The False Ally Fallacy

This article is written by Kim Carlson and Paul Magennis from the MAiD in Canada substack.

The following post is part of a structured, multi-week, simultaneously published exchange between Kim Carlson and Paul Magennis, authors of MAiD in Canada, and Gordon Friesen, President of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition. These alternating messages will explore deeply divergent views on Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD), and no mutual endorsement is implied.

Previously published exchanges between Friesen and MAiD in Canada have been:

Gordon Friesen, Monday, January 12, 2026.
Maid in Canada (MIC)     January 19, 2026.
Gordon Friesen                January 26, 2026.

The False Ally Fallacy:

Why Friesen’s references do not support his claims

It is disappointing that Mr. Friesen devoted so much time to matters unrelated to MAiD in cases where eligibility is based on mental illness and the central question is decision-making capacity. By our count, less than half of his latest submission addressed the topic we explicitly agreed to discuss. In addition to being red herrings,[1] this appears to be an attempt to introduce so many diversions that responding to them would distract us from addressing his central—and unsupported—claim.

For now, we simply ask Friesen how characterizing MAiD providers as “homicide-friendly professionals” reflects anything that could reasonably be described as “neutral,”[2] or even respectful, within the terms of this exchange?

Back to the topic

Friesen has not engaged with our previous arguments. Since he has not challenged the fact that people living with mental illness can possess decision-making capacity, we take this point as conceded.

What remains, then, is an argument from uncertainty: that there is no way to distinguish between a desire to die arising from acute symptoms of mental illness, and a reasoned and capable response to long-term, treatment-resistant suffering. Uncertainty is not justification for categorical exclusion, and arguments of this kind have already been considered and rejected by the Supreme Court of Canada.[3]

Denying the rights of an entire group demands substantial justification from those advocating for that denial.[4] Because Friesen’s purported justifications are unsupported—even by his own references—he has not met that burden.

The Canadian Psychiatric Association (CPA)

Friesen notes that the CPA “has not taken a position on whether MAiD should be available” on the basis of mental illness and then treats that as evidence of opposition. It is not. Declining to take a position is not the same as taking a position against, particularly in a complex and contested domain.

More importantly, the CPA’s statement contains no suggestion that decision-making capacity cannot be assessed in this context.[5] Instead, it acknowledges a lack of consensus within Canadian psychiatry—a point made explicit in the preceding sentence that Friesen omitted from his quote:

“Within Canadian psychiatry there are divergent opinions with respect to the provision of MAID, as well as whether access to MAID should be permitted on the basis of mental disorder.”

The CPA declined to take a position because of the complexity of the issue and because its members genuinely disagree—not because they believe decision-making capacity cannot be assessed. For those psychiatrists who believe MAiD might be appropriate in some cases, that view necessarily presupposes that capacity can be determined—further undermining Friesen’s claim.

Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention (CASP) & American Association of Suicidology (AAS)

Friesen again appeals to the CASP and AAS to suggest that MAiD and suicide are indistinguishable. CASP explicitly disagrees with that claim, and AAS doesn’t even make it.

CASP stated that MAiD for those without a terminal illness constitutes a form of suicide.[6] However, CASP does not argue that MAiD and suicide are clinically or ethically indistinguishable, nor that it is impossible to differentiate the two. In fact, in an earlier statement, CASP explicitly affirmed that “MAiD and suicide can, at least in principle, be distinguished,” even while acknowledging possible overlap.[7] 

Claims that CASP regards MAiD and suicide as indistinguishable are not just unsupported—they directly contradict CASP’s published statements.

Friesen makes a similar error with the AAS, who retired a prior statement recognizing a distinction between MAiD and suicide[8] [9]—a standard process for aging position statements.[10] [11] But the removal of that statement does not imply the adoption of the opposite position. Friesen’s conclusion here relies on an inference his source does not support.

The American Psychiatric Association (APA)

Friesen’s reference to the APA follows the same pattern. While the APA opposes MAiD based on mental illness, the objection does not rest on an inability to assess capacity.[12] On the contrary, in the reference Friesen provides the APA explicitly states that:

• psychiatrists may be asked to assess capacity where psychiatric symptoms may impair decision-making;
• some mental conditions involve temporary alterations in preferences that reflect the underlying disorder; and 
• in jurisdictions where MAiD is legal, it is ethically permissible for psychiatrists to assess capacity in this context.

