Canada's parliament needs to fully review the euthanasia law.

This speech was delivered to the Special Joint Committee on Medical Assistance in Dying on May 5, 2026. I was only given 5 minutes to speak.

Petition: Canada's euthanasia law needs a complete review (Link).

My name is Alex Schadenberg and I am the Executive Director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition. I work in Canada and also with people world-wide who oppose euthanasia and assisted suicide. Canada is increasingly seen internationally as a cautionary example. The rapid growth in MAiD deaths and the expansion in the types of cases are being closely watched abroad.

Developments in Canada have influenced debates in other countries, including the defeat of the assisted dying bills in Scotland, the UK House of Lords(1) and Slovenia, where assisted suicide was overturned through a referendum.

Rather than extending assisted dying to persons whose sole underlying condition is a mental disorder, Parliament needs to examine how Canada’s assisted dying law is functioning. How has the law been implemented? Is it achieving its intended outcomes? Are there abuses of the law based on its original intention? Does the law require amendment? These questions have never been addressed.

Dr Ramona Coelho stated in her article, published by the MacDonald Laurier Institute on January 5, 2026(2) as a commentary on the Sixth Annual Report on MAiD that:

“Although the report emphasizes self-identified disability, all MAiD recipients are disabled by definition. Disability refers to any long-term impairment that limits participation in life. MAiD is legal for individuals with a “grievous and irremediable” condition, an incurable illness causing irreversible decline in capabilities. Anyone meeting these criteria is by definition disabled, though not all disabled people should qualify for MAiD.

Common conditions listed for Track 2 MAiD reinforce this point. Diabetes appears frequently, and Ontario’s MDRC documented a man who received MAiD for an essential tremor. These are disabilities, yet they do not usually cause the serious decline that MAiD is intended to address. By emphasizing self-identified disability, the report obscures the real story: MAiD eligibility targets disabled people, a concern highlighted by the disability community, the United Nations and human rights watchdogs, and most recently, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.”(2)

The United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has called for repeal of Track 2 MAiD, increased oversight of the law and no further expansion, including the scheduled expansion of MAiD for the sole criteria of mental illness.

For instance, Kiano Vafaeian (26) died by MAiD in Vancouver on December 30, 2025.(3) Kiano was seeking assisted dying in Ontario, where he lived, but his requests for MAiD were not approved by doctors in Ontario.

Kiano then contacted Dr Ellen Wiebe in Vancouver, British Columbia, who assessed him and approved him for MAiD.

Margaret Marsilla, Kiano’s mother, was shocked that her son, who was living with Type 1 diabetes, resulting in Kiano becoming legally blind and also living with significant mental health issues, could have been approved for MAiD.(3)

Kiano was approved as a Track 2 candidate for MAiD. Kiano’s family was never consulted, which is important since Kiano was living with depression and suicidal ideation.(3)

The family did not learn about his death until several days after his death.

If Kiano’s death was the only disturbing MAiD death then one might suggest that his death is an outlier, but in fact there have been many controversial MAiD deaths.

Instead of expanding MAiD further, Parliament needs to examine how the current law has led to outcomes like the death of Kiano. Parliament needs to completely review the euthanasia law.

More broadly, Canada’s assisted dying law is vague. While Health Canada provides guidance, the legal framework allows for wide interpretation and it lacks effective oversight.

Because of time constraints, I will highlight one key issue.

Sections 241 (3) and 241 (3.1) of Canada's Criminal Code states that medical practitioners or nurse practitioners are required only to be “of the opinion” that the eligibility criteria are met. That, in practice, makes accountability extremely difficult, even impossible to prosecute a medical or nurse practitioner in Canada, even when the MAiD death is clearly wrong or deeply disturbing. 

The MDRC reports and cases that have already been submitted to you speak to that reality.

Canada should not be considering the expansion of the euthanasia law to include people with mental illness alone but rather Parliament needs to fully review the law.

1. Colby Cosh, “Canada’s horrifying example causes UK to think twice about euthanasia,” (January 31, 2026), online: National Post,< https://nationalpost.com/opinion/canadas-horrifying-example-causes-u-k-to-think-twice-about-euthanasia>

2. Dr Ramona Coelho, “Disabled Canadians should never feel compelled to die. Let’s given them the support they need to live,” (January 5, 2026), online: Macdonald Laurier Institute, <https://macdonaldlaurier.ca/disabled-canadians-should-never-feel-compelled-to-die-lets-give-them-the-support-they-need-to-live-ramona-coelho-in-the-hub/>

3. Sharon Kirkey, “A Doctor took my ‘son’: This 26 year-old was denied assisted death in Ontario but died by MAiD in BC,” (January 30, 2026), online: National Post, <My name is Alex Schadenberg and I am the Executive Director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition. I work in Canada and also with people world-wide who oppose euthanasia and assisted suicide. Canada is increasingly seen internationally as a cautionary example. The rapid growth in MAiD deaths and the expansion in the types of cases are being closely watched abroad.

