Monday, August 18, 2025

The Hospice News promotes assisted suicide discussions.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

I receive daily updates from the Hospice News. Usually this news service provides updates about funding issues, legislative initiatives or it will report on the business of Hospice. 

The August 13 Hospice News update featured an article written by Holly Vossel titled: Medical Aid in Dying Laws: What Hospices Need to Know?

The article is written in a neutral manner and begins with information. The articles states that 11 US states have legalized assisted suicide, that Delaware is the most recent state to legalize assisted suicide and New York is considering assisted suicide. The article doesn't state that the New York bill passed in the legislature and is held up by Governor Kathy Hochel who is deliberating on whether or not to veto the bill.

Vossel quotes Jessica Empeño, national director for clinical engagement at Compassion & Choices, America's leading assisted suicide lobby group, who states:

Discussions about medically assisted deaths can allow for greater insight into some of the unmet patient needs, such as unmanageable symptoms and the sources of discomfort or distress, Empeño indicated. Even questions related to MAID can “open the door” to valuable conversations about what’s most important to patients and their families, which can improve goal-concordant care delivery, she stated.
From a neutral point of view Empeño is correct that discussions about assisted suicide can provide insight into unmet patient needs, such as unmanageable symptoms and the sources of discomfort or distress, but Empeño is wanting Hospices to discuss assisted suicide with patients to create greater demand for assisted suicide and normalize it as a Hospice "option."

Vossel then quotes Yelena Zatulovsky, vice president of patient experience at AccentCare who states:
“We have policies and protocols in place on how to have conversations related to MAID, and these have evolved a lot,” Zatulovsky said. “For questions related to medical aid in dying, it’s having a solid, very strong process so that our teams feel equipped and empowered to handle any kind of ethical dilemma. Ultimately, everything around these are nuanced cases — the complexities, the challenges, the discord, the stigmatization — is related to conversation. It’s about what their good death looks like.”
Essentially this article urges Hospices to contact Compassion & Choices for training related to discussions about assisted suicide.

The assisted suicide lobby wants to normalize assisted suicide and Compassion & Choices wants to be the go-to group for training people on assisted suicide.

Let's understand this. 

The group that lobbies to legalize assisted suicide is also the group that would provide information to Hospices about assisted suicide.  

Hospices need to say NO to assisted suicide.

Feeding Roger Foley - Clarification of update.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

On Saturday August 16, EPC sent out the following message:
EPC has followed the Roger Foley story since it began. In June, EPC launched the petition: Roger Foley needs to be fed. After launching the petition the hospital inserted an IV. Roger needs assistance to enable him to eat.

After visiting Roger on August 6 and learning that he was only receiving water, we relaunched the petition. The hospital responded by feeding Roger. They then withdrew feeding and then reversed the decision and are feeding him again. It is ridiculous that an Ontario hospital has put a disabled man on a roller coaster ride over his basic right to eat.

Important: Sign the Petition. Roger Foley needs to be fed (Petition Link).

Roger Foley responded to the update:

Clarification of My Situation: LHSC is still not feeding me.
  • I only have limited access to fluids in order to stay off an IV. The Compleat 1.5 is not food — I am drinking it only to get by until my lighting accommodations are restored.
  • I remain blocked from eating and from accessing oral medications. Sometimes LHSC even restricts me to water alone.
  • To drink, I am forced to wear extremely heavy makeshift ski goggles that cause severe pain and further injury to my deformed cervical spine. With these goggles, I can only manage about 10 minutes of fluids three times a day, before my neck gives out. During that short window, I must bloat myself with as much fluid as possible to avoid dehydration. There will come a time when my neck can no longer tolerate the goggles, and then I will be forced back on an IV.
Roger is receiving Compleat 1.5, which is an improvement, but as he states, this is not food and since he is not being fed he is unable to receive oral medications, that are required to be taken with food.

Roger wears ski goggles to enable him to eat without reacting to the light, but as he states, he can only wear the goggles for 10 minutes because of his neck and his cervical spine.

