Tuesday, January 23, 2024

An excerpt from "Bipolar Bear, a journey into the unknown"

This story was written by Melinda Joy Pole, and published on January 23, 2024 as part of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition story contest (Contest link). 

The story is posted here (Link).

The Gatekeeper

by Melinda Joy Polet

It’s my second time meeting Dr. Lee. My first impression, unfortunately while in a chemically induced coma, was blurry. He was short, his back was to me, and he appeared as though he was on his way to somewhere else. He saw the two young women I’ve been chatting with, then the man that looks like my friend Patrick, who committed suicide several years ago. Whatever he said to this man appears to have pleased him, for the man is smiling. Then again, the man is always smiling, like he has a secret. Patrick had secrets too and I keep them safe.

I have my own secret. I have many secrets, all of them conspiratorial, and some of them so deep, I cannot name them. They are what have gotten me here. I’m neither nervous nor excited, two sides of the same coin I know. Still, there is nothing left to be afraid of and for the first time in my life I don’t have to keep telling my body that. I’ve been on the streets now for days, I think I was raped, I think a police officer violated me. I’ve seen the worst that I thought I could see, been through the darkest places I thought I could go. When I leave here, IF I leave here, I’ll be homeless again even though I have a home, and a car, and children and a life of great abundance. Nothing makes sense. Still, It’s better to be free and on the streets than behind these walls, where secrets remain and are kept under lock and key. 

Dr. Lee arrives and sits down. It’s all cheery at first. He’s up for the challenge today. I no longer care what comes out of my mouth, as no one would believe me anyway, so, he plays along.

Parks Canada permits euthanasia (MAiD) on its premises.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Many people have reacted with shock to the story that Parks Canada is permitting euthanasia on their premises. 

Everything to do with euthanasia (killing people by poison upon request) is dangerous, socially lethal and wrong, but the news story about Parks Canada was disappointing but not surprising.

In May 2023 I wrote an article titled: One stop death in Canadian funeral homes: a business opportunity, concerning a Québec funeral home that was offering euthanasia on it's premises.  

A CBC news article published on October 26, 2021 reported that the Northview Funeral Chapel in London, Ontario began offering MAiD rooms in early 2020. 

In March 2022 Churchill Park United Church in Winnipeg Manitoba hosted the euthanasia death of Betty Sanguin (86). Sanguin, who was living with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) died by lethal injection in the sanctuary of the Church.

There have been reports of euthanasia deaths in many locations. It is
disappointing but not surprising that Parks Canada is allowing euthanasia on its premises.

Sheila Gunn Reid reported for Rebel News on January 20, 2024 that:

In doing research for our documentary about what's currently happening in Canada's euthanasia system,we stumbled upon this on a pro-euthanasia blog:
MAiD has been provided in various locations including a health facility, funeral home, home, and even outdoors on private land (although Parks Canada also has a MAiD policy allowing MAiD in some parks in certain circumstances).

I reached out, like any good journalist would, to Parks Canada for confirmation.
Gunn Reid sent Parks Canada this list of questions:
According to the Canadian Association of MAiD Assessors and Providers, Parks Canada also has a MAiD policy allowing MAiD in some parks in certain circumstances. I am looking for information on what the policy entails.

What does one need to do to access this policy?

Does the MAiD recipient need to first alert Parks staff to where inside the park they will end their lives?

What provisions are taken to ensure the public or unsuspecting Parks staff do not stumble across the deceased?

Can one end their life via MAiD in any National Park, or is the practice limited to certain parks? If so, which parks?
Parks Canada provided this response to Gunn Reid:
The decision to pursue Medical Assistance in Dying is a deeply personal one. Parks Canada recognizes that many Canadians have personal connections to national historic sites, national parks, and national marine conservation areas. These treasured places can provide physical, emotional and spiritual comfort to those at the end of life.

While Parks Canada continues to develop its protocols and guidance with respect to MAiD, we evaluate requests on a case-by-case basis when a person eligible for MAiD would like to pursue this medical procedure at a Parks Canada administered location.
When Canada legalized doctors and nurse practitioners killing people, upon request, by lethal injection (MAiD) it provided many other situations. If you see a doctor or a nurse injecting a person to death in a Canadian Park, it is the legalization of killing that is the problem, the rest is sadly not surprising.

Monday, January 22, 2024

Tell your Member of Parliament to oppose euthanasia for mental illness.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Canada’s federal Justice Minister, Hon Arif Virani stated in December, 2023 that the government is considering "hitting the pause button" on euthanasia for mental illness. Members of Parliament will return from their break next week. 

The government has not stated it's intention on the issue but you need to tell your representatives that you oppose euthanasia for mental illness.

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition (EPC) launched a campaign to stop euthanasia for mental illness. 

Join our campaign by ordering parliamentary post-cards (above) that state: I demand that the government reverse its decision to permit “MAiD” for mental illness alone. The cards are ordered for free by contacting EPC at: 1-877-439-3348 or email: office@epcc.ca.

EPC also launched a petition (Petition Link) to the Justice Minister and the Justice Critics urging the Canadian government to reverse the decision to permit euthanasia for mental illness and demanding that Canadians with mental illness not be abandoned to death by euthanasia (“MAiD”).

EPC is also sending a copy of Tyler Dunlop's book: Therefore Choose Life—My Journey from Hopelessness to Hope to every Member of Parliament.

When Canada expanded the euthanasia law in March 2021 (Bill C-7), one of the expansions in the law was to permit euthanasia for mental illness alone. At that time the government decided to approve euthanasia for mental illness but with a two-year moratorium to give the government time to prepare.

Early last year the government delayed the implementation of euthanasia for mental illness for another year. Canada is currently scheduled to permit euthanasia for mental illness on March 17, 2024.

