Ontario Chief Coroner report: Some euthanasia deaths are driven by homelessness, fear and isolation.

More than 400 Ontario euthanasia deaths have not fit the criteria of the law.

The Ontario MAiD Death Review report has three parts (Part 3) (Part 2) (Part 1).

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Maria Cheng reported for the AP Press on October 17 that the Ontario chief coroner released a report reviewing euthanasia death. The report examined several cases where Ontario patients were killed by MAiD in part for social reasons such as isolation and fears of homelessness, raising concerns over approvals for vulnerable people in the country’s assisted dying system.

Cheng reported that:

The expert committee’s reports are based on an analysis of anonymized cases, chosen for their implications for future euthanasia requests.

Canada’s legal criteria require a medical reason for euthanasia — a fatal diagnosis or unmanageable pain — but the committee’s reports show cases where people were euthanized based on other factors including an “unmet social need.”

Dr Ramona Coelho

Dr Ramona Coelho, a member of the expert committee told Cheng:

“To finally have a government report that recognizes these cases of concern is extremely important,”

“We’ve been gaslit for so many years when we raised fears about people getting MAiD because they were poor, disabled or socially isolated.”

The reported examined several controversial cases. Cheng reported:

In the case of a man identified as Mr. A, Ontario’s expert committee questioned whether authorities tried hard enough to relieve his pain before he was euthanized. Mr. A was an unemployed man in his 40s with bowel disease and a history of substance abuse and mental illness. He was described as “socially vulnerable and isolated.” Some committee members were alarmed that a psychiatrist suggested euthanasia during a mental health assessment.

Mr. A was eventually picked up and driven to the location where he was killed by the health professional who euthanized him — a transgression of professional boundaries, according to some committee members. They said that might have “created pressure and gave rise to a perception of hastening a person towards death.”

Another case detailed Ms. B, a woman in her 50s suffering from multiple chemical sensitivity syndrome, with a history of mental illness including suicidality and post-traumatic stress disorder. She was socially isolated and asked to die largely because she could not get proper housing, according to the report.

Committee members couldn’t agree whether her death was justified; some said that because her inadequate housing was the main reason for her suffering, she should have been disqualified from euthanasia. Others argued that “social needs may be considered irremediable” if other options have been explored.

Dr Sonu Gaind

Dr Sonu Gaind, professor of psychiatry medicine at the University of Toronto told Cheng:

the coroner’s reports are alarming for numerous reasons, notably the handling of mental health conditions in those seeking euthanasia.

“What we’re doing in many cases is the opposite of suicide prevention,” he said, citing an example of a man in his 40s who had previously tried to kill himself and did not have a definitive diagnosis when his euthanasia was approved.

Dr Scott Kim, a physician and bioethicist at the National Institutes of Health in Washington told Cheng:

the real issue is the permissive nature of Canada’s law. Despite polls showing widespread support for expanding euthanasia access, he questioned whether most Canadians understand what is allowed and said it’s “baffling” that officials hadn’t previously considered these issues.

Trudo Lemmens

Trudo Lemmens, professor of health law and policy at the University of Toronto told Cheng

medical professional bodies and judicial authorities in Canada appeared “unwilling to curtail practices that appear ethically problematic.”

“Either the law is too broad, or the professional guidance not precise enough,”

“Or it is simply not seen as a priority to protect some of our most vulnerable citizens.”

The report indicated that 2% of the euthanasia deaths did not meet the mandated safeguards despite the fact that no doctors or nurses have been prosecuted.

Cheng concluded her article by stating:

AP’s investigation also found data suggesting a significant number of people euthanized in Ontario when they weren’t dying live in the province’s poorest and most deprived areas. On Wednesday, the Ontario coroner released that as well, showing that people asking to be killed were more likely to require disability support and be socially isolated.

I reported on September 10 that The Office of the Chief Coroner of Ontario reported that there were 2452 reported euthanasia deaths in the first six months of 2024 up by 10% from 2,227 reported euthanasia deaths in the first six months of 2023.

As of June 30, 2024, there have been 20,828 euthanasia deaths since legalization in June 2016.

The recent Ontario Coroner's report admits that 2% of all euthanasia deaths did not meet the legal criteria. Since there were 20,828 euthanasia in Ontario from legalization until June 30, 2024, that means that more than 400 euthanasia deaths in Ontario have not fit the criteria of the law.