Slovenian Supreme Court upholds results of assisted suicide referendum.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition.

I have more great news from Slovenia.

The Slovenian Supreme Court has upheld the results of the assisted suicide referendum that rejected the Slovenian assisted suicide law.

The Slovenian parliament legalized assisted suicide in July 2025. After the passing of the poison bill, a group of citizens organized by Aleš Primc, of the Slovenian Voice for Children and Families, collected 46,000 to require a referendum on the assisted suicide bill.

On November 23, 2025, the Slovenian people rejected the assisted suicide law by passing the referendum by a 53.46% margin.

Following the successful referendum vote, a court challenge was launched claiming irregularities in the referendum campaign.

On March 24, 2026, the Slovenian Supreme Court rejected the challenge to the referendum results and decided that there was no proof that any alleged irregularities had a significant impact on the vote and its outcome.

Aleš Primc

Aleš Primc, told the European Conservative that:

I am convinced that a miracle happened. In recent years, the media often published manipulative emotional stories in favor of assisted dying and polls in the final week suggested less than 30% of the public opposed it. We won the referendum with 53.46%.

Please read our article on how Slovenian overturned their assisted suicide law. (Read).

Euthanasia and assisted suicide laws have lost their luster.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Robert Clarke, a lawyer and the director of advocacy with ADF International was published in the Federalist on March 23, 2026 with his article: Around the World, Assisted Suicide Laws Are Losing Support. Clarke outlines how campaigns to legalize euthanasia and/or assisted suicide have lost their luster and a new direction has begun to begin rolling back laws that already exist. 

Clarke writes:

Last week, Scotland resolutely rejected assisted suicide. Alberta announced major new legislation to protect individuals from the practice. And the clock is ticking in the United Kingdom’s House of Lords on a bill that would legalize the practice in England and Wales.

Clarke explains that the recent defeat of Scotland's assisted suicide bill by a vote of 69 to 57 happened with cross-party opposition to the bill. Clarke also refers to the introduction in Alberta of Bill 18, a government bill that will use provincial jurisdiction to institute greater protections for Albertans concerning euthanasia.

Alberta Bill 18 will:

• require the individual to have a 12 month terminal prognosis, thus preventing Track 2 euthanasia approvals. Track 2 refers to euthanasia for people who are not terminally ill.
• prevent the expansion of euthanasia to people with mental illness alone, 
• prevent the expansion of euthanasia to "mature minors", people who cannot consent and prevent euthanasia by advanced request,
• prevent out of province referrals,
• require the assessor to contact other practitioners who have cared for the patient, before approval.
• require (MAiD) euthanasia practitioners to receive specific training,
• prevent health care practitioners from introducing euthanasia, without a request,
• require Regulatory Colleges to sanction practitioners who violate the act.
• provide conscience rights by enabling practitioners to refuse to participate or provide assessments for (MAiD) euthanasia,
• enable institutions to refuse to participate or provide assessments for euthanasia,
• create an exclusion zone for euthanasia around an institution that refuses to participate,
• require practitioners who refuse to participate or provide assessments to provide information to patients wanting to access euthanasia.

Clarke writes:

Over the last four years, deaths in Alberta from Canada’s Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) regime increased by 109 percent. In her announcement, Alberta’s premier, Danielle Smith, was clear that the proposed law is “about protecting vulnerable Albertans.” As the federal government seeks to expand MAID across the country, including by moving to allow assisted suicide solely on the basis of mental health concerns, Alberta is drawing a line to protect its most vulnerable. If passed, the Safeguards for Last Resort Termination of Life Act would prohibit MAID for minors and when the sole condition is mental illness, in addition to introducing other key protections and delineating a right to conscientious objection.

Clarke maintains that safeguards cannot make euthanasia or assisted suicide safe but Alberta Bill 18 is headed in the right direction by dealing with some of the most egregious parts of Canada's euthanasia law.

