Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition
 |
| Alex Schadenberg |
Bill C-218 would have amended the Criminal Code to prevent euthanasia for mental illness as a sole criteria.
The defeat of Bill C-218 was directly related to the announcement, the same day, at 12 noon by Justice Minister Sean Fraser and Health Minister Marjorie Michel. They stating that the federal government will introduce legislation, this fall, that will prevent the implementation of euthanasia for mental illness as a sole criteria. However, the government legislation will also permit euthanasia by advanced request.
The defeat of Bill C-218 was directly related to the announcement, the same day, at 12 noon by Justice Minister Sean Fraser and Health Minister Marjorie Michel. They stating that the federal government will introduce legislation, this fall, that will prevent the implementation of euthanasia for mental illness as a sole criteria. However, the government legislation will also permit euthanasia by advanced request.
Euthanasia by advanced request is a very dangerous concept as it would permit doctors and nurse practitioners to kill someone who has become incompetent, based on an advanced request.
We knew that the language of Bill C-218 would have prevented euthanasia for mental illness, as a sole criteria, but we have not seen the language of the upcoming government bill.
Language is everything.
Dr Laurence Normand-Rivest, a family physician in Montréal who cares for geriatric patients and provides in-home palliative care, Dr Paul Saba a family physician in Lachine Québec who has personal experience with caring for people with mental health related trauma, Odile Marcotte, a retired professor from the Université du Québec à Montréal and a former deputy director of the Centre de recherches mathématiques, and a EPC Board member, and Alex Schadenberg, Executive Director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition spoke at a Press Conference.
Who would make the final decision to poison an incompetent person to death?
The government bill, that we have not seen, may create a catch 22 situation where voting "No" to the bill would allow euthanasia for mental illness, as a sole criteria, but voting "Yes" to the bill would permit euthanasia by advanced request.
The government bill, that we have not seen, may create a catch 22 situation where voting "No" to the bill would allow euthanasia for mental illness, as a sole criteria, but voting "Yes" to the bill would permit euthanasia by advanced request.
The government should separate the issues with two bills instead of one.
Until we analyse the language of the bill, we will not determine whether the government bill will actually prevent euthanasia for mental illness as a sole criteria.
Press Conference on October 7 at 11 am
Until we analyse the language of the bill, we will not determine whether the government bill will actually prevent euthanasia for mental illness as a sole criteria.
Press Conference on October 7 at 11 am
 |
| October 7 Press Conference |
Dr Normand-Rivest, Dr Saba, Marcotte and Schadenberg witnessed the historic and dissappointing vote on Bill C-218, at 3:30 pm in the parliamentary gallery.
13 comments:
thank you for the very hard work in preventing the bill to pass. This gives us hope! Thank you.
We wanted Bill C-218 to pass.
How is "incompetent" defined?
Incompetent is not defined, it is assessed. Essentially it means that the person is unable to make medical or care decisions for themselves.
When it is not defined, it means that any quack Doctor Who wants to stretch the definition to fit their own purposes, can write it in the chart and it becomes the diagnosis regardless of how functional the patient's brain is.
Well Francis, you are right and based on the fact that one doctor may determine that a person is not competent and another doctor will determine that the person is competent, your commments appear correct.
The issue works both ways. Currently you have to be capable of consenting to be approved to be killed in Canada by euthanasia. But once again capable of consenting is based on an assessment. That is how Brigitte Stegemann was approved to be killed. https://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2026/09/yes-brigittes-story-about-being-killed.html
Thank you for the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition's relentless hard work. Alex, my eyes were opened to what is happening with MAiD when you presented in Abbotsford, BC years ago.
Sorry to hear this. Canada will be a very dangerous place to live for the mentally ill if we cannot protect them with legislation. Are Canadians indifferent, callous, ignorant or just morally bankrupt to allow the acceleration of euthanasia ? Unless challenged the legislature will continue to make laws till there is no one that will not qualify . Children are next.
Suicide is completely legal in canada. But since 2015 I have to fear being offered to be murdered every time I seek Healthcare as a 70-year-old with multiple health issues, incl.uding depression. I'm one bad decision away from being put down like a dog. I watched my little brother 66 with Down Syndrome struggle to recover from a stroke while his medical supports were removed and he was sedated to death right in front of my eyes.Im only here by the grace of God.
No, Canadians are no more immoral than people from other countries. But the introduction of euthanasia legitimized the view that some people’s lives are not worth living. That was the first decisive step. Then the development proceeded incrementally. This was made possible, in part, by undefined basic concepts in the legislation; then by enthusiastic euthanasia doctors’ creative interpretations of the law; and finally, for reasons of fairness, by expanding the legislation to include new groups of people. Legitimization leads to normalization, which leads to trivialization. Because the killings are being increasingly trivialised, those acts, originally considered quite abhorrent, eventually come to enjoy general acceptance and, yes, even respect.
The Danish network ”No to state-assisted suicide” has developed seven arguments against euthanasia and physician assisted suicide. The arguments aren't new, but in my opinion, they're better articulated than is usually the case.
Number five reads:
”State-assisted suicide will make us all more cynical and callous. The utilitarian mindset is already creeping into every aspect of society and our view of humanity—our value is measured by what we accomplish, not by who we ARE. Euthanasia will corrupt our view of people with disabilities, mental illness, the terminally ill, and others who do not “perform.” Such a cultural shift cannot be reversed.”
https://www.nejtilstatsassisteretselvmord.dk/
Fabian Stahle, Sweden
Euthanasia and MAID will likely come down to whatever is practical and if the person appreciates living in their current mental or physical condition, but most of all, are their "organs" healthy enough to take for transplants or research. The surgeons make a good living in transplants today, and everyone is a donor, unless the patient or family state otherwise and in advance. You are very vulnerable if you wear a bracelet that States, "Do not resuscitate." You are pushed into a small room where you die alone.
Our hearts are heavy but God has a plan, the plan, so we pick up the torch and continue the race. Come Holy Spirit come, to give us wisdom, courage and peace.
Post a Comment