The stand-off between the hospital and Roger concerns the level of lighting. The staff insist that it is not safe to feed Roger without more light but Roger insists that his reaction to the regular lighting is so intense that he requires special lighting. The CNIB confirmed that Roger has severe photo sensitivity.

The key issue is that London Health Sciences Centre (LHSC) must accommodate Roger by changing the lighting.

It is ridiculous that an Ontario hospital is not feeding a man with a degenerative neurological condition. Roger is capable of eating but he requires assistance.

Friday, August 15, 2025

Join EPC - Worth More Film - online screening on September 10

Join the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition and Worth More film producer Bronwyn Gray on September 10, 2025 (World Suicide Prevention Day) as we provide a free online screening of the Worth More Film.
The screening will be followed by an online discussion.

Date: Wednesday September 10, 2025
Time: 7:00 pm (Eastern Time) or 4:00 pm (Pacific Time)
 
Register in advance for this film screening: (Registration Link). 
 
Worth More Film
  • What is your aging mother worth?
  • What is your friend struggling with a mental illness worth?
  • What are you worth?
  • Loud voices in society convey that the basis of human worth is unstable, contingent on what a person can contribute to society. 
  • The United Nation's Declaration of Universal Human Rights states that all human beings have “inherent dignity.” 
  • Every human being is worthy of respect and love simply because they are human, and they exist. 
The film Worth More has been produced because we believe Medical Assistance in Dying is an attack on human dignity, and we believe in contrast, that all human beings are worth protecting and loving to their natural end.

Euthanasia for mental illness alone is scheduled to be implemented in Canada in March 2027. Your life is worth more. Your life is worth living.

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

On the use of language. Assisted Suicide or Medical Aid in Dying?

Gordon Friesen
By Gordon Friesen
President: Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

What's in a name ?

"That which is called a rose by any other name would smell as sweet"
Thus runs the amazingly fertile thought of the single most quoted speaker of the English language. And within the context of Romeo's love for Juliet we are happy to approve.

However the exact correspondence of words to their objects is crucial to coherent thought, and doubly crucial when those words are found in written texts of law.

When two words are assumed to refer to the same object, but actually point to different things, we have a problem. And when one key word is legally enshrined, and charged with marking the limits of stable policy --but is none-the-less in a state of dynamic flux-- we have another.

Sadly, with "Assisted Suicide" and "Medical Aid in Dying" (and indeed with all of the terms surrounding the assisted death debate) we have both of these problems in spades.


Voluntary euthanasia drops its defining adjective


All the way back to the beginnings of modern euthanasia discussion (1870)[1] it has been commonly understood that our subject is the voluntary death, of a dying patient in unbearable suffering, at the hands (or with the help) of his or her doctor. This is what the public believes, and this is the basis on which the results of polls and votes have been consistently returned.

However, recent changes in vocabulary are by no means accidental, and by no means innocent. The new words do not have the same meaning. Most importantly, without any widespread understanding, the "thing" we are discussing has changed dramatically. And the most dramatic change lies in the progressive removal of the requirement that any such death be "voluntary".

To demonstrate this change, one common theme in the semantic component of the assisted death debate concerns a vigorous (even indignant) rejection of the word "suicide", under the charge that it's use is pejorative and disrespectful to those who avail themselves of a doctor's assistance to die.

And yet the most common definition of suicide ("an instance of taking one's own life voluntarily and intentionally") is no more than a technical description of fact.

Similarly, the time honoured term "voluntary euthanasia", is no longer anywhere in use at this time. The last instance I am aware of occurred in the pivotal Canadian Supreme Court "Carter" case, where it was decided that a complete ban on all forms of assisted death was not compatible with Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms. During that trial, counsel representing the litigants used the then novel term "Medical Aid in Dying".

When challenged to show how the meaning of that phrase (as defined in that trial) differed from the old term "voluntary euthanasia", it was grudgingly admitted that there was no difference.