There is no suggestion here that capacity cannot be determined. Indeed, there is an explicit acknowledgment that psychiatrists can assess capacity for MAiD in the setting of mental illness.

The APA’s objection is instead tied to concerns about hope and incurability, stating that “labelling a mental illness as…irremediable is inconsistent with present treatment approaches in psychiatry.” That is a complex and contested claim, particularly given the growing discussion of palliative psychiatry[13]—but incurability is not the subject of our exchange with Friesen.

Conclusion

This exchange now turns on a narrow question: whether the acknowledged difficulty, in some cases, of assessing decision-making capacity justifies denying assessment to an entire group. Neither clinical practice nor legal principle supports that move. Friesen has not shown why it should.

---

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring

[2] “’Homicide”, is a neutral, Latin, technical term.” - Gordon Friesen

[3] Carter v Canada (Attorney General), 2015 SCC 5 at paras. 87–88.

[4] Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s. 7 (life, liberty, and security of the person).

[5] Canadian Psychiatric Association Position on MAID

[6] CASP Issues Statement About MAiD for Mental Illness

[7] CASP statement on the Expansion of Medical Assistance in Dying to those without a Reasonably Foreseeable Death

[8] AAS Update on Physician Assisted Death Previous Statement

[9] Statement of the American Association of Suicidology: “SUICIDE” is not the same as “Physician Aid in Dying”

[10] World Health Organization, WHO Handbook for Guideline Development, 2nd ed. (2014), s. 12.5 (“Updating guidelines”), pp. 163–164.

[11] Canadian Psychiatric Association – Position Papers and Statements

[12] APA Position Statement on Psychiatric Participation in Physician Assistance in Dying

[13] Trachsel M, et al., “Palliative psychiatry for severe and persistent mental illness: a new treatment paradigm?” BMC Psychiatry (2016).

 

 

Kiano (26) - Determined to be Killed.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Sign the EPC Petition Demanding a review of Dr Ellen Wiebe's euthanasia practice (Petition Link).

Rupa Subramanya wrote an insightful article about the death of Kiano Vafaeian that was published by The Free Press on January 26, 2026. 

Kiano was the 26 year-old Ontario man was killed by euthanasia by Dr Ellen Wiebe on December 30, 2025. Subramanya also wrote about Kiano in 2022 when he was first approved to be killed at the MAiDHouse euthanasia clinic in Toronto, but the killing was called off when his mother launched a campaign to save the life of her son, who was then 23.

Subramanya stayed in contact with Kiano making his death both tragic and personal. Subramanya wrote:

Marsilla had just learned that her 26-year-old son, Kiano Vafaeian, was approved for “medical assistance in dying” (MAID), Canada’s government-run assisted-suicide regime. He was blind, struggling with complications from type 1 diabetes, and living in public housing in Toronto. He also suffered from depression.

Vafaeian was not terminally ill—and did not need to be to end his own life. In Canada, MAID patients must show only that they have a condition that is “intolerable” and cannot “be relieved under conditions that they consider acceptable.” These people often feel beset by enduring illness, unresolved social hardship, and other afflictions, all of which blur the line between medical suffering and the hardships of daily life itself.

Just to be clear, Kiano was partially blind and was being financially helped by his mother. Subramanya continues:

I met Vafaeian three years ago, after his mother accidentally found an email that laid out the scheduled date, time, and location of his assisted suicide—just two weeks before it was set to take place at a Toronto facility called MAiDHouse. Shocked, she called the doctor and pretended to be a woman seeking MAID. She recorded the conversation and sent me the tape. The doctor postponed Vafaeian’s scheduled killing, then said he wasn’t going through with it, without explanation.

Vafaeian was furious at his mother, telling me that she had violated his right as an adult to choose death. We stayed in touch for about two years, and he often talked about getting back at her. He also talked about coming to visit me in Ottawa, and I promised to track him down in Toronto someday. He was bright, curious, and funny, with a beautiful smile that immediately put you at ease. He also never gave up on wanting to die.