Last year, the Hon Ed Fast sponsored Bill C-314, a bill that would have prohibited the government from permitting euthanasia for mental illness. Bill C-314 was defeated by a vote of 167 to 150 but 8 Liberals, every NDP and every Conservative Member of Parliament supported Bill C-314. This led to the government considering reversing their position on euthanasia for mental illness.

Canadians oppose euthanasia for mental illness.

In February 2023, the Angus Reid Institute published a poll indicating that 31% of Canadians supported euthanasia for mental illness alone, with the highest support being in Quebec (36%) and the lowest support being in Saskatchewan (21%). In September 2023, the Angus Reid Institute conducted another poll which indicated that support for euthanasia for mental illness had dropped to 28% of Canadians.

Dr K Sonu Gaind
A Globe and Mail editorial published on November 4, 2023 quoted Dr. K Sonu Gaind, Chief of Psychiatry at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre in Toronto, who stated that there is "absolutely no consensus" as to what constitutes an irremediable medical condition when it comes to patients with mental illness. The comment by Dr Gaind is important because the law requires that a person must have an irremediable medical condition to be approved for euthanasia.

The Federal government sponsored a conference on euthanasia for mental illness in October in Victoria BC where it was argued that certain addictions are linked to mental illness and therefore euthanasia for mental illness could include people with addictions.

Similar to people with disabilities, people with mental health issues are more likely to live in poverty, to be homeless or to struggle to obtain the medical treatment that they need.

More articles on this topic: 

  • Join our campaign to stop euthanasia for mental illness (Link).
  • Euthanasia for drug addicts is an outcome of euthanasia for mental illness (Link).
  • Canada's government may pause the implementation of euthanasia for mental illness. (Link)
  • Canada passes Bill C-7 - permitting euthanasia for mental illness. (Link)
  • Canada to delay euthanasia for mental illness until March 2024. (Link)
  • The majority of Canadians oppose euthanasia for mental health. (Link)
  • 28% of Canadians support euthanasia for mental illness. (Link)
  • Bill C-314 defeated. Parliament divided on euthanasia for mental illness. (Link)
  • Veterans Affairs Canada worker advocates euthanasia for PTSD. (Link)
  • Canadian Quadriplegic woman approved to die by euthanasia faster than it takes to get needed disability benefits (Link)
  • Canadian woman offered euthanasia as a "treatment option" during a mental health crisis. (Link)
  • Globe and Mail editorial urges federal government to withdraw euthanasia for mental illness. (Link
  • The problem with Canada's MAiD policy (Link)
  • Ontario man seeks euthanasia to avoid homelessness. (Link)
  • Why did they kill my brother. (Link)

Friday, January 19, 2024

The importance of competitively presenting life-affirming care

Gordon Friesen
Gordon Friesen
President, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Undoubtedly, the human will for personal survival represents an enormous economic force. And yet, like all brute forces of nature, like wind, fire and water, this power must be structurally harnessed in order to produce useful effects.

In the realm of consumer economics, such harnessing is done by cultivating the urgent perception of a need to choose (among competing services), and the promotion of one particular choice, as that which will most closely respond to consumer needs and desires.

The most powerful industry-shaping tool available to life-affirming physicians, therefore, lies in the effective presentation of a medical practice which faithfully embodies their life-centered ideals.

By thus presenting their practice, in clear contrast to that of more utilitarian colleagues, a deep rift is boldly and deliberately opened in the medical marketplace: a schism which may only be resolved through the operation of patient choice.

The essence of this strategy lies in the translation of ideological debate to the realm of real competition in practice. For in all simplicity: if doctors propose life-affirming services --and if patients select those services-- then the life-affirming future of the medical industry will be assured.

And conversely: once a clearly articulated life-centered clinical program is presented with competitive intent, the ultimate penetration of utilitarian death-medicine can rely only upon the success with which its authors may themselves succeed in presenting death as a superior clinical option.

Considering the human will to live, and considering the observed history of Hippocratic medicine (considering, that is, the reasons why people go to doctors in the first place); and considering, also, the advanced state to which medical science has now progressed: it would seem unthinkable that advocates of death-as-care might widely prosper in a commercial environment where these two alternatives are frankly compared.

But unthinkable, that is, only if life-affirming physicians accept the challenge of vigorously presenting their case.

Gordon Friesen
President, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition
euthanasiadiscussion.com

Tuesday, January 16, 2024

People who experience mental illness do not need our help to die — they need our support to live

This column was published by thelaker.ca on January 15, 2024.

This column is written by Moira Wilson, President of Inclusion Canada, and the parent of an adult son with a disability.

Moira Wilson
By Moira Wilson
President, Inclusion Canada

On March 17, 2024, individuals in Canada whose sole underlying medical condition is a mental illness will become eligible for medical assistance in dying (MAiD) – unless the federal government decides not to go forward as planned.   

As a parent, a medical professional, and an advocate for human rights, we must put a stop to this inhumane policy.  By legalizing MAiD for mental illness, Canada will further deviate from the practice of preventing suicide — for everyone.

While “assisted suicide” may be an unsettling term, I use it intentionally. It’s time that we reckon with the discomfort of reality. People with disabilities are now legally dying by suicide in Canada with assistance from MAiD providers, and this will become far more common with the availability of MAiD for mental illness.

Medical assistance in dying was, for the first five years, an option made available to people with a “grievous and irremediable medical condition” and a “reasonably foreseeable natural death.” Then, in 2021, Canada began to allow all eligible people labelled with a grievous and irremediable illness, disease or disability to die by MAiD.

The caveat was (and is) that people with a mental illness were to be “excluded” from MAiD as a solution to suffering associated with their mental illness. They are therefore “included” under the Criminal Code’s protection from suicide promotion and facilitation, which is a protection most Canadians enjoy. People with a mental illness currently remain eligible for MAiD if they have a co-occurring illness, disease or disability.

This mental illness “exclusion” will expire in March.