However, in hindsight, that answer was either disingenuous, or ill informed. For the practice of "Medical Aid in Dying" has now departed considerably from "voluntary euthanasia", not in detail, but in the fundamental character of its voluntary nature. For MAID, if rigorously admitted as a true medical procedure, can not be fundamentally voluntary. And, indeed, MAID as currently practised, does not (necessarily) require even capacity to consent, let alone voluntary intention.

For that is the true meaning of "medical aid in dying" as it is now evolving in practice: not an "option" to autonomously request and self-administer lethal substances, exercised by fully competent individuals at the extreme end of life (as the context is still so carefully delimited to this day), but entirely differently... a standard medical response to suffering in virtually any circumstance whatsoever.

Certainly the practice in Canada, Belgium and the Netherlands, where patients are now euthanized as infants or young children, as demented adults (with advance directives), and for mental illness as sole underlying condition (including even for drug addiction),[2] would suggest this as the logical direction of policy.

It would appear, then, that the abandonment of assisted (or physician assisted) "suicide" and "voluntary euthanasia" for the umbrella term "medical aid in dying" is simply the linguistic component of what remains (for many) an unsuspected --but radical-- shift in real policy.


This, to be clear, is precisely the meaning of claims that ingesting poisons under a doctor's supervision is "not suicide". The affirmation is that there is something else, "something" requiring a different name, which is neither "assisted suicide" (where the voluntary nature of the act is inherent to the definition) or "voluntary euthanasia" where the word "voluntary" is actually part of the literal term employed.


It is, in sum, precisely the excision of this voluntary component which is the key to substituting the term "medical aid in dying".

Endnotes:

[1] Popular Science Monthly/Volume 3/May 1873/Euthanasia https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Popular_Science_Monthly/Volume_3/May_1873/Euthanasia accessed Nov 10, 2023

[2] Canada Will Legalize Medically Assisted Dying For Eligible People Addicted to Drugs, vice.com, Manisha Krishnan,October 19, 2023 https://www.vice.com/en/article/4a3bdm/canada-will-legalize-medically-assisted-dying-for-people-addicted-to-drugs accessed Nov 10, 2023

Thursday, August 14, 2025

Bad news in Slovenia and Uruguay.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

I have bad news. Slovenia has legalized assisted suicide and Uruguay's lower house passed a euthanasia bill.

Slovenia

Roselyne Min reported for Euronews on August 13 that Slovenia became the first Eastern European country to legalize assisted suicide. Min wrote:
In Slovenia, eligible patients will have access to assisted suicide, where they would have to ingest or inject a substance themselves, local media reported.

Patients will be required to express their intention to their doctor twice before submitting a formal request, which must be approved by an independent doctor. Their ability to make a decision will also be assessed by a psychiatrist.
Min reported that a group called Coalition Against the Poisoning of Patients has already collected 15,000 signatures and needs to collect 40,000 signatures in a little more than a month to launch a binding referendum on whether to repeal the law.

In June 2024, I reported that the Slovenian people passed a non-binding referendum (55% to 45%) based on the concept of assisted suicide. The next referendum will be based on the language of the legislation.

Min reported that Dr Bojana Beovic, president of the Medical Chamber of Slovenia stated:
“Their life is coming to an end, they are elderly, they do not feel they are useful in society, and the best thing is that they leave this world and their family members,” she said.
It sounds like Beovic believes that certain people are better off dead.

Uruguay

The Uruguay media reported on August 13 that Uruguay's Lower House passed the euthanasia bill with 64 of the 93 members present supporting the bill.

The euthanasia bill requires two doctors to approve the euthanasia death, but when one of the doctors disagrees, the decision would be reviewed by a medical board.

The Uruguay Upper House has not voted on the bill yet.

All of these countries should look to the Canadian experience before considering the legalization of euthanasia or assisted suicide. Once legal, the law will inevitably expand, as has happened in Canada and in almost every state in the US that has legalized assisted suicide.
  • More articles about Slovenia assisted suicide debate (Link).
  • More articles about Uruguay's euthanasia debate (Link).