The key factors as to why euthanasia and assisted suicide have lost their luster are the radical implementation and expansion of Canada's euthanasia law and the incredible referendum overturning the Slovenian assisted suicide law. In fact, Canada's euthanasia law had a direct affect on Slovenia's successful referendum campaign.

Canada origally legalized euthanasia for people who were terminally ill and suffering. Canadians were told the the law would only be a last resort, but from the beginning the language of the law lacked definition which immediately led to a type of expansion. 

In less than 5 years Canada expanded the law legally by removing the requirement that a person be terminally ili, eliminated the "reflection period" for those who are terminally ill to allow a same-day death, eliminating the requirement that a person be capable of consenting at the time of the killing and allowing euthanasia for mental illness alone. Parliament delayed euthanasia for mental illness alone. It is now scheduled to begin on March 17, 2027.

The euthanasia stories from Canada have had an incredible effect on the international euthanasia debate. The world asks how a 26-year-old diabetic man with a serious history with mental health issue, who lives in Ontario, could be killed by euthanasia in Vancouver BC after not being approved to be killed by doctors in his own province.

The world asks how a man with a back disability can be approved for euthanasia, even though he is only asking to be killed because of housing issues. The same question comes up concerning an Ontario woman with Multiple Chemical Sensitivities who was living in social housing. She was killed by euthanasia even though she actually needed suitable housing.

These are only a few of the incredible number of stories from Canada that are changing the international perception of euthanasia and assisted suicide. For those who do not oppose killing people, euthanasia and assisted suicide are becoming an interesting theoretical experiment without an effective practical implementation.

The incredible referendum campaign that overturned Slovenia's assisted suicide law is another key factor. Here is an article I wrote about this campaign. (Read article). 

Slovenia is the first country to legalize assisted suicide and then overturn the law. We all now how difficult it is to run a referendum campaign, but the Slovenian campaign stuck to their talking points and did not avoid the truth of what euthanasia and assisted suicide actually are,

The average person continues to have an aversion to killing people. So long as we focus on what euthanasia and assisted suicide actually are, we can win the debate. When become afraid of saying the truth and argue that euthanasia and assisted suicide are not necessary, that means that it is OK but not necessary. Why isn't it necessary? 

Killing is not only unnecessary but it is always wrong to give medical practitioners the right in law to kill you. Also, once legal it cannot be controlled. Killing is contagious.

International change projected from Alberta Bill 18

Gordon Friesen

By Gordon Friesen
President, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

I think it is fair to say that the world-wide euthanasia/assisted-suicide/medical-homicide debate has recently entered a new phase.

For as long as I can remember, a relentless click-clack, click-clack, click-clack, political ratchet sound had signalled "progress" in one direction alone: more legal jurisdictions; wider eligibility; increasingly limited access to real care.

Article: Alberta Bill 18 will provide limits to euthanasia (MAiD) (Read).

Our victories were counted in the defeat of euthanasia and assisted suicide bills. And, even while celebrating, we knew that the same people would be back, next year, in the same states or countries, with the same bills (or perhaps something even worse).

In the last few years, huge chunks of cultural geography seemed poised to totter all at once, notably including the entire British diaspora of UK, Wales, Scotland, the Chanel Islands, Australia, New Zealand, and of course, Canada. France too, had lately joined the contest, along with the rest of Southern Europe. And in the US the "progressive" bastions of Illinois, and New York, finally managed to eke out a long awaited pro-death majority.

But now, it would seem that the winds may indeed be changing. For although its former satellites --Australia, Canada, and more-- have indeed forged ahead in radical fashion, The UK itself including all its main constituents (England, Scotland) has not. And while France has been teetering for years, against all lucid prediction: it teeters still.

And then something amazing occurred. Slovenian legislators legalized euthanasia in July 2025, according to the same "the fix is in" international playbook that we see advanced elsewhere. But the Slovenian people suddenly rose up and reversed that decision with a binding referendum, in November of the same year!

Apparently, this tiny victory, in a nation of only 2 million souls, is destined to be recorded in history as that first infinitesimal crack in an apparently indestructible wall, which clearly foretells (for those who can read the signs) a future collapse of the entire structure. For in this instance, a euthanasia legalizing initiative was not merely postponed, but frankly rolled back.

To be clear on this point: unlike any number of American States, Slovenians will not face a new euthanasia initiative next year. And this, in exactly the same way that an overturned US Supreme Court decision never results in new legislation, to the same effect, for at least a generation.

