Euthanasia (MAiD) by advance request is euthanasia without consent.

Alex Schadenberg

Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Justice Minister Sean Fraser and Health Minister Marjorie Michel stated on October 7, 2026 that the federal government will introduce legislation, that will prevent the implementation of euthanasia for mental illness as a sole criteria. 

However, the government legislation will also permit euthanasia by advanced request.

Euthanasia by advanced request is a very dangerous concept as it permits doctors and nurse practitioners to kill someone who has become incompetent, based on an advanced request.

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition opposes killing people but why is euthanasia by advance request even more egregious?

Euthanasia was originally legalized in Canada under the guise of being for mentally competent adults, who are capable of consenting and who freely "choose." Euthanasia by advanced request undermines these basic principles.

Euthanasia by advance request means that a person, while competent, legally declares their "wish" to be killed, and if the person becomes incompetent, the person could then be killed, even though the person is not capable of consenting. Therefore euthanasia by advance request is euthanasia without consent.

Further to that, once a person becomes incompetent, they are not legally able to change their mind, meaning that some other person will have the right to decide when the person dies, even if that person is living a happy life.

Therefore a person who is approved to die by euthanasia based on an advanced request, who becomes incompetent, will lose their right to change their mind.

This is what happened in the Netherlands with the “coffee euthanasia” death where  an incompetent woman, who had previously requested euthanasia, resisted during the euthanasia. The doctor responded by putting a sedative in the woman's coffee but the woman continued to resist, so the doctor had her family hold her down as the doctor completed the lethal poison injection.

If euthanasia by advance request is approved, the law will discriminate against incompetent people who did not make an advance request. The law will be challenged in the court as it will be argued that the person didn't make the advance request based on timing (the option didn't exist yet) or lack of knowledge that it was possible to make an advance request. Will the court, in the future, expand the law even further?

Once killing incompetent people is viewed as "compassionate" it will be considered cruel not to kill an incompetent person who is deemed to be suffering, because the person didn't make an advance request.

Finally, euthanasia by advanced request is outside of the federal government jurisdiction. Every Canadian province has advanced directive laws based on their constitutional power over healthcare. 

Québec already expanded their law to allow euthanasia by advanced request. Whereas I oppose euthanasia by advanced request I recognize that based on provincial jurisdiction concerning healthcare, Québec had the right to do so, whereas the federal government does not have the right to do so.

Thank you Tamara Jansen for sponsoring Bill C-218

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition is thankful to Tamara Jansen (MP) for sponsoring Bill C-218 and carrying this clear and important bill through parliament. Jansen's leadership was impressive.

Links to some excellent speeches by Tamara Jansen (Speech 1) (Speech 2) (Speech 3).

There were several other Members of Parliament who committed significant time and political capital to support Bill C-218, in particular Andrew Lawton (MP). 

Link to an excellent speech by Andrew Lawton (Speech)

Thank you also to the NDP caucus, Elizabeth May (Green Party) and Liberal members - Kent Macdonald and Marilyn Gladu who also supported Bill C-218.

The vote on Bill C-218 did not go as we had hoped but the campaign in support of Bill C-218 was excellent and resulted in the government announcing that they will introduce a government bill to prevent euthanasia for mental illness as a sole condition. We are not celebrating as we have not seen the language of the government bill, which may not have been written yet.

The government also announced that they will expand Canada's law to permit euthanasia by advanced request. This means that Canadians who declare, while competent, that they want to die by euthanasia, they can be killed at a later date, if they become incompetent.

The government announced that the bill will both prevent euthanasia for mental illness as a sole criteria and they will expand the law to allow euthanasia by advanced request. This is disgusting. The government will force Members of Parliament to vote on a bill that does both good and evil at the same time.

Since we have not seen the language of the bill we will not make a recommendation as to how Members of Parliament should vote on the bill.

We are nervous since euthanasia for mental illness, as a sole criteria is scheduled to begin March 17, 2027. The government does not have a lot of time.

Bill C-218 was defeated. What will happen next?

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Alex Schadenberg

It is too early to assess what will happen now that Bill C-218, the private members bill that was sponsored by Tamara Jansen (MP) was defeated in parliament by a vote of 187 to 141 on October 7. 

Bill C-218 would have amended the Criminal Code to prevent euthanasia for mental illness as a sole criteria.

The defeat of Bill C-218 was directly related to the announcement, the same day, at 12 noon by Justice Minister Sean Fraser and Health Minister Marjorie Michel. They stating that the federal government will introduce legislation, this fall, that will prevent the implementation of euthanasia for mental illness as a sole criteria. However, the government legislation will also permit euthanasia by advanced request.

Euthanasia by advanced request is a very dangerous concept as it would permit doctors and nurse practitioners to kill someone who has become incompetent, based on an advanced request. 

We knew that the language of Bill C-218 would have prevented euthanasia for mental illness, as a sole criteria, but we have not seen the language of the upcoming government bill. 

Language is everything. 

Who would make the final decision to poison an incompetent person to death?

The government bill, that we have not seen, may create a catch 22 situation where voting "No" to the bill would allow euthanasia for mental illness, as a sole criteria, but voting "Yes" to the bill would permit euthanasia by advanced request.

The government should separate the issues with two bills instead of one.

Until we analyse the language of the bill, we will not determine whether the government bill will actually prevent euthanasia for mental illness as a sole criteria.

Press Conference on October 7 at 11 am 

October 7 Press Conference

Dr Laurence Normand-Rivest, a family physician in Montréal who cares for geriatric patients and provides in-home palliative care, Dr Paul Saba a family physician in Lachine Québec who has personal experience with caring for people with mental health related trauma, Odile Marcotte, a retired professor from the Université du Québec à Montréal and a former deputy director of the Centre de recherches mathématiques, and a EPC Board member, and Alex Schadenberg, Executive Director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition spoke at a Press Conference.

Dr Normand-Rivest, Dr Saba, Marcotte and Schadenberg witnessed the historic and dissappointing vote on Bill C-218, at 3:30 pm in the parliamentary gallery.