Pass the test and live. Fail the test and die.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

An article that was published by Harper's Magazine that was
written by Michel Houellebecq and translated by Robyn Creswell and  under the title: The European Way to Die - On Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide has a very philosophical tone but it also touches on some very poignant arguments.

Houellebecq, who is an agnostic who opposes euthanasia and assisted suicide is essentially writing about the experience with assisted suicide. He philosophically examines several issues but then gets to his topic and states:

An assisted suicide—in which a doctor prescribes a lethal cocktail that the patient self-administers under circumstances of his own choosing—is still a suicide... When I hear that someone I know has committed suicide, what I feel isn’t respect—I don’t want to exaggerate—but neither is it disapproval, nor derision.

Houellebecq continues:
Groups that advocate for the legalization of voluntary euthanasia argue that the procedure is the only humane alternative when the final days or weeks or months of a person’s life will otherwise be filled with unbearable pain. This argument is predicated on two lies, all the more effective for being at once terrifying and rarely articulated. The first has to do with suffering—physical suffering. I may be fortunate, but in all the cases of physical agony I’ve experienced, morphine has been enough to relieve my pain. This wonder drug was discovered at the outset of the nineteenth century and since then much progress has been made; opioid derivatives far more powerful than the original morphine molecule have been synthesized. In our own day—this needs to be said clearly and constantly repeated—physical pain can be vanquished.

The second lie is more insidious. It’s only on television (American television in particular) that a doctor is asked, “How much time do I have left, doc?” and will respond with appropriate gravity, “Three weeks at most.” In real life, doctors are more circumspect. They know, because their basic training is scientific, that the time we have left conforms, like so many things in this world, to a bell curve.
Houellebecq then comments on the film Soylent Green and writes:
American science fiction written during the Fifties and Sixties explored with an impressive, visionary power an array of issues that now feature, or have begun to feature, in our daily lives: the internet, transhumanism, the quest for immortality, and the creation of intelligent robots. For such writers, the idea of euthanasia, conceived as a solution to the economic problems posed by an aging population, was an obvious subject—almost too obvious. The best-known work of the sort is undoubtedly Make Room! Make Room!, largely because of the film version Soylent Green, with an extraordinary performance by Edward G. Robinson.
For Houellebecq, Richard Matheson's book "The Test" is his favorite:
Yet my own favorite is “The Test,” a moving short story by Richard Matheson, curiously never adapted into film, as far as I know, though the cinema has been friendly to Matheson and the story would be easy to adapt. In the world of the story, old people are given regular competency tests that they must pass in order to avoid being put out of their misery. Meanwhile, their descendants sit at home, quietly hoping for the result that will free them from the burden of the aging. Once you have read “The Test,” it seems to me, there is nothing more to say against euthanasia; the story says it all.
I sadly agree that Houellebecq's argument, within the context of Canada's euthanasia law, is correct.

Atlantic article details the horrors of Canadian euthanasia

This article was published by National Review online on August 13, 2025.

Wesley Smith
By Wesley J Smith

Opponents of euthanasia have been screaming about Canada’s god-awful euthanasia machine for years. And it keeps getting worse. Now, the mainstream media — usually in the tank for assisted suicide — has finally noticed, as demonstrated by a thoroughly researched and objectively presented story by Elaina Plott Calabro.

It’s a long piece, but it’s well worth everyone’s time. Calabro discusses examples of doctors who have killed hundreds of patients, people who have had themselves killed because they couldn’t access proper support services, and many other cases. Euthanasia is Canada’s fifth-leading cause of death, with more than 15,000 patients terminated annually.

But this section really got to me. From, “Canada is Killing Itself“:

The details of the assisted-death experience have become a preoccupation of Canadian life. Patients meticulously orchestrate their final moments, planning celebrations around them: weekend house parties before a Sunday-night euthanasia in the garden; a Catholic priest to deliver last rites; extended-family renditions of “Auld Lang Syne” at the bedside.

