scheduled for March 2023, but which was postponed, the government said, to ensure it could “move forward on this sensitive and complex issue in a prudent and measured way.”

The fact that a parliamentary special committee is set to report on that very issue by the end of this month, is apparently neither here nor there to Downie. She claims that all the necessary steps are in place, from data collection to a national curriculum for assessors. There is “strong evidence” that the bodies that regulate psychiatrists and nurses are ready, she said.

Downie is the euthanasia academic activist who claims that the Supreme Court declared, in Carter, that Canadians have a right to euthanasia. She is wrong. The Supreme Court also never declared that euthanasia must be permitted for people with a mental illness alone. Downie has always made graniose claims that are only backed up by her euthanasia lobby friends.

Ivison explains how Canada got to the point of permitting euthanasia for people with mental illness alone, including the Quebec Truchon lower court decision and then states:

But the courts have not spoken with any finality. “It should be absurd to anyone that a lower court decision in Quebec determines what Parliament should be doing. It is absurd that anyone argues Parliament should legislate based on ‘here’s how the Supreme Court of Canada might rule’,” argues Trudo Lemmens, Professor of the School Chair in Health Law and Policy in the Faculty of Law at the University of Toronto.

He and 24 other law professors from across the country wrote to the prime minister arguing that the constitutionality, or lack of constitutionality, of an exclusion clause for MAID MD-SUMC has not been tested in the courts. Lemmens and his colleagues argued there is no legal requirement for the government to expand MAID because the Supreme Court has not reviewed the evidence on whether mental illness can reliably be diagnosed as irremediable.

The previous justice minister, David Lametti, was on record as opposing the expansion but he is gone and his successor, Arif Virani, has only said the government is weighing up its options over whether to seek a deferral.

Ivison then states that the Truchon lower court decision in Quebec was not appealed because it was a popular decision in Quebec and it came out during the federal election. Ivison continues:

A private member’s bill by Conservative MP Ed Fast that would have killed the expansion revealed how contentious the move remains. It was defeated by 17 votes, but only because the Bloc supported the government. The NDP voted with the Conservatives and several Liberals.

The government has every reason to be concerned about being pushed into a decision. An Angus Reid Institute survey from last February reveals strong support (61 per cent) for the existing MAID legislation. Most Canadians, including this one, agree that consenting adults facing intolerable pain should have the right to a compassionate end to their lives; that there should be an enlightened balance between access and protection.

But that support drops in half (31 per cent) when respondents are asked about extending MAID to those whose sole medical condition is mental illness.

Ivison concludes the article by summing up the situation:

The latest statistics we have are that 44,958 people died by MAID between 2016 and the end of 2022, more than the number of Canadian military deaths in the Second World War.

The trend lines are worrying: 31.2-per-cent more cases in 2022 over the previous year.

The fear is that those numbers will really blast off if access becomes too open. There are plenty of signs that Canada has gone too far already, without lifting more restrictions.

• As Lemmens points out, despite the safeguards in place, accessors have reasonably broad discretion in an area with a 50-per-cent accuracy rate of prediction.

• There is data from Europe that show many people seeking psychiatric MAID have unresolved socio-economic suffering.

• Canada is the only jurisdiction that does not see MAID as a last resort — it does not require the patient to be in a state of treatment when he or she seeks medically assisted dying.

• A 2:1 majority of Ontario Medical Association psychiatrists oppose MAID MD-SUMC, even though 80 per cent support medically assisted dying in other circumstances.

In these circumstances, the federal government should show some mettle, refuse to accept Parliament’s role of rubber-stamp that some activists would bestow upon it, and put an end to a domino effect that will almost certainly see the extension of MAID to mature minors become the next frontier.

More articles on this topic:

• Join our campaign to stop euthanasia for mental illness (Link).
• Euthanasia for drug addicts is an outcome of euthanasia for mental illness (Link).
• Canada's government may pause the implementation of euthanasia for mental illness. (Link)
• Canada passes Bill C-7 - permitting euthanasia for mental illness. (Link)
• Canada to delay euthanasia for mental illness until March 2024. (Link)
• The majority of Canadians oppose euthanasia for mental health. (Link)
• 28% of Canadians support euthanasia for mental illness. (Link)
• Bill C-314 defeated. Parliament divided on euthanasia for mental illness. (Link)
• Veterans Affairs Canada worker advocates euthanasia for PTSD. (Link)
• Canadian Quadriplegic woman approved to die by euthanasia faster than it takes to get needed disability benefits (Link)
• Canadian woman offered euthanasia as a "treatment option" during a mental health crisis. (Link)
• Globe and Mail editorial urges federal government to withdraw euthanasia for mental illness. (Link) 
• The problem with Canada's MAiD policy (Link)
  
• Ontario man seeks euthanasia to avoid homelessness. (Link)
• Why did they kill my brother. (Link)