Quite frankly, I think most people assumed (or at least feared) that this victory would be a one-off, and that the death-cult steam-roller would continue unabated as before.

But now we have Alberta, one of ten Canadian Provinces which suddenly says:

"No, Canada may render an extended practice of legal euthanasia, but the Province of Alberta will limit such practice within the bounds of public healthcare."

Once again, as in Slovenia, what is already legal (and in the Canadian context what had been actual practice going back five years) will be halted. Not a prevention. A roll-back!

In a little while it will be appropriate to say something more specific about the meaning of Alberta Bill 18 for Canada, and especially, for other Canadian Provinces. But for today, I would simply like to make two international remarks.

First: it can be done!

Defeating a Bill in your jurisdiction is not necessarily a temporary victory. It is possible that you have stopped this madness permanently. And furthermore --just as in Slovenia and Alberta-- even losing is not the end of rational hope. Evil policy can actually be reversed. We have the proof!

My second remark, however, is more sobering: The popping of champagne corks, that we hear in Canada today, is to celebrate rolling back the demented policy of that nation in only one of ten Provinces; and even there, only to the original state of euthanasia law in 2016, which was then the most radical in the world.

The number one lesson of Alberta, in the US and around the world, is therefore this:

If you do not wish to find yourself in a similar situation to that described, it is imperative to invest yourself, now, in the struggle to prevent any legalization, whatsoever, in whatever jurisdiction you cherish as your home.

How Slovenia overturned their assisted suicide law.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Alex, Alexander, Aleš, & Wesley

On January 21, the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition (EPC) and EPC-USA held a strategic meeting in Washington DC.

Aleš Primc, (second from the right) was a key organizer of the referendum campaign that overturned Slovenia's assisted suicide law.

Slovenia is the first country to legalize assisted suicide and then overturn the law through a referendum. On November 23, 2025 the Slovenian people voted 53.6% to overturn the assisted suicide law.

Aleš began his presentation by thanking (Alex Schadenberg) for helping them with advice, information and direction for the successful referendum campaign in Slovenia.

Aleš Primc

This is the message that Aleš shared.

The Slovenian government held a referendum in 2024 based on the concept of legalizing euthanasia. Slovenians passed the 2024 referendum by a 55 - 45% margin.

The Slovenian government then introduced a law to legalize poisoning by assisted suicide that passed in July 2025. 

Alés formed a group to gather signatures to enable a referendum to overturn that law. They needed 40,000 signatures, which is difficult considering Slovenia has only 2 million people. 

In Slovenia they do not collect signatures in the street, the people must go to the public office to sign in support of a referendum campaign. It was very hard to collect these signatures. We had 35 days to collect signatures and it took us until the final few days to get the signatures.

The polls showed that 30% of the people were planning to support the referendum.

Interview in Slovenia.

Aleš said that when Alex Schadenberg was in Slovenia in 2024, they learned that they had to develop their own language and their own arguments in order to win the campaign. Everything needed to be new. If they would speak the language used by the other side and react to their talking points they would not win the referendum.

The poison lobby framework was designed to manipulate people. They decided to go a different direction.

Aleš first wanted to say that they considered their victory to be a miracle.

It was important that they got all of the opposition political parties on their side as this legislation was pushed by the government. The opposition parties had political reason to support the campaign. Political parties have local structures that enabled them to collect the signatures and get out the vote.

It was important that the Churches recognized this referendum as their referendum. Not all of the Churches joined the campaign in the beginning, but once they got going they all joined.

It was important that the medical associations supported the campaign. These organizations didn't want to be involved directly with the campaign but it was very important that they were on our side. These groups didn't like that we used strong language and they wanted to use "nice" words, but they were on our side.

Most doctors do not want to participate in the "dirty job" of killing and they recognized that if some doctors participate that it would change medicine for everyone. They saw it as a law that created new obligations that were directly opposed to their professional ethics. If they didn't get them involved they may have only fought for conscientious objection, but they may have done very little.

When the referendum was approved, the structures within the medical association began to move on the issue.

At the same time, all of the Churches in Slovenia made a common statement supporting the referendum. This was important because it created a common position but it also changed the media response since the media will often attack the Catholic Church, but they couldn't because every christian and non-christian religious group supported the referendum.

The common statement made every religious group decide that this referendum was their referendum. As the referendum day approached more and more religious groups directly participated in the get-out-the vote campaign. It was incredible to see all of these groups becoming directly involved.