Research shows that recovery from mental illness is very difficult to predict. While mental illness can be treatment resistant, it is impossible to predict the likelihood of improvement for a given person at a given time.

As the parent of a son with an intellectual disability, I have some experience with doctors predicting quality of life. This is a near-universal experience for parents of people with disabilities.

The nature of these early-diagnosis conversations can change your life-course and give or take away hope. I am thankful that my son’s doctor told us to never put limits on him, but others in my community were told that their child simply would not thrive (they later defied these predictions).

I have little faith in a medical professional’s ability to predict without bias what is scientifically known to be unpredictable.

As a medical professional myself, I am disappointed with Canada’s choice to pivot away from suicide-prevention — which was a key reason for legalizing MAiD in 2016. I’ve come face-to-face with suicide at various points throughout my career, including leading reviews of deaths by suicide in my community.

Because of this, I want to be clear not to overlook the “grievousness” of mental illness. Mental anguish paired with social stigma can be a lot for one person to hold. Many people expend precious energy into keeping themselves alive every single day.

This is exactly why, when a person wants to die, they don’t need to hear that their suffering warrants death. They don’t need their suicidal ideation affirmed.

People who experience mental illness do not need help to die. They need support to live, to be heard, to be invested in, to have the conditions of their life improved upon, and to be unconditionally valued. Even if — especially if — they may be “difficult” to work with.

Social determinants shape a person’s likelihood of acquiring a mental illness, their likelihood of accessing adequate and appropriate treatment for their mental illness, and the likelihood that their treatment will be successful.

Four out of five people with a mental health disability have at least one other type of disability, and over 40 per cent of people with an intellectual disability have a co-occurring mental health condition. Yet, our elected officials are pursuing MAiD for mental illness of their own accord and on their own rushed timeline.

How did we get here? At the recommendation of the Senate, elected officials made the hasty decision to go down the path of legalizing assisted suicide for people with a mental illness at a pre-determined date. They made this decision over the course of 29 days in 2021.

If no further action is taken, this predetermined course of action will come into effect in March, with no new safeguards being added to the law. That leaves us, Canadians, in the unfortunate position of needing to ask elected officials to admit they made a mistake. Join me in encouraging them to do so.

Moira Wilson is the President of Inclusion Canada and the parent of an adult son with a disability.

Suicide among elderly skyrockets after legalizing Assisted Dying in Victoria Australia

By Leslie Wolfgang

Assisted suicide or Voluntary Assisted Dying (VAD) has a correlation to increased suicide among the elderly, revealed a peer-reviewed article published this week. According to research published by Dr. David Albert Jones, Director, Anscombe Bioethics Centre in the Journal of Ethics in Mental Health (2023), the rate of suicide among the elderly in the Australian state of Victoria increased by an astonishing 50%, even exclusive of legalized assisted suicide and euthanasia.

Though assisted suicide is sold to the policymakers of Australia and America as a perverse method to reduce suicide generally, the societal outcome of permitting some people to legally commit suicide has caused many other people to attempt and succeed in their own suicides. It is as though suicide is a social contagion — which it is.

This is in addition to a steady increase in demand for legal assisted suicide year over year since VAD was adopted in Australia. According to the annual report of the Voluntary Assisted Dying Review Board’s latest publication for July 1, 2022 to June 30, 2023, the number of deaths via assisted suicide in Victoria increased by 11% to 306, and the number of applications for assisted suicide increased by six percent over the previous year.  

This data, coupled with the revelation that suicide among the elderly in Victoria has increased by 50% should give pause to any policymakers wondering if assisted suicide is good public policy. 

In the Australian state of Queensland, assisted suicide is happening at a shocking rate as revealed by latest reports. Australians there are dying from assisted suicide and euthanasia at rates even higher than Victoria or Western Australia. In a shocking international news story, the Australian Capital Territory Human Rights Commission in a report to the Voluntary Assisted Dying Committee criticized current Australian law for not permitting minors to utilize their “assisted dying” legal regime.

Many critics of assisted suicide claim that assisted suicide advocates are never satisfied with any restrictions or conditions on access and will continually fight for the expansion of criteria for accessing assisted suicide. Continued efforts for expansion in Australia, Canada, and America may prove them correct.

Leslie Wolfgang is a Board Member of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition -USA.

Monday, January 15, 2024

Canada has revealed the horror of assisted dying.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Spiked published an in-depth article by Lauren Smith on January 15, 2024 entitled: Canada has revealed the horror of assisted dying. Smith tells the stories of the many people who have felt forced into  considering death by euthanasia.

Smith sets the stage for her article by calling Canada's euthanasia law a gruesome, state-sanctioned industry. 

Smith states:

There is nothing remotely civilised about Canada’s medical assistance in dying (MAID) programme. Assisted dying in Canada was initially considered a last resort for terminally ill patients suffering from incurable pain. But in the space of just a few years, euthanasia has been made available to pretty much anyone who is struggling with an illness or a disability. Even Canadians facing homelessness and poverty are feeling compelled to end their lives, rather than ‘burden’ the authorities.
Canada's euthanasia law will get worse with the approval of euthanasia for mental illness in March 2024. 

Smith explains:
Things are about to get even darker. In a few months time, on 17 March, Canadians will be able to apply for MAID on the grounds that they are suffering from a mental illness. If this expansion to the MAID programme goes ahead, anyone struggling with a serious mental-health condition may be eligible for either assisted suicide or euthanasia, even if they are not suffering from any physical pain at all. This would include people dealing with drug addiction or other substance-abuse issues.
Canada's euthanasia law has expanded very quickly. Smith explains how this happened:
At the time, MAID was sold to Canadians as a question of autonomy. The ‘right to die’ was presented as a fundamental human right. In 2015, the Canadian Supreme Court, in the case of Carter v Canada, ruled that denying someone assisted suicide or euthanasia denied ‘equality to the physically disabled’. Essentially, this ruling established that people have the right to be assisted to kill themselves, or be euthanized, provided that they meet certain criteria.