Subramanya explains how Canada legalized killing by euthanasia and she explains the incredible growth of euthanasia in Canada. She then interviews Dr. Sonu Gaind, a University of Toronto psychiatry professor. Subramanya writes:

When I told Gaind about Vafaeian and what he had been through, Gaind responded: “I’m not denying his suffering, but it doesn’t paint a picture of someone who is constantly suffering. That contradiction should trouble people.”

He said that Canada’s assisted-suicide system “has been set up so that if the person says their suffering is intolerable, assessors will say, ‘Who am I to question that?’ ”

Kiano recently re-applied for euthanasia, but this time his application was through Dr Ellen Wiebe in Vancouver British Columbia. British Columbia has the second highest provincial euthanasia rate at 6.7% of all deaths.

Subramanya continues by interviewing Kiano's mother:

Marsilla, his mother, told me that she thought her son was doing well. Their strained relationship seemed to be on the mend, and she set him up in September with a fully furnished condominium near her office in Toronto, including a live-in caregiver. Marsilla also drafted a written agreement promising him $4,000 a month in financial support. They went out for dinner to celebrate the plan. He signed the agreement, she said, and talked about moving in before winter.

Vafaeian texted her afterward to say that he was “looking forward to a new chapter.” He asked for help paying down his debts, and told his mother that he was saving her money so they could travel together. He flew to New York City to buy a pair of newly released Meta Ray-Ban glasses, praised by some people as a breakthrough for those who are blind. Marsilla was uneasy about him traveling alone, but he texted her photos and videos of the glasses. Then he admitted that he was afraid to use them, worried they wouldn’t work, and thought he had wasted her money.

Marsilla believed that her son was doing much better and then everything changed. Subramanya writes:

In October, she bought Vafaeian a gym membership and 30 personal training sessions, all of which he used. “He was so happy that he was working out and getting healthy,” she told me. Then, abruptly, he walked away from all of it: the condo, the caregiver, the money. “Something snapped in his head,” Marsilla told me.

On December 15, Vafaeian checked into a luxury resort in Mexico. On Instagram, he posted photos of himself posing with staff at the resort’s El Detalle restaurant—smiling, relaxed, and seemingly at ease. A concierge who remembered Vafaeian said that he seemed happy. He asked his mother to join him, but she said no. After two nights, he checked out and flew to Vancouver.

Three days later, a text message from Vafaeian to his mother delivered stunning news: He was scheduled to die by MAID the next day. He told his sister Victoria that if any family members wanted to be there when it happened, they should catch the last flight from Toronto. “We were obviously freaking out,” his mother told me. She said that she criticized him for “throwing this on us now—right before Christmas,” and then asked: “What’s wrong with you?

Marsilla tried to convince her son to go back to Toronto and to live. Subramanya reports:

Vafaeian said that her son told them he had asked for security to be present if they showed up at the MAID facility in Vancouver to try to stop him. She took it as a sign that he was wavering about ending his life. She thought the same thing when Vafaeian told his mother the next day that his assisted suicide had been postponed by “paperwork.”

Marsilla urged him to come home to Toronto, offered to buy him a plane ticket, and told him that she was praying for him and had Christmas gifts waiting. He refused. “No, I’m staying here. I’m going to get euthanized,” he said, according to Marsilla.

Marsilla learned later that her son was to be killed by Canada's notorious euthanasia doctor, Ellen Wiebe, who has been involved with some of the most controversial euthanasia deaths. Subramanya explains:

Wiebe has described assisted dying as “the best work I’ve ever done” and “incredibly rewarding.” I asked her what she meant when she said in 2018 that she provides “what is right up to the edge of the law, and never beyond, of course,” but “beyond where some providers would work.” She replied: “I have a very strong, passionate desire for human rights. I’m willing to take risks for human rights, as I do for abortion.”

Subramanya continued:

“No,” she replied without hesitation. Then she began talking about blindness, even though I had not mentioned it. “Just because it’s worth living for somebody who is blind doesn’t mean life is worth living for someone else who is blind,” Wiebe told me. How could she be so certain? She said: “We have long, fascinating conversations about what makes their life worth living—and how you make the decision when it’s been enough.”