Another outcome of the common statement was that every religious group organized their own prayer.

Another development was the reaction of Croatians who viewed the referendum as their referendum because they knew that if Slovenia legally poisoned their citizens then Croatia would likely be next. Croatia is directly south of Slovenia.

The referendum became a common battle for all groups and we cooperated with them.

Language.

They decided to not use any words that are used by their opponents. They decided to do everything that is possible to win. They were not battling an idea, they were battling to win.

To win, they decided that they would only use their language. They never used the name of the law. The name of the law was designed to sell the law. They noticed in other countries, that groups will refer to legislation by it's name -- voluntary euthanasia or assisted suicide. They would have lost if they used the actual name.

Aleš always stated that this was the law that allows poisoning of the people. They decided that they would speak about poisoning people.

They asked - What is the intention of the poisoning lobby? The opposition frightened Slovenians by telling them that they would suffer. They wanted everyone to fear the last days of their life. They succeeded in their message through years of brainwashing people during the government debates.

Nobody in Slovenia, or the western world, wants to suffer. Fair enough, but the opposition message was ridiculous. So they decided to not speak about suffering. They did not speak about suffering because people were already brainwashed to fear death.

They did not speak about euthanasia or assisted suicide but poisoning.

When speaking about poisoning they did not need to speak about the difference between euthanasia and assisted suicide because both involved poisoning. Speaking about prescribing or injecting doesn't help, with poisoning there is no difference. The person dies from being poisoned.

This law was about poisoning people and those who were promoting the law were the poisoning lobby. The intention of the law was to poison people. The law therefore established a framework whereby people could be poisoned.

It is a hard language and at first some people were hesitant to use this language. The Church and the doctors groups didn't use this language, but as the leader of the campaign it was important for Aleš to use this language.

The opposition were angry and almost terrified by the language. They constantly repeated that this is not poisoning. When they were doing interviews they spoke about this not being poisoning and  Aleš explained why it is poisoning, therefore they were speaking about poisoning.

They then stated that this is the pension, healthcare and social reform law. They stated that dead people don't need money from the government. Dead people don't need a pension, they don't need healthcare and they don't need social care.

When you are elderly and have an illness, the cheapest way for the government is to poison you.

In Slovenia they have socialized healthcare, but it is not a very good system. In Slovenia it will sometimes take two to four years to see a specialist. But the law called poisoning a healthcare right. 

The law allowed people to by poisoned to death in 20 days while people have to wait sometimes two to four years to see a specialist, but you can be poisoned to death in 20 days. They called this the government healthcare, pension and social reform law. People knew that this was true.

The government published a calculation of the cost to kill people by poisoning and the cost to provide healthcare, social services and pensions for people.

The government calculated that each poisoning will cost 3,000 to 5,000 euro but healthcare, social services and pension may cost 20,000 to 40,000 euro per month. They argued that this was why the government had legalized poisoning.

The group asked who gets the money that is saved from all the dead people? The government gets the money that iss saved from the people being poisoned to death.

Slovenians understood that if this law was not overturned that their lives were at risk. When Slovenians are sick they want to go to the doctor for healthcare not poisoning.

Slovenians said, I paid all of my life into the pension and healthcare system and never used anything and now when I'm older and would need healthcare or need a pension, after paying 30 - 40 years into the system, they will offer to kill me.

They succeeded in turning around the conversation.

When they had TV debates on the referendum the poisoning lobby said that it is not poisoning and they were lying. But they didn't speak about their talking points, they spoke about poisoning. It was important that they stuck to their talking points, even though the poisoning lobby tried to make them speak about other things.

They only had a few key talking points and they stuck to them. It is not easy on a TV show or debate to stick to your talking points but you have to do it. As soon as you start talking about their talking points you will not win.

Since Slovenia was not the first country to legalize therefore they didn't need to imagine what would happen. They presented actual evidence of what is happening in other countries, such as Canada.

It was very helpful that Alex Schadenberg regularly sent information and helped them during the campaign. The arguments and information was very important for them because if they didn't have information the other side could claim whatever they wanted, but they were able to use actual information and prove it.

Because of the regular information that they received, they led the "International" arguments campaign about what is happening in countries that have legalized.

They responded by saying, don't tell us that all of these things will not happen because this is what is happening, not only in one country, but also in the other countries that have legalized it. It was not that it may happen, but that it is happening right now.

It is important that you have real arguments not just potential arguments about imagined scenario's. They were careful to use actual facts.