All of this successfully framed assisted dying as a merciful and dignified act. It isn’t fair, advocates said, that someone should be in pain during the final stages of their life, if death is near and foreseeable anyway. Surely it would be better for someone to end their life on their own terms than for them to suffer on in agony for a few months more? Or so went the argument.
Smith explains the influence of the euthanasia lobby:

Campaign groups like Dying With Dignity fought hard to portray MAID as a question of individual choice. The Canadian public seemed broadly to agree. In 2014, not long before MAID was introduced, 79 per cent of Canadians supported assisted suicide being offered in limited circumstances. Back then, Canadians were told assisted suicide and euthanasia would only be offered to those with a terminal illness and with only a short time left to live. But it didn’t take long for those restrictions to loosen.

In 2021, five years after MAID was first introduced, Canada expanded the eligibility criteria. Those with serious and chronic physical conditions became eligible, even when their illness is not life-threatening. This meant that a natural death no longer had to be ‘reasonably foreseeable’ for someone to be accepted for MAID. A long-term health condition that made life ‘intolerable’ was now enough. Applying for the MAID programme became significantly easier.
After the expansion of euthanasia in 2021 Canadians began to read about stories of euthanasia for poverty, homelessness, disability and an inability to receive medical treatment and even veterans with PTSD:
It didn’t take long for people to start applying for MAID for reasons that had little to do with poor health. One of the most infamous cases was that of Amir Farsoud, a 54-year-old disabled man who applied for MAID in 2022 because he was about to be made homeless. Farsoud was quite open about the fact that he didn’t actually want to die. He simply didn’t know what else to do. He felt that he was being abandoned by the authorities. He decided that he would rather be dead than homeless.

Homelessness, or fear of it, is not one of the reasons Canadians can apply for MAID. Not yet, at least. Farsoud applied on the basis of his chronic back pain. He got as far as receiving one of the two doctors’ signatures required to proceed. Thankfully, after a public outpouring of support and a wave of donations, he decided that he didn’t want to go through with it.

Others weren’t so lucky. In February 2022, a 51-year-old woman called Sophia (not her real name) was euthanized by doctors. She suffered from an extreme sensitivity to household chemicals and cigarette smoke, which made life unbearable for her. Because of her complex needs, the local authorities found it difficult to house her. After two years of asking for help with her living situation, all to no avail, Sophia decided that MAID was the only solution left. Four doctors wrote to federal-government officials on Sophia’s behalf, begging them to help her find alternative accommodation. But their pleas fell on deaf ears. She was killed instead.

In a similar case, 61-year-old Donna Duncan was euthanized in 2022, after she was deprived of the treatment she so desperately needed. A car accident caused her to have a particularly bad concussion. This led to months of mental and physical decline. She was never seen by her local clinic for complex chronic diseases, thanks to its months-long waiting list. But when she applied for MAID she was approved within a few days. Her daughters maintain that she did not have the capacity to consent to being euthanized.

Stories like these are shockingly common. For many unwell Canadians, accessing MAID is easier and cheaper than getting the treatment or care they need. More and more people are applying for MAID because they cannot afford to go on living, or their families cannot afford to support them. In 2021, 35.7 per cent of MAID patients said that they believed themselves to be a ‘burden on family, friends or caregivers’. These are not medical concerns, but rather economic and social ones. In the words of one anonymous disabled woman: ‘MAID, for me, is not a life-and-death choice. It’s about what kind of death I want when I run out of money.’

The Canadian authorities are all but promoting death as a cheaper, easier alternative to life’s struggles. Far from being a last resort for those with incurable health issues, MAID is all too often viewed by officials as the first port of call. In one disturbing example, an army veteran called up Veterans Affairs Canada in 2022, seeking treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder and a brain injury. He was offered MAID instead. In another disturbing case, Christine Gauthier, a Paralympian and veteran, asked the authorities if she could have a stairlift installed in her home. She received a letter asking if she had ever considered euthanasia.
Smith reports on the push-back by disability rights groups wanting to protect their lives:
Thanks to cases like these, disability-rights campaigners have become some of the fiercest opponents of Canada’s euthanasia laws. In January last year, more than 50 organisations warned that MAID poses an existential threat to disabled people, devaluing their lives and providing the state with an excuse to forgo its responsibilities to vulnerable citizens. These groups rightly argue that Canada should be improving its healthcare services for disabled people and helping them to live decent lives, rather than offering them assisted dying as a ‘solution’.

The same applies to terminally ill patients, too. The priority should surely be ensuring the best quality end-of-life care, rather than ending people’s lives sooner than is necessary. Indeed, it is the absence of decent palliative care that is driving so many terminally ill patients to seek euthanasia in the first place.
The concerns about the expansion of euthanasia to people with mental illness is real:
With the MAID programme set to expand to the mentally unwell in only a few months’ time, we will undoubtedly see a new wave of shocking cases. Already, people who have been suffering from mental illnesses are preparing to apply. One woman, 47-year-old Lisa Pauli, plans to apply for MAID as soon as the law changes, on account of her debilitating anorexia. She has ‘tried everything’, she told Reuters recently, and is now ‘too tired’ to go on.

Forty-year-old Mitchell Tremblay said in 2022 that he also planned to seek out MAID services once the law changes. He has been diagnosed with ‘anxiety, alcoholism, personality disorders and continual thoughts of suicide’. He cannot work and receives a meagre monthly disability payment. ‘You know what your life is worth to you’, he says, ‘and mine is worthless’.