Wiebe, who has used a wheelchair for 34 years, firmly rejected the argument that disability itself should not qualify someone for assisted death. “People will say quadriplegics can be happy, that their suffering isn’t intolerable,” she told me. “But the person themselves has to decide: Is this intolerable to me?”

Subramanya interviewed several leaders concerning Wiebe's assertions:

David Lepofsky, a blind lawyer and disability-rights advocate in Toronto, said that focusing on suffering rather than pain invites broad, subjective interpretations—and that the MAID process lacks any independent safeguards before death is delivered. “Blindness doesn’t cause pain,” Lepofsky said. “Millions of us live good, independent lives.”

Trudo Lemmens, a professor of law and bioethics at the University of Toronto, met Vafaeian in 2022 at an event shortly after my article about him was published. The seminar was attended by physicians, MAID assessors, and policy experts. “The only reason that Kiano was alive when I met him is because his mother had the guts to go public, not because of the medical community that would have ended his life,” Lemmens recalled. “I was standing there, looking around the room, and thinking, This is dystopian.”

Ramona Coelho, a family physician and member of Ontario’s MAID Death Review Committee, said provincial oversight reports increasingly show in general that the person’s suffering appeared to be driven less by medical decline than by loneliness, social distress, and fear of the future. “Young people relapse, and they also recover,” Coelho told me. Allowing government-sanctioned assisted suicide “during periods of acute vulnerability risks mistaking transient suffering for permanent decline.”

Subramanya further interviewed Dr Coehlo.

Canada’s assisted suicide numbers are almost certain to keep rising. In Quebec, where such deaths now represent 7 percent of all deaths, a provincial law passed in 2024 allows people who have been diagnosed with dementia to preauthorize their future deaths once they lose capacity, even though such requests are illegal under federal criminal law. Quebec sidesteps this by declining to prosecute physicians who act under provincial law.

A parliamentary committee has recommended studying whether to extend MAiD eligibility to “mature minors,” Canadians who are younger than 18 but deemed capable of making their own medical decisions. Wiebe told me that she is shocked assisted suicide isn’t already allowed for “mature minors,” adding that any 17-year-old who went to court would almost certainly be approved under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

“The only reason it has not happened,” she said, is that “nobody has asked.” Federal legislation has delayed MAID eligibility for adults whose sole underlying condition is mental illness until at least 2027 so that Canada can develop safeguards.

Subramanya then states:

Marsilla will probably never know exactly what happened after her son decided again that he wanted to die.

On December 30, Vafaeian went to a law firm in Vancouver to sign his will. He told the executor that he wanted the “world to know his story” and to advocate that “young people with severe unrelenting pain and blindness should be able to access MAID,” just as terminally ill patients can, the lawyer told me.

More stories about Kiano Vafaeian: (Articles Link).

Scottish Proposal Would Ban Assisted Suicide Prevention

This article was published by National Review online on October 31, 2025.

Wesley Smith

By Wesley J Smith

Assisted suicide is not legal in Scotland — I have traveled there three times to fight that agenda — but it is a looming threat again. And now, an amendment to the legalization bill has been proposed that would prohibit prevention efforts at or near places where suicidal people’s lives would be ended. From the ADF International press release:

A Scottish parliamentarian and member of the Health Committee, Patrick Harvie MSP, has proposed an amendment to Scotland’s controversial “assisted suicide” bill that would criminalise discussion of suicide prevention within a large, undefined public area surrounding any building where an assisted suicide might take place.

The vague proposal would forbid any attempts to “influence” a person’s decision to undergo an assisted suicide, such as through conversation with a family member or the display of a suicide prevention poster.

Holy cow! Is Scottish nihilism so thick that it would actually criminalize efforts to save lives? We’ll see. But I guess we shouldn’t be surprised, as advocates oppose the right of medical conscience that would allow professionals to opt out of all complicity in killing patients or assisting their suicides.

Also, this would seem to imply that there will be assisted suicide clinics. And indeed, there is a “MAID house” in Canada where patients go to be killed.

What a world, what a world.

Franchising Death (MAiDHouse)

This article was written by Kelsi Sheren and published on her substack on March 12, 2025. 