Their arguments may seem simple but it was not easy to stick to their talking points because the media tried to pull them away from their talking points. It was very important to stick to the plan.

In Slovenia they proved that it was a good decision to stick to their talking points all of the time. They didn't let the poisoning lobby pull them away from their campaign.

2025 was a year of great victory with great challenges.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director,
Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

2025 was a year of great success and great challenges for those who oppose killing by euthanasia and assisted suicide.

The first success was the growth of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition (EPC). The EPCBlog grew significantly in the past year with 3.66 million readers in 2025, not counting the people who read our articles that were republished on other sites.

We allow anyone to republish our articles, as long as they attribute or link to our original article. Our blog articles always contain links to the original articles enabling people who are doing research to find the original articles.

We are pleased with the successful Sloveniana referendum. The Slovenian parliament passed a bill to legalize euthanasia in July 2025. The referendum was a great success with 53.5% rejecting the Slovenian euthanasia law.

We are very pleased with our January 1, 2026 release of the film: Life Worth Living. (Link to the Life Worth Living information).

The film project grew out of our work with the successful Slovenian referendum campaign, as well as our work with partners in Victoria, Australia who were trying to prevent the expansion of their assisted suicide law, and also our promotion of Bill C-218, the bill that is sponsored by Tamara Jansen MP which, if passed, would prevent euthanasia for mental illness alone in Canada.

While working on the film project, we shared footage of interviews concerning Canada’s experience with euthanasia, that was used in the Slovenian referendum campaign.

There were more successes, but there were also significant losses.

Delaware, Illinois and New York all legalized assisted suicide in 2025. This is a significant loss considering that the last state to legalize assisted suicide was New Mexico 5 years earlier. We are concerned that 2026 will lead to more states legalizing assisted suicide.

We are also concerned about the assisted suicide debate in Britain. The assisted suicide bills at Westminster (England and Wales) and at Holyrood (Scotland) will likely both be voted on in 2026.

Canada's experience with euthanasia has changed the debate in many countries. This is good since we don't want them to follow Canada's lead. Nonetheless, many of these jurisdiction believe that they are not Canada, or the Netherlands or Belgium, therefore it will be different for them. Canadians were told the same in 2015/2016.

People miss the fact that people are people and killing is killing.

We opposed to euthanasia because it is literally about killing people. Assisted killing is a bad idea not just because it cannot be contained or it will negatively affect people at a vulnerable time of their life, even though those statements are true.

We oppose assisting a suicide because it is also about killing someone. Assisting a suicide undermines the need that the person is experiencing, where the response should be proper care and suicide prevention.

Based on the nature of the human person, it is never a good idea to give someone, the right in law, to kill people, as euthanasia and assisted suicide laws actually do. Historically, it has never worked out when a society allows one group of people (medical professionals) to kill people, even when it is requested.

Assisted suicide was legalized in three US states in 2025. Are you concerned?

Alex Schadenberg

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, 

Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

In 2025, assisted suicide was legalized in Delaware, Illinois and New York. This means that there are now 13 US states plus Washington DC that permit assisted suicide. The 13 states include California, Illinois and New York, three of the six most populated states in America.

This is tragic and will result in many early deaths and will lead to the further medical abandonment of people in need.

Previous to this year, the last state that legalized assisted suicide was New Mexico in 2021.

Are you concerned? I am concerned.

I watched the recent online US assisted suicide lobby political meeting. During the meeting the assisted suicide lobby outlined that, in 2026, there will be at least 18 states with bills to legalize assisted suicide. 

We are very concerning with some of the listed states which included: Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada and Virginia. There are other states that the assisted suicide lobby are focusing on that are less likely to legalize assisted suicide in 2026 including (but not limited to) Arizona and Florida.

Our allies have been very successful in the past few years but the issue seems to be changing How are we to respond?

Let's look at the most recent successful campaign. 

The Slovenian people voted on an assisted suicide referendum on Sunday, November 23, 2025 and voted to overturn the assisted suicide bill that was passed in the Slovenian legislature in July 2025. More than 53.5% of the voters rejected the assisted suicide law.

This was a great victory, that was accomplished by a small group of committed citizens who stuck to their talking points. They achieved the victory for people who are sick, people with disabilities and pensioners against all odds, as they were up against the government and a well funded death lobby.

Slovenia is not the United States, but the principles in the successful campaign will transport to North America.

They weren't afraid to call it what it is. They used the term poisoning. Assisted suicide is to provide a lethal concoction to poison a person to death. 