For $10.99, you can design your MAID experience with the help of the Be Ceremonial app; suggested rituals include a story altar, a forgiveness ceremony, and the collecting of tears from witnesses. On the Disrupting Death podcast, hosted by an educator and a social worker in Ontario, guests share ideas on subjects such as normalizing the MAID process for children facing the death of an adult in their life — a pajama party at a funeral home; painting a coffin in a schoolyard.

Brr. And guess what. These patients do not receive suicide-prevention interventions. And their organs may be harvested.

When the hastening of death is legalized, it turns some suicides and homicides into a “good.” That transforms culture for the much worse. For example, a 2023 poll found that 28 percent of Canadians polled favored allowing euthanasia for homelessness.

In all of this, I am reminded of the observation made by Canadian journalist Andrew Coyne many years ago: 

“A society that believes in nothing can offer no argument even against death. A culture that has lost its faith in life cannot comprehend why it should be endured.” 

Canada is indeed killing itself. If it can happen there, it can happen here too. Caveat emptor.

Wednesday, August 13, 2025

Newsweek article: Mass exodus from organ donation registries

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, 
Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) sent out the following media release on July 21, 2025 concerning organ donation and the organ transplant system in America.

Health and Human Services examined 351 organ donation approvals and determined that in 103 of the cases the dead donor rule may have been violated. 

Organ donation is a difficult topic to write about since organ donation can save lives. I have written about issues related to organ donation for many years. It is a scandal that death is sometimes caused by organ removal rather than organs being retrieved from a dead donor.

Since then we have published three articles on the organ donation scandal (Article 1) (Article 2) (Article 3).

Joshua Rhett Miller reported for Newsweek on August 13 that the recent organ donation articles have led to an unprecedented mass exodus from organ donation registries. Miller wrote:

Thousands of Americans have removed themselves from organ donor registries following "irresponsible reporting" led by the New York Times, officials said.

The Association of Organ Procurement Organizations (AOPO), a trade group that represents 46 of the nation's 55 federally designated nonprofit entities that help facilitate donations, accused the newspaper of a "lack of balance and accuracy" in its recent coverage of the problems in the sprawling transplant system.

An AOPO letter stated that:

"These stories have directly led to the biggest increase in people removing themselves from donor registries ever recorded, putting patients waiting for transplants at greater risk,"

The AOPO letter claims both articles contained "serious factual inaccuracies."

Claims about factual inaccuracies don't negate the reality that the US Health and Human Services examined 351 organ donation approvals and found:

  • 73 patients with neurological signs incompatible with organ donation.
  • At least 28 patients may not have been deceased at the time organ procurement was initiated—raising serious ethical and legal questions.

There were also problems with poor neurologic assessments, lack of coordination with medical teams, questionable consent practices, and misclassification of causes of death, particularly in overdose cases.

In other words, the AOPO should have monitored organ donation programs to prevent the scandal that has occurred. People support the dead donor rule. People are willing to donate their organs once they have died, but they do not want to die by donating their organs.

Last year the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition published an excellent article by lawyer, Sara Buscher titled: Let's not get rid of the Dead Donor Rule.

If the Dead Donor Rule is ignored or removed it results in people losing trust in the system and withdrawing their names from organ donation registries.

Donate to Alex's half-marathon fundraising run for CCC and EPC

Alex Schadenberg and Marcel Lemmen are running a half-marathon on Sunday September 28, 2025 as a fundraiser for Compassionate Community Care (CCC) and the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition (EPC).

Donations from the half-marathon (21.1 km) run are very much appreciated. 

The Compassionate Community Care charity operates a help-line, a training program for visiting seniors, an advocacy training program and a calling service for lonely seniors.

Charitable donations can be made to Compassionate Community Care at: (Donation Link).

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition informs, educates, and supports opposition to killing by euthanasia and assisted suicide and endorses proper care for people in need.