One mentally ill woman admitted to CTV News that she is terrified of the expansion. She is worried that she will seek out MAID when she next has suicidal thoughts. Her fears are not unfounded. Instead of talking suicidal people out of killing themselves, the Canadian authorities increasingly offer them a chance to die.
Originally the Canadian government planned to implement euthanasia for mental illness in March 2023 but it has been delayed until March 17, 2024. Further to that, the Hon Ed Fast sponsored Bill C-314 in parliament to overturn the decision to permit euthanasia for mental illness. C-314 didn't pass but it did get significant support in parliament. Smith comments on the expansion of euthanasia in Canada:
Unfortunately, tragedies will continue to occur so long as deathcare remains more accessible than healthcare. In 2022, MAID was responsible for over four per cent of all deaths in Canada. That was up from 3.3 per cent in 2021 and 2.5 per cent in 2020. In Quebec, a shocking 6.6 per cent of all deaths in 2022 were attributable to the MAID programme.

As if all this were not horrifying enough, there remains a vocal minority – among them high-profile physicians and healthcare professionals – that is advocating to expand MAID criteria even further, well beyond the mentally ill. Children born with severe disabilities and elderly people who are ‘tired of being alive’ have recently been put forward as potential candidates for legalised euthanasia.
Smith concludes by stating:
All of this is well beyond the bounds of what Canadians were originally told MAID would entail. But stories of homeless, poor, disabled and desperate people accessing a state-assisted death, because it is the ‘easier’ option, are merely the grim, logical consequence of legalising assisted dying in the first place. Assisted dying undermines the value of life. It elevates death as the ultimate solution to suffering. Canada is a warning to the world. This is where the ‘right to die’ leads us.

More articles on this topic: 

  • Join our campaign. Stop euthanasia of people with mental illness (Link).
  • Canada must put the brakes on euthanasia for mental illness (Link). 
  • Don't abandon people with mental illness to death by euthanasia (Link).
  • BC cancer patient was euthanized after he couldn't obtain chemotherapy (Link).
  • Canada's MAiD program has gone 'mad' (Link).

The well-funded euthanasia lobby in Canada.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

An interesting article about the euthanasia lobby group - Dying With Dignity (DWD) Canada was written by Miranda Schreiber and published by the Walrus on January 12, 2024. Schreiber provides important information about the financing and positions of DWD Canada.

DWD supports MAiD by advanced request
Schreiber sets up the article with the following paragraph:

Dying with Dignity Canada isn’t just a charity; it’s also the country’s biggest pro-MAID lobby group. Theoretically, lobby groups are meant to allow for the interests of all stakeholders to be represented to the government. But when a lobby group is so well funded that it wields disproportionate power over a debate, the voices of less powerful parties can be neglected. Some critics believe public conversations around MAID are skewed in Dying with Dignity Canada’s favour. And when it lobbies to expand access to assisted dying, few have the resources to push back.
Dying with Dignity lost their charitable status in February 2015 for "serious non-compliance issues" which made them become more politically oriented. But in 2018 DWD received regained charitable status and received a massive donation. Schreiber explains:
In 2018, Dying with Dignity Canada received a donation of $7 million from the late Vancouver entrepreneur David Jackson, an amount that’s been described as transformational. “Being handed 7 million without having to spend any money raising it would make any group [a] top lobby group [in Canada] right away on any issue,” says Duff Conacher, co-founder of Democracy Watch, a democratic reform and corporate responsibility advocacy group.

That year, the Supreme Court had thrown out the stipulation that to receive tax-exempt status, charities could direct only 10 percent of their funds toward political purposes. As a result, Dying with Dignity Canada had its status as a charitable organization reinstated, meaning it was eligible for government funding.
DWD was organizing events with the goal of expanding Canada's euthanasia law. Those events included Justice Minister David Lametti, as a speaker and other political leaders. Schreiber states:
In 2020, Dying with Dignity Canada registered with the federal government as a lobby group while still being recognized as a charity. The group sent Health Canada a letter proposing amendments to regulations, issued in 2022, for how to monitor and document MAID deaths. Dying with Dignity Canada also provided input to the Parliamentary Special Joint Committee on Medical Assistance in Dying (AMAD), which submitted a report in 2023 that reviewed key issues related to assisted dying, including the possibility of expanding eligibility to mature minors and people with mental illness.

Trudo Lemmens
Lemmens says that, having worked in his field since the early 1990s, “I don’t know of any bioethics debates . . . where the government have felt so comfortable appointing or basically promoting the view of specialists associated so directly with a lobby group in favour of one side of the issues.”

“Lobby groups and advocacy groups are obviously part of the political landscape,” Lemmens says. But a healthy democracy, he continues, requires “a certain distance between interest groups and decision makers.” Dying with Dignity Canada “established strong connections in the political and medical establishment,” he says. “Their strong funding base has enabled them to have a disproportionate impact on the legal developments and the public discourse.”
In its 2021 report DWD Canada acknowledged their meetings with cabinet ministers and their political pressure campaign to get Bill C-7 passed. Since Bill C-7 passed there have been many examples of people with disabilities, people living in poverty, people who are homeless, people who are unable to obtain medical treatment, and more, being approved or dying by euthanasia and yet DWD claims this is a myth. Schreiber reports:
Since then, there have been alarming media reports of people with disabilities applying for assisted death because they experienced poverty and had no viable options for living, a situation disability groups had been warning about for years. Studies have repeatedly shown that some MAID applicants are driven by squalid conditions in long-term-care homes, homelessness, lack of access to appropriate care, and insufficient disability welfare. During AMAD committee hearings, some disabled activists, doctors, and nurses said they had personally seen people apply for assisted death due to material privation and insufficient access to health care. It is sometimes the case that even if those applicants are approved for MAID based on their physical health, it may be their lack of financial and health care support that drives them toward this option.