The never used the language of the other side. The other side continuously lied about what the assisted suicide law said or what assisted suicide is. The campaign focused on telling the truth and challenging the lies.

They called assisted suicide, health care reform. Most jurisdictions require health care reform to enable a more equitable provision of care. Assisted suicide poisons a person to death. Dead people don't need health care.

The called assisted suicide pension reform. Slovenia, like most jurisdictions, invest a significant portion of their budget into the pension system. Assisted suicide poisons a person to death. Dead people don't collect pensions.

Proper medical care. The other side focused on suffering. The campaign opposing assisted suicide talked about proper care, and explained that assisted suicide forces people, who cannot attain proper medical care, to be poisoned to death.

The Slovenian campaign was more aggressive than most campaigns, but they won even though they were massively out-spent.

The take-away from the Slovenian referendum is that people innately oppose killing people, but you must be willing to state what assisted suicide is. The Slovenians built their campaign on a few key talking points and stuck to them. Hiding behind nice language or presenting the issue in a way that seems more socially acceptable avoids the reality that assisted suicide is about killing people by poison.

I am not afraid to say that I oppose killing people.

How Slovenia won a referendum that rejected euthanasia.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The Slovenian people voted in a referendum on November 23, 2025 to overturn the euthanasia bill that was passed in the Slovenian legislature in July 2025.  More than 53% of the voters rejected the euthanasia law.

This was a great victory, that was accomplished by a small group of committed citizens who stuck to their talking points. They achieved this victory for people who are sick, people with disabilities and pensioners against all odds, as they were up against the government and a well funded death lobby.

Why did Slovenians reject the govenrment euthanasia law? 

Aleš Primc, the organizer of the referendum explains:

• Slovenian people decided that they are valued and respected.
• Patients, disabled people and pensioners need treatment, medication and pain relief, and the people rejecting poisoning, or forcing them to poison themselves.
• Doctors and healthcare personnel decided to respect medical ethics and the Hippocratic Oath, which stipulates that a doctor treats and does not kill, nor does he/she participate in poisoning people.

They were up against a massive well funded opposition. As Aleš stated:

The poisoning of patients, disabled people and pensioners was supported by all government parties and the largest media. However, most people in Slovenia nevertheless retained their common sense and made decisions in accordance with their conscience.

They were faced with constant lies. Aleš explained:

The poisoning lobby has been lying, deceiving and scaring people all the time. Our task was to expose these lies and prove this with references to the law. Then they twisted their words and wanted to change the subject.

Leaders also made telling statements. Aleš wrote:

The Prime Minister stated that "people who have living, immobile parents are unlucky". Former Minister of Health Keber, stated that a patient towards the end of life is not a person, but only organs.

As Aleš stated having an elderly or disabled relative is not unlucky and towards the end of life a person is not "only organs.|

The take-away from the Slovenina referndum is that people innately oppose killing, but we must be willing to state what euthanasia actually is. The Slovenian team built their campaign on a few key talking points and stuck to them. Hiding behind nice language or presenting the issue in a way that seems more socially acceptable avoids the reality that euthanasia and assisted suicide are about killing people. 

Slovenians rejected the killing of people.

More articles on Slovenia

• Great news: Slovenia rejected euthanasia law with more than 53% support for the referendum (Link).
• Slovenian interview with Alex Schadenberg and Theo Boer (Link). 
• Bad news in Slovenia and Uruguay (Link). 
• Has Slovenia legalized assisted suicide (Link). 
• Slovenia debates assisted suicide. Doctors and medical groups oppose the bill (Link).

Slovenia: The sick, the disabled and the pensioner won the referendum!

Alex Schadenberg\
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

I reported on November 23 that Slovenia rejected the euthanasia law, that the government passed in July through a successful referendum that garnered more than 53% support.

Aleš Primc, the organizer of the referendum campaign sent the following message to their supporters, campaign team and to the media.

Let me be clear, the Slovenian people rejected poisoning their citizens to death. The referendum followed a tight message that focused on what euthanasia actually is. Here is the message from Aleš Primc:

Aleš Primc

Thank you Slovenia! The sick, the disabled and the retired won the referendum!

Thank God! We are witnessing a miracle! The culture of life has defeated the cult of death!

The result of the referendum showed that in Slovenia we respect the sick, the disabled and the retired. Compassion, justice and solidarity won the referendum. Slovenia decided for life and rejected the government's health, pension and social reform, which was based on death by poisoning.