Donate to the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, which is not a charity, at: (Donation Link).
 
This is the sixth consecutive year that Alex and Marcel are doing a half-marathon fund-raising run for CCC and EPC.

Canada's government promotes euthanasia to the Indigenous community

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

An article by Sonal Gupta that was published by the Canadian Press on August 11, 2025 examines the role of the Canada's federal government in normalizing (MAiD) euthanasia within the Indigenous community.

The article explains how the Canadian government is selling MAiD to the indigenous community based on the MAiD death experienced by James Frank Palmater. Gupta writes:
The degree of care, cultural safety and communication they received should be widely available across Indigenous communities in Canada, she said.

“People should know their options,” she said. “If there’s no hope and no return, people should be supported to go with dignity.”

Yet this experience is an exception, not a norm: many Indigenous communities face persistent barriers that call into question whether MAiD is truly a free choice or a forced response to systemic issues.
Indigenous communities have not supported euthanasia and have commented on how the government did not consult them.

Gupta examines the concerns of the Indigenous community especially considering the planned expansion of euthanasia to include mental illness alone starting in March 2027:
Brendon Moore, national chief of Congress of Aboriginal People — a group that represents the interests of Indigenous people is concerned that expanding MAiD, especially for those with mental illness as a sole condition — is especially troubling in communities that already experience the highest rates of suicide as a result of intergenerational trauma and systemic racism.

The nightmare scenario: MAiD could substitute investments in living supports and mental health care if underlying conditions aren’t addressed first.

“We’re looking for an equitable opportunity to live first,” he said. “If we had culturally safe palliative care and mental health support, some people might choose that path instead of moving toward MAiD.”
Brendan and Shawna Moore
Moore also commented on euthanasia in the prisons.
“We believe compassionate release should be prioritized, allowing individuals the opportunity to make end-of-life decisions with dignity, surrounded by family and cultural support and not from within a prison cell,”
Moore emphasized on how the government legalized euthanasia without consulting Indigenous communities:
“Our main concern is that medical assistance in dying will become the easier choice for people within our communities that are continuing to struggle with the systemic barriers that are placed in front of them,” Moore said.
Josie Nepinak, president of the Native Women’s Association of Canada told Gupta that Indigenous women lack culturally safe healthcare. Nepinak stated that: some Indigenous women believe that euthanasia conflicts with their spiritual and cultural beliefs about family and traditions.
Nepinak continued:
Without better access and culturally safe care, MAiD risks being chosen as a result of lack of hope, resources or social connection rather than true free will.
In response to Gupta's concerns, A Health Canada spokesperson stated:
it’s continuing to work with Indigenous communities on MAID and end-of-life care and to increase participation in that consultation, the survey was shared with Indigenous Services Canada, provinces and territories and various Indigenous organizations.
Moore described the Health Canada consultation as a "surface consultation." Gupta reported:
“We’re really still in the baby steps of reconciliation. Reconciliation is meant to bring us back to par with the average Canadian and their rights, but this is a very Western perspective, not something you find in many of our ways. It’s deeply concerning that work is moving forward on things like this and attempting to make it law, when we still haven’t made much progress on reconciliation,” Moore said.
Health Canada told Gupta that they will share more details about their consultation later this summer.

Gupta is both challenging Health Canada but also promoting the work that Health Canada is doing to normalize euthanasia within the Indigenous community. 

The fact is that many Indigenous Canadians have a very difficult time obtaining equitable healthcare, but MAiD is readily available.

Monday, August 11, 2025

UN Committee launches investigation into France's proposed euthanasia law.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The European Centre for Law & Justice reported that the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has sent a letter to France stating that it has launched an investigation into France's proposed euthanasia law.