MAiDHouse is a euthanasia clinic that started in Toronto and are now establishing MAiDHouse "franchises".

MAiD Houses, looking for a recession proof way to profit? Why not death?

Kelsi Sheren

By Kelsi Sheren

MAiDHouse is not healthcare—it's death care. Under the polished, sanitized branding of "compassion" and "choice," what we really have is a killing house with two convenient Canadian locations, Toronto and Victoria. This place exists solely to profit from the despair, isolation, and vulnerabilities of those at their weakest moments.

Let's strip away the comforting language and face the reality: MAiDHouse is actively marketing death to a population already drowning in pain, loneliness, and neglect. By using slick websites, carefully curated newsletters, and targeted outreach to platforms frequented by caregivers, medical professionals, social workers, and even influencers on LinkedIn and other online communities, they're dangling a deadly carrot—wrapped conveniently as "information"—in front of people who desperately need genuine support, community, medical intervention, and psychological care, not assisted suicide.

Their own annual report reveals the extent of their grim enterprise. "What an incredible year it has been for MAiDHouse in 2023! After opening the doors at our new space in 2022, the number of individuals using our space for a MAiD procedure doubled in 2023. That is astounding progress for such a young organization, and reflects the commitment and resolve of our executive director, Tekla Hendrickson, in ensuring MAiDHouse will always be available to serve anyone who needs us, when they need us. One of the things that makes me most proud to be involved in MAiDHouse is the across- the-board positive reaction from those who use our space – whether it be the individuals choosing MAiD, their friends and family, or providers. During a time that is incredibly personal, vulnerable and full of emotion, they still take the time to thank us for the compassionate and competent support they receive; they tell us how much they love our space – its artwork, its comforts, its overall ambiance; they express gratitude for the service MAiDHouse provides." 2023 Annual Report MAiD House. Every individual they "serve" isn't simply guided compassionately to the end of life; they're methodically funneled toward death, carefully recorded as another statistic, another "success story" for their marketing materials. The morally bankrupt justification of providing dignity masks the reality: this is a facility designed not to heal, not to comfort, but to eliminate burdens. By normalizing the idea that one's suffering can simply vanish at the push of a needle, it dangerously opens the door for families overwhelmed by caregiving responsibilities, subtly incentivizing them toward the expedient and cost-saving solution of choosing death over care.

This sinister enterprise exploits the gaping holes in our social safety nets, preying mercilessly on those already abandoned by inadequate healthcare systems, systemic poverty, chronic illness, mental health challenges, and societal neglect. It's not compassion to offer death when society has catastrophically failed in offering meaningful life-affirming alternatives. It is coercion masked as freedom; it is despair presented as liberation. Make no mistake this is seen as abuse—plain and simple. MAiDHouse does not only facilitate this abuse; it actively profits and thrives on it.

Furthermore, by promoting their services to medical professionals and social workers, they insert themselves insidiously into trusted networks. Their marketing subtly reshapes how caregivers view the sanctity and value of human life, pushing a narrative that frames assisted dying as not merely acceptable but preferable, even admirable. The ethical erosion this generates is immeasurable, reshaping societal attitudes to regard life as disposable, contingent on convenience rather than dignity and intrinsic worth.

We must face the uncomfortable truth head-on: MAiDHouse is not about mercy or dignity; it is about convenience, economics, and a profoundly disturbing disregard for human life wrapped in a carefully constructed ethical cloak. This isn't a humane service; it's a cold, calculated, profitable business model that thrives on despair. No civilized society should ever justify or normalize such a practice. MAiDHouse doesn't belong anywhere near the realm of healthcare—it belongs in the category of predatory enterprises we expose, dismantle, and categorically reject outright.

Previous articles by Kelsi Sheren:

• Let's call MAiD what it is: Homicide (Link). 
• The death cult of the euthanasia lobby. A rebuttal (Link). 
• UK veteran in crisis illegally offered assisted suicide (Link).

MAiDHouse -- a Canadian charity -- kills 125 people in 2022

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The 2022 MAiDHouse Annual Report  reveals that MAiDHouse facilitated 125 euthanasia deaths in 2022, up significantly from 2021.