I congratulate you from the bottom of my heart and thank you to everyone! Thank you to everyone who submitted a signature, thank you to everyone who collected signatures, thank you to everyone who put up posters and distributed leaflets. Thank you to everyone who posted on social media. Thank you to everyone who encouraged family and friends to participate and vote AGAINST. Thank you to everyone who took someone to the polling station. Thank you to everyone who voted AGAINST. There were more than 370,000 of us (53.46%). The final result is not yet known, but pensioners, patients and disabled people have achieved a magnificent victory, where the Slovenian people have told them that they are valued and respected. 

Yes, dear patients, disabled people and pensioners, you are not a burden, but you are precious!

Patients, disabled people and pensioners need treatment, medication and pain relief, not poisoning, forcing them to poison themselves and abuse. Thank you to everyone who made this victory possible. So that everyone, especially patients, disabled people and pensioners, can celebrate the upcoming Advent and Christmas holidays peacefully.

Thank you to the doctors and all healthcare personnel who respect medical ethics and the Hippocratic Oath, which stipulate that a doctor treats and does not kill, nor does he participate in poisoning people.

Thank you also to the parties SDS, NSI, SLS, Glas pokojencev, Zeleni and Demokrati, who opposed the Poisoning Act. Thank you to the Catholic Church, the Serbian and Macedonian Orthodox Churches, the Evangelical and Pentecostal Churches, and the Jewish community for their strong commitment to respecting God's commandment: You shall not kill. As a Christian, I am especially happy that the Catholic Church has committed itself to respecting God's commandments: You shall not kill! and Honor your father and mother, that you may live long and it may go well with you on earth, and to Jesus' commandment to Love your neighbor. Love and compassion do not poison, but help. God's commandments are the foundation of faith and the foundation of peaceful and solidary coexistence between people.

Thank you to all civil society organizations and professional associations that have publicly stated that they oppose the law that introduces the poisoning of patients.

Thank you to the wonderful coordination team of dedicated and kind-hearted people, where everyone did their job. There was really a lot of work, which we did well.

The fight was difficult. The poisoning of patients, disabled people and pensioners was supported by all government parties and the largest media. Pupils and students were indoctrinated in high schools and faculties. However, most people in Slovenia nevertheless retained their common sense and made decisions in accordance with their conscience.

The poisoning lobby has been lying, deceiving and scaring people all the time. Our task was to expose these lies and prove this with references to the law. Then they twisted their words and wanted to change the subject. The liar was already their symbol. As you know, they had a heart. The heart is a sign of life, not the poisoning that they propagated. In confrontations, representatives of the poisoning lobby were aggressive and uncultured. It is difficult to debate with such people, so we had to adapt to this. Sometimes it was quite harsh, but it always turned out that the poisoning lobby has no arguments, but is driven only by an ideological thirst for poisoning and scaring people.

The poisoning lobby is furious because the patients, the disabled and the pensioners won the referendum and not them. I understand that defeat hurts, but I don't understand why they are now threatening everyone. This shouting and threats that the poisoning lobby is now making in the major media is their process of healing the wounds after defeat. Instead of coming to terms with the fact that people do not want the patients, the disabled and the pensioners to be poisoned and that they should live in constant fear of poisoning, they continue to threaten the whole of Slovenia with poison. 

I find it corrupt that Prime Minister Golob, after the people have said that they do not want poison as a health service, continues to threaten with poison and scare people. And this is a man, a Prime Minister, who stated that "people who have living, immobile parents are unlucky". Or former Minister of Health Keber, who claims that a patient towards the end of life is not a person, but only organs. You've heard: not a person, only organs. With these statements, the poisoning lobby has completely exposed itself and we have all seen what they are really about. To poison as many people as possible and to make money at the expense of health services, pensions, medicines and social services that would not have to be paid to people who would die from poisoning.

Once again, thank you all for stopping the poisoning lobby and saving the sick, disabled and pensioners from the danger of poisoning, pressure and abuse.

Best regards!

Aleš Primc

More articles on Slovenia

• Great news: Slovenia rejected euthanasia law with more than 53% support for the referendum (Link).
• Slovenian interview with Alex Schadenberg and Theo Boer (Link). 
• Bad news in Slovenia and Uruguay (Link). 
• Has Slovenia legalized assisted suicide (Link). 
• Slovenia debates assisted suicide. Doctors and medical groups oppose the bill (Link).