The European Centre for Law & Justice stated:

The UN worries that the “proposed eligibility criteria . . . appear to be based in ableist perceptions of the quality and value of the life of persons with disabilities.” In fact, under the proposed law, while a person with a disability who is suffering may be eligible for aid in dying, an able-bodied person who is suffering is not. This corresponds to what the Committee calls “ableist.” The UN is also concerned about the lack of “alternatives to assistance to dying,” the creation of a new felony of obstructing an assisted-suicide, and the minimum mandatory cooling-off period of only two days before euthanasia or “suicide” can be performed.

At the same time, in its letter to the French government, the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities called on civil society organizations to send “information to the above-referred questions”. We have done so. On August 1, the ECLJ sent the Committee a written memorandum explaining how the Government has actively supported euthanasia for persons with disabilities and responding point by point to the questions raised by the Committee.

One of the points raised concerns persons subject to legal protection measures, in particular persons under guardianship. Basing the decision to euthanize purely on their expressed desire to do so is particularly shocking, given that they are considered incapable of looking after their own interests in other decisions, however serious or even trivial.

We also encouraged our partners to send their memorandums, a request that was favorably received by Claire Fourcade, on behalf of the French Society for Accompaniment and Palliative Care (SFAP), and Louis Bouffard, on behalf of the group “Les Éligibles” (“those who qualify to be euthanized”). We have also explained in the French and foreign media, as well as in the European Parliament, that the proposed law on euthanasia violates the rights of persons with disabilities.

The French government's response to the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities will be examined during its session between August 11 and 29 in Geneva. We do not yet know its content. This UN session is a new step in these proceedings.

This Committee has already acted on the basis of this international treaty in previous proceedings. In April 2025, it asked Canada to review its legislation on the rights of persons with disabilities. It was also this Committee that asked France not to euthanize Vincent Lambert in 2019, as the Committee believed that he had been deprived of food and water because of his disability.
The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition is encouraged by this development. We plan to gather information concerning Canada's euthanasia law and share it with the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and encourage other friendly organizations to do the same.

More information on similar topics:

  • The International disability rights community is concerned with Canada's euthanasia law (Link).
  • UN demands change: Canada must end MAiD for people without terminal illness (Link).
  • United Nations Committee directs Canada to repeal Track 2 euthanasia deaths (Link).
  • Canada's euthanasia deaths continue to rise with approximately 16,500 euthanasia deaths in 2024 (Link).
  • Has Canada's euthanasia law gone too far (Link).

What my daughter taught me about human value.

This profound article was published by the Bloom blog on July 9, 2025.

Robin Koczerginski and daughter Bree

By Robin Koczerginski

When I was younger, I believed a meaningful life was one I'd be proud to share in old age, sitting frail but content at a family gathering, surrounded by children and grandchildren, maybe even great-grandchildren bringing cups of tea to my bedside.

I imagined telling stories: backpacking through Guatemala, driving through the bush in Northern Ontario to do charitable work, romantic evenings out on the town with their grandmother. I’d offer wisdom, reflect on my mistakes, and hope to pass on a better path. It would all rest on a foundation of career and contribution, something that made a dent in the world, something lasting.

I had a recipe for a meaningful life: a heavy dose of impact, a dash of adventure, generous helpings of love and relationship, all baked in a base of longevity.

My internalization of this, shaped by the books I read, the movies I watched, and the history I absorbed, was the scaffolding of that imagined future.

But what if human value isn’t something we build over time, but something that exists in a single moment? What if it isn’t earned, but inherent?

When my daughter Bree burst into the world like a meteor crashing into my life, everything I thought I knew about meaning was shaken. Bree has a rare genetic condition called Trisomy 13, or Patau Syndrome. There’s no cure or treatment. It isn’t a disease; it’s an imprint, a fundamental part of who she is. She has an extra 13th chromosome tucked into every cell in her body.

The impact of this extra chromosome varies, but in most cases, it brings profound cognitive and physical disabilities. And even that is only relevant if the child survives, because the prognosis is devastating. We found out about Bree’s diagnosis during pregnancy. We were told she might not make it to birth. And if she did, her life expectancy would likely be measured in weeks.