But representatives associated with the MAID lobby continued to argue that access to assisted death for anyone with a chronic or terminal medical condition is an essential liberal right, and that excluding people from MAID eligibility on the basis that their deaths were not foreseeable was discriminatory. Dying with Dignity Canada’s website includes a post that lists myths and facts about MAID; the allegation that vulnerable people are eligible for MAID on the basis of insufficient social and financial supports is listed as a myth. Below it is a listed “fact”: “Suffering from a lack of social supports does not qualify a person for MAID. No one can receive MAID on the basis of inadequate housing, disability supports, or home care.” This is, strictly speaking, true, but many disabled people have testified that while their disability makes them eligible for MAID, their reason for acting on this eligibility is poverty.
DWD Canada claims that there is no evidence that (MAiD) euthanasia has been provided disproportionately and yet Schreiber reports:
A recent Al Jazeera Fault Lines documentary tells the story of forty-one-year-old Rosina Kamis, who taught statistics at a university. Diagnosed with fibromyalgia in her twenties, she eventually had to stop working and began relying on government support. “I can’t believe it’s so easy for me to get MAID,” she wrote in an email that appears in the documentary. In another email to a friend, she confides that “the suffering I experience is mental suffering not physical.” She explains in the email that part of the reason for her application was her exhaustion related to the health care that she needed, her poverty, and her feelings of isolation. “I think if more people cared about me I might be able to handle the suffering.” Kamis died by MAID in September 2021.
DWD Canada has worked to change the perception and meaning of palliative care. Schreiber explains:
The thinking goes that patients with chronic or terminal conditions still have the option to receive care that enhances their quality of life, thus alleviating their suffering, until they die a natural death; those who can no longer bear their agony can choose to turn to MAID. This framing has led to a perception that MAID is an offshoot of palliative care. But research the Canadian Society of Palliative Care Physicians (CSPCP) carried out in 2015 found that palliative care could not be reliably depended on as a safeguard for MAID because it was underfunded and underresourced. At the time, nearly 80 percent of Canadians in urban areas had access to palliative care; that figure fell to about 35 percent in some rural and remote areas. The CSPCP expressed concern that Canada did not have sufficient social infrastructure in place for MAID to be legalized safely. (A 2023 report from the Canadian Institute for Health Information found that while the number of people accessing palliative care has risen in recent years, “there are still signs of poor-quality palliative care, including people not getting palliative care until just before they die.”)

In 2015, Susan MacDonald, then president of the CSPCP, told Canadian Medical Association Journal that medically assisted death should not be classified under palliative care. Her concern was that ending life was in contradiction with the philosophy and practices of palliative care, the purpose of which is enhancing care for patients.
Leonie Herx
Schreiber interviews Leonie Herx, a palliative care practitioner and professor of medicine at Queen’s University who said:
“Lobby groups like Dying with Dignity [Canada] get these very loud spokespeople who are representing a very different view to the vast majority of palliative care clinicians and [use] that in their marketing strategies,” says Herx. Dozens of Dying with Dignity Canada’s webinars include guest interviews with palliative care physicians and nurses who express the view that offering MAID is part of palliative care. One consequence of this apparent integration is that some practitioners are noticing more hesitancy among patients to seek out palliative treatment because they are worried they will be offered MAID.

Meanwhile, some palliative care professionals feel increasingly ignored by the government. While appearing before the AMAD committee, Long split her five-minute testimony with former Canadian senator James Cowan, who retired from the Senate in 2017. But neither of the two national Canadian palliative care organizations was invited to speak.
I am convinced that DWD Canada lobbying has led to provincial governments forcing palliative care institutions to provide euthanasia.

Funding for DWD Canada has grown significantly with corporate donations and government grants. Schreiber reports:
Some of the lobby organization’s donors have included TD Canada Trust, Rogers, Google Ads, Mackenzie Investments, Telus, Sun Life Financial, RBC, and Pfizer. (Pfizer also makes three of the drugs recommended by the Canadian Association of MAID Assessors and Providers to facilitate MAID.) As a charitable organization, it received $222,077 in government assistance in 2020 and $204,655 in 2021, according to Charity Intelligence Canada. The Canadian Association of MAID Assessors and Providers (CAMAP), an organization founded by a member of Dying with Dignity Canada’s advisory council, received $3.3 million for the development of MAID training modules. In 2022, the Temerty Faculty of Medicine at the University of Toronto appointed a Bresver family chair in end-of-life care and medical assistance in dying, a new departmental role addressing both palliative care and MAID. The position was financed by a $1 million donation from Barbara Bresver, director-at-large of the GTA chapter of Dying with Dignity Canada.
Money buys influence as Schreiber reports:
By virtue of its financial resources, Dying with Dignity Canada has a higher degree of access to politicians than most palliative care workers or activists are able to get. It works with prominent PR firms such as Blackbird Strategies and, previously, Impact Public Affairs. From 2022/23, representatives of Dying with Dignity Canada have registered thirty-five pre-arranged oral meetings with politicians in Ottawa to discuss topics such as expanding eligibility for MAID.
Schreiber concludes the article by reporting how DWD Canada claims to represent marginal communities “through the lens of diversity, anti-racism and anti-oppression.” But disability advocate, Mitchell Tremblay explains the reality. Schreiber writes:
Meanwhile, Dying with Dignity Canada has responded to questions from disabled advocates with statements that are “very pro-MAID while dismissing the negative effects,” says Mitchell Tremblay, a disability advocate and host of The #Pwdcast. (He also appears in the Fault Lines documentary.) He says he talks to people every day who feel coerced into applying for MAID because it has become one of the only ways to escape poverty, homelessness, bad treatment from landlords, and the feeling that the government doesn’t care about them. “We want safeguards, proper mental health, addiction, and housing support,” says Tremblay. “So that MAID isn’t the better option for so many.”
The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition has a large base of financial supporters. Some of our donors are making very generous donations, and we thank you for your support.

More articles on this topic:

  • Euthanasia is being forced on Montreal palliative care home (Link).
  • Euthanasia lobby pressures BC government to force Catholic hospitals to provide euthanasia (Link). 
  • British Columbia government to build euthanasia center next to Catholic hospital (Link).
  • Canada: How Death Care is pushing out Health Care (Link).
  • The reality of medical assistance in dying in Canada (Link).