MAiDHouse, is a euthanasia clinic in Toronto that offers euthanasia for people do not wish to die by euthanasia in a hospital.

In September 2022, Margaret Marsilla ran a petition campaign to prevent the euthanasia death of her 23-year-old son Kiano who was scheduled to die at the MAiDHouse on September 28, 2022. 

In her media release, Margaret Marsilla wrote:

Dr. Joshua Tepper and Dr. Laurie Morrison (“Dr. Death”) have approved the application for medical assistance in dying (MAiD) for my son, set to take place on September 28, 2022, at MAiDHouse. Both the doctors and MAiDHouse, run by Tekla Hendrickson, continue to turn their nose up to the requirements of legislation, which was to have built-in safe guards to protect vulnerable individuals.

The MAiDHouse Annual Report exposes their plan to expand euthanasia by opening more death clinics. 

In contrast, the Delta Hospice Society that provided excellent end-of-life care, was defunded and had its 10 bed hospice building expropriated by the British Columbia government because of their commitment to provide a no kill hospice.

MAiDHouse exclusively provides euthanasia.

MAiDHouse and CAMAP (Canadian Association of MAiD Assessors and Providers) exist to provide and promote euthanasia. Both have been designated as charities by the Canadian government.

23-year-old scheduled for euthanasia on September 28 remains alive.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The 23-year-old (Kiano) who was scheduled to die by euthanasia on September 28 is alive.

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition was instrumental in this first victory to prevent the killing of Kiano.

After speaking with Margaret Marsilla, the mother of Kiano (who was originally scheduled to die by euthanasia on September 22 and then rescheduled for September 28) I published an article titled: Mother wants to stop her 23-year-old son from being killed by euthanasia. (Link).

Margaret had started a Change.org petition. I asked her if we could republish her petition on CitizenGo, a petition platform that we have successfully launched other petition campaigns. Almost 10,000 people signed the CitizenGo petition.

Sign and share the petition to the Ontario Minister of Health (Petition Link)

Margaret told the media that the petition campaign was instrumental in activating people to stop the doctor and MAiD House from killing Kiano.

We originally did not publish Kiano's name because he asked his mother to keep his name private, but since then Kiano has used his name when being interviewed by the media.

But the battle is not over. Margaret wants to prevent her son from being killed by euthanasia but she also wants to set a precedent that wrong approvals for euthanasia can be challenged. 

Since the government is treating euthanasia as medical treatment, then, in Ontario, challenges to euthanasia applications should be able to be reviewed before the Consent and Capacity Board, like other medical treatment disputes.

Linda Slobodian wrote on September 28 in an article for the Western Standard news Margaret as saying:

“We’re going to be fighting the Ontario health system to not allow any other doctors to perform euthanasia on my son.”

“We have to bring this to the Capacity Board, so he’ll be forced to do some testing with regards to his psychological capacity.”

Ontario’s Consent and Capacity Board, a quasi-judicial administrative tribunal, operates independently from the health ministry under the Health Care Consent Act’s authority. Marsilla’s also considering legal action against MAiD House and the doctor.

“This is going to be a big battle. I’m not going to give up my fight.”

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition told Margaret that we would help her in this process.

You may also want to read the interview with Kiano written by Dorothy Cummings McLean and published by LifeSiteNews on September 29.

Kiano is alive, at least for now. This is great news. Our work with his Margaret has been successful and has made a difference. 

But the battle continues.

To all media: Preventing Doctor Death and MAiD House from Killing My Son

TO: ALL MEDIA

Re: Preventing Doctor Death and MAiD House from Killing My Son and other youth.

*Sign and share the petition to the Ontario Minister of Health (Petition Link)

I am writing to bring your attention to my protest against a euthanasia procedure (killing) that is scheduled to take place between my 23-year old son, and a doctor who has been unwilling to do his due diligence before approving the application for MAiD.

Dr. Joshua Tepper and Dr. Laurie Morrison (“Dr. Death”) have approved the application for medical assistance in dying (MAiD) for my son, set to take place on September 28, 2022, at MAiD House. Both the doctors and MAiD House, run by Tekla Hendrickson, continue to turn their nose up to the requirements of legislation, which was to have built-in safe guards to protect vulnerable individuals.