So how do you measure the worth of a life that might be short and full of medical complexity? What meaning does it hold? Or, maybe, was there something flawed in the question itself?

In the very early days of her life, when we lived in the NICU at Mount Sinai Hospital, when every beep of a monitor sent waves of panic through my body, when her fragility felt too much to bear, I believed it was my duty as her father to impose value on her life.

While Bree pushed forward, embracing each new challenge with a quiet resilience, the idea of her death loomed over me. I put immense pressure on myself to solve the question of what her life meant, because I believed I would one day have to justify it. I was already silently writing her inevitable eulogy.

I thought I had to be the vessel for her worth. That her legacy would depend on my growth, my contributions, my impact. I vowed to become a better person when she was gone. I imagined starting a fundraiser, launching a charity, plastering her face on posters so the money raised in her name could “do good” in the world.

Because if death took her as an infant, I thought meaning had to be made, not simply felt.

But Bree didn’t die in the NICU. Or in the weeks that followed.

There were minor medical procedures and lots of trials to find the right medications to support her. There were new routines developed. There was a life with Bree in it, starting to blossom. 

She kept surviving and exceeding the minimal expectations placed on her. And, in doing so, reshaping the expectations I had for her life.

What changes in how we value her life if she wasn’t just a brief shooting star in our life? Not a tragedy I had to redeem, but a full participant in our family’s core?

As Bree grew older, and I worked hard to understand the anticipatory grief I was feeling, I began to appreciate Bree for who she was, not what I, or society, expected her to be. She is almost four-years-old now. She has vision loss, low-muscle tone, is on a continuous G-tube feed, is medicated to control her seizures that come out as short myoclonic jerks, requires constant low-flow oxygen, and is monitored 24 hours a day for her safety. She is and will likely always be non-verbal and never be able to be independent in any way.

Yet, Bree has carved out a beautiful existence, one wrapped in love, insulated from the noise and stress and existential panic the rest of us often live with. She experiences extreme joy through the songs she likes, the textures of her toys in her mouth, the motion of being carried by her mother, the brightness of the sun gracing her face, and the sounds of her big sister’s high-pitched voice. And while she could never fully understand the literal meaning of the words “I love you," I have no doubt she feels the energy behind those words through us. And in her own very unique way, she displays her love for the world fiercely. 

Her progress and her potential are not her path towards value. By simply existing and being loved, her life holds complex and very real layers of meaning. She, and so many children like her, have taught me that presence, connection, and a soft harmonization with the world are dimensions of meaning that can so often be overlooked. 

There’s a quiet but persistent pressure in our culture to leave a mark. We teach it early: change the world, chase your dreams, do something big. And when it comes time to measure a life, we often default to questions like: What did they accomplish? Who did they influence? What legacy did they leave?

When Bree was born, I carried this framework with me. I grieved the idea that she wouldn’t grow up to pursue passions or change lives or build a family of her own.

And yet, she changed me fundamentally. She expanded my capacity to love. She cracked open a version of fatherhood I didn’t know I was capable of. She slowed me down and sharpened my focus. She introduced me to a community I would never have found otherwise. 

Bree has and will likely never say a word, and still she shifts the ground beneath me. Isn’t that impact?

We often associate human value or worth with scale, as though something must be visible, replicable, or lasting to count. But Bree taught me that meaning can live in the intimate and the invisible. In the way I now notice the stillness in a room. In the way I approach other families with disabled children. In the way I’ve started writing, to stay close to her. To understand myself as her father.

I’ve come to believe that we’re asking the wrong question. It’s not “Did this person leave a legacy?” It’s “Were we changed by loving them?”

If the answer is yes, then something important happened. Even if no one else sees it. Even if it didn’t last long.

Robin Koczerginski is community programs manager for AccessNow. Like this content? Sign up for our monthly BLOOM e-letter, follow BLOOM editor @LouiseKinross on X, or @louisekinross.bsky.social on Bluesky, or watch our A Family Like Mine video series.