Friday, January 12, 2024

Washington State House Bill 1035 prevents health care entities from prohibiting assisted suicide.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Washington State House Bill 1035 is being debated in the Washington State legislature. HB 1035 will prevent Health care entities from prohibiting health care staff from participating in assisted suicide. 

House Bill 1035 is an extension to Senate Bill 5179 that expanded the Washington State assisted suicide law last year.

House Bill 1035 removes the rights of religiously affiliated medical institutions in Washington State that currently prohibit assisted suicide. The bill states:

Section 2 (3) A health care entity may not discharge, demote, suspend, discipline, or otherwise discriminate against a health care provider for providing services in compliance with this section.

Section 3 (a) A person shall not be subject to civil or criminal liability or professional disciplinary action for participating in good faith compliance with this chapter. This includes being present when a qualified patient takes the prescribed medication to end his or her life in a humane and dignified manner;

(b) A professional organization or association, or health care provider, may not subject a person to censure, discipline, suspension, loss of license, loss of privileges, loss of membership, or other penalty for participating or refusing to participate in good faith compliance with this chapter.

The assisted suicide lobby wants to remove the right of religiously affiliated healthcare institutions from prohibiting medical practitioners from participating in assisted suicide.

Last year, Washington State Senate Bill 5179 expanded the state's assisted suicide law (among other ways) by:

  1. Changed the definition of who can approve and prescribe assisted suicide from physicians to "qualified medical providers" which includes: physicians, physician assistants and nurse practitioners.
  2. Expanded who can counsel a person when the consent is considered questionable, from psychiatrists or psychologists to include independent clinical social worker, advanced social worker, mental health counselor, or psychiatric advanced registered nurse practitioner.
  3. Permitted the lethal drug cocktails to be delivered by courier or mail service.
  4. Shortened the waiting period from 15 days to 7 days.
  5. It allowed the "qualified medical provider" to waive the 7 day waiting period if someone is nearing death, allowing a same day death.
  6. It limited the right of a religiously based healthcare provider from preventing an employee from providing assisted suicide.

SB 5179 provided several minor amendments to the assisted suicide law that I have not listed.

Cuba approves law for ‘death with dignity’. What could possibly go wrong?


Michael Cook
By Michael Cook
 
On the Friday before Christmas, the Cuban parliament passed a new health law acknowledging the right of terminally ill Cubans to refuse to artificially prolong their lives or to opt for a “dignified” death.

The legislation, unanimously approved by the National Assembly of People’s Power (Asamblea Nacional del Poder Popular), will come into effect when regulations for its implementation have been approved by the Ministry for Health.

The new law recognizes individuals’ right “to access a dignified death through the exercise of determinations for the end of life, which may include limiting therapeutic efforts, continuous or palliative care, and valid procedures to end life.” The procedure specifically mentions patients with degenerative and irreversible chronic illnesses who are experiencing unbearable suffering in the terminal phase of life.

In plain speech, Santa Claus brought Cubans euthanasia as a Christmas present.

According to Leonardo Pérez Gallardo, president of the Cuban Society of Civil and Family Law, this law legitimizes a right which was debated during discussions leading up to the 2022 approval of the Family Code, which legalised same-sex marriage, same-sex adoption and altruistic surrogacy.

The recent “debate” in the National Assembly consisted mostly of bouquets to the wisdom and eloquence of its authors. Dr Taymí Martínez Naranjo, a member of the government’s inner cabinet, the Council of State, was glowing in her praise of this essentially pro-life measure. It affirms, she said:
“the right of individuals to access a dignified death through the exercise of determinations for the end of life, and to decide on the course of their illness based on the bioethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, and justice. Today, we are discussing a law that places respect for the lives of human beings and their most important right at the centre: the ability to decide.”
It comes as something of a surprise that a Marxist country like Cuba with ostensibly strong communitarian values should opt for euthanasia. But the first state in the world to legalise euthanasia was Soviet Russia, in 1922 – although it rescinded the law after a few months to avoid abuse.

Cuba may be the poorest country to legalise the right to die and is certainly the first authoritarian regime to do so. This could lead to problems, as bioethics commentator Wesley J. Smith noted sardonically in the National Review:
“Swell. Cuba is a very poor country with people having access to general practitioners, but the country is plagued by medicine shortages and run down facilities. Indeed, according to the Miami Herald, poor access to medical care is one reason Cubans immigrate or flee the country.

Poor quality care and socialized medicine are a toxic combination, perhaps even leading to people being driven to euthanasia or lethal jabs becoming a substitute for care, both of which appear to be happening in Canada.

Then, there is the possibility of euthanasia being used as a cover for political murders in a ruthless tyranny. Hey, what happened to that political dissident? Oh, he asked for “death with dignity.” Aww, compassion!

More articles on this topic:

  • Cuba legalizes euthanasia (Link).
  • Cuba quietly legalizes euthanasia (Link).

The assisted suicide lobby pass "restrictive" assisted suicide bills and expand them later.

At least 18 states will debate assisted suicide bills in 2024
Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

On January 8, I published an article titled: Assisted suicide bills must be defeated in at least 10 US states. Now the assisted suicide lobby are stating that they are sponsoring assisted suicide bills in at least 16 states.

The current states with a new bill are: Florida, Indiana, Missouri, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wisconsin.

The states with an existing bill carried over from last year are: Delaware, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania.

It is important to state that we have been successful. No new state has legalized assisted suicide in the past two years but the assisted suicide lobby remains relentless.

There are also bills to expand assisted suicide laws in at least two states where it is legal, such as Washington State and New Jersey.

One of the key strategies of the assisted suicide lobby is to present an "restrictive" assisted suicide bill for the purpose of getting it passed and once it is passed they introduce bills in subsequent years to expand the assisted suicide legislation.