To make matters worse, the doctors associated with his approval are part of a Catholic institution that does not agree with the procedure of medical assistance in dying. I am surprised that there would be physicians associated with this sort of procedure that work with St. Michael’s Hospital. I understand the need to seek this sort of assistance in dire situations where a patient has undergone significant evaluation to determine eligibility, and where their natural death is reasonably foreseeable, given frailties, advanced age, and a state of decline in their health. However, my family and I are struggling to understand how and why this would apply to a youthful person that is otherwise generally healthy, and where his death is not reasonably foreseeable.

As such, I feel the need to bring this to the nation’s attention as we do not want to see this procedure happen to our son, nor do we want it to set a precedent for others in the future. We protest the abhorrent medical practice of MAiD for youth dealing with a mental health crisis or other non-terminal illnesses or disabilities.

I am hoping to invoke your interest to broadcast this story, but also to bring awareness to our society, and legislators of what’s currently happening within our healthcare system. Society should be made aware of the shocking revelation that young adults are given an option to end their lives rather than receive help that they need to deal with their mental or physical health. To worsen matters, as of March, 2023, Bill C-7 allows people suffering solely from mental illnesses the right to seek medical assistance in dying. I cannot imagine that the legislators, contemplated the extent of this overreaching piece of legislation that legalized suicide and killing!

I am asking if you could please assist us in bringing attention to our dear son’s situation.

Thank you,
Margaret Marsilla
EMAIL: margmarsilla@gmail.com

Previous article: 

Mother wants to stop her 23-year-old son from being killed by euthanasia (Link).

Mother wants to stop her 23 year old son from being killed by euthanasia.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition.

Sign and share the petition to the Ontario Minister of Health (Petition Link)

Margaret Marsilla has launced a campaign to stop the euthanasia death of her 23-year-old son. Margaret's son has had Type 1 Diabetes since he was 4yrs old….he is now 23. Her son is scheduled to be killed by lethal injection (MAiD) on September 28 at the MAiD House, which is a euthanasia clinic. Margaret wrote in her petition:

My son has had Type 1 Diabetes since he was 4yrs old….he is now 23. He recently lost eyesight in his left eye, and has partial eyesight in the right eye.

From having diabetes at a young age to losing his eyesight, he decided to apply for MAID (medically assisted in dying) and to our surprise, he got approved for it. Can you believe it!!! The doctor literally has given him the gun to kill himself.

When speaking with Margaret she expressed that she loves her son and is committed to getting him the treatment that he needs. But he needs to be alive to receive treatment. Margaret wrote in her petition:

Now just think of it…. A young boy who has lived with diabetes, a teenager who has been influenced with constant marijuana smoking (which has obviously altered his young brain) and now just lost his eye sight has been given the go ahead to give up just like that!!! This doctor and small team of opinions are basing it on Diabetes and blindness and that he is suffering from pain.

However, his pain is managed through injections in his eye, and his diabetes is managed through insulin. There are plenty of treatments out there for all of this but my son is giving up on life not because of pain and suffering but because it affected him mentally and emotionally.

Giving up is in the now, but killing yourself is for eternal, and not a good reason for MAiD.

Sign and share the petition to the Ontario Minister of Health (Petition Link) 

Margaret is committed to saving the life of her son but she is also concerned about your kids. Margaret wrote in her petition:

This action has long reaching consequences for all young adults and teens. It will affect them and their parents going through the journey of diabetes, knowing that when the going gets tough, that they can make a decision to have help in dying. This system that allows troubled young adults to make a life altering decision is wrong.

THIS IS REAL AND I NEED TO TRY TO STOP THIS FROM BECOMING REALITY AND NOT ALLOWING IT BECOME A PRECEDENT CASE FOR FUTURE KIDS LIVING WITH A DIABETES OR ANY OTHER MANAGED DISEASE, OR MENTAL ILLNESS.

I need your help to make our voices heard. Please sign the attached Petition to stop these awful doctors from giving our children the ammunition they need to kill themselves.

Sign and share the petition to the Ontario Minister of Health (Petition Link)