This is not a new strategy. What has changed is that the assisted suicide lobby is publicly admitting their "bait and switch" tactic. 

Rep Josh Elliott
For instance Josh Elliott, a three term member of the Connecticut House, and a sponsor of previous assisted suicide bills was interviewed by Paul Bass for the New Haven Independent on January 4, 2024. Bass reported:

Elliott has been sponsoring bills for years to allow terminally ill people to take their lives (aka ​“aid in dying”). The bill finally passed the legislature’s Public Health committee; it got stuck in Judiciary.

The version he plans to resubmit this year has been narrowed to cover terminally ill people with prognoses of less than six months to live, with sign-offs from two doctors and a mental health professional, monthly check-ins, and at least a year of state residence.

“Almost no one” would qualify under that restricted version of the law, Elliott said. But passing it would open the door to evaluation and expansion.

For further clarification Elliott told Bass in the wider interview at 21:30 that:
The bill would be, um, exceptionally narrow in scope, it would be the most narrow in scope bill of this kind were we to pass it. It would be, uh, six months left to live, you have to get sign-offs from multiple doctors—two doctors and one mental health physician—uh, and then you need to go for frequent check ins—I think it's like once a month—and you have, there is a one year residency requirement, so there are so many ways we limit who could actually use this bill, to the point I believe if we were actually to implement the way that we are talking about it, almost nobody would use it. But the important thing for me is to get this bill on the books, and then see how it's working, and if it's not and people aren't using it, than make those corrections to actually allow people to use it. So that is what we've been discussing.
Elliott is clearly explaining his "bait and switch" tactic, that his goal is to pass a "restrictive" assisted suicide bill and then expand the law later.

Amy Paulin, the sponsor of the New York assisted suicide bill, recently stated that they need to get the bill passed first and then expand it later

J.M. Sorrell, Executive Director of Massachusetts Death with Dignity, was quoted on a similar bill as saying,

“Once you get something passed, you can always work on amendments later.”
Clearly the assisted suicide lobby are willing to admit to their 'bait and switch' tactic.

The key to holding the line on assisted suicide is to stop states from legalizing it. The key to defeating an assisted suicide bill is to call it what it is. The purpose of assisted suicide is to cause death.

The other key to defeating assisted suicide bills is to clearly explain what the assisted suicide bill says. Those who support assisted suicide will vote based on ideology but many legislators will agree that the language of legislation is fundamental.

We now have solid evidence that when an assisted suicide bill is "restrictive" that the intention is to pass the bill and expand it later.

The assisted suicide lobby will use false terminology to sell assisted suicide as a form of healthcare that provides "choice" at the end-of-life. Assisted suicide is not healthcare or aid in dying and it provides death at the end of life.

The assisted suicide lobby claims that there is no slippery slope, yet, in the past few years nearly every assisted suicide law has been expanded by: reducing or eliminating the waiting periods, allowing non-doctors to participate in assisted suicide, allowing assisted suicide approvals by tele-health, expanding the meaning of terminal illness and removing the state residency requirement.

One of our greatest concerns is that the assisted suicide lobby have removed the residency requirements in Oregon and Vermont and they are now pressuring New Jersey to also permit assisted suicide tourism.

In October 2021, the assisted suicide lobby launched a court case challenging the Oregon assisted suicide residency requirement. In March, 2022 the Oregon government agreed to remove the residency requirement.

A February 2023 article by James Reinl for the Daily Mail reported that Dr Nicholas Gideonse had opened an assisted suicide clinic in Oregon to prescribe lethal assisted suicide drugs for death tourists.

As for Vermont, in August, 2022, the assisted suicide lobby launched a lawsuit challenging Vermont's assisted suicide residency requirement. Lisa Rathke reported in March, 2023 for the Associated Press that Vermont's attorney general's office reached an agreement with the assisted suicide lobby and dropped the Vermont assisted suicide residency requirement.

New Jersey is facing similar pressure. In August, 2023 the assisted suicide lobby launched a lawsuit to force the state of New Jersey to drop its assisted suicide residency requirement. The lawsuit claims that the New Jersey assisted suicide law is unconstitutional because it denies equal treatment.

If the assisted suicide residency requirement in New Jersey is removed, the assisted suicide lobby will establish an assisted suicide clinic in New Jersey to assist the suicides of people in the neighboring states that have not legalized assisted suicide.

The assisted suicide lobby is aware that they will not legalize assisted suicide in every state but by forcing states to permit suicide tourism, assisted suicide will then become available to every American.
 
The good news is that in
 April 2023, The United Spinal Association, Not Dead Yet, Institute for Patients’ Rights, Communities Actively Living Independent and Free, Lonnie VanHook, and Ingrid Tischer have launched a lawsuit to strike down the California assisted suicide law with the goal of the case going to the United States Supreme Court to strike down assisted laws throughout the US. (Link to the complaint).

The case asserts that the assisted suicide act is a discriminatory scheme, which creates a two-tiered medical system in which people who are suicidal receive radically different treatment responses by their physicians and protections from the State depending on whether the person has what the physician deems to be a “terminal disease”—which, by definition, is a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act. (Link to the article). 

More articles on this topic:

  • Assisted suicide laws violate the Americans with Disabilities Act (Link).
  • Vermont assisted suicide deaths more than quadruple (Link).
  • New York assisted suicide bill sponsor: Get this passed first, expand it later (Link).
  • American medical association maintains opposition to assisted suicide (Link).
  • Michigan debates deceptive assisted suicide bill (Link).
  • How medical aid in dying became the euphemism of choice for assisted suicide (Link).
  • Anita Cameron: Dont be fooled. Assisted suicide is suicide (Link).
  • Assisted sucide lobby launches lawsuit to allow assisted suicide tourism in New Jersey (Link).