The group that legalized euthanasia in Canada admits that it's being abused.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The National Post published a Special Report by Miranda Schreiber on December 19, 2024 explaining that the group that was behind Canada's euthanasia law is now saying that the euthanasia law is being abused.

A similar article was written by Cameron Henderson and published by The Telegraph on October 26, 2024.

Schreiber explains that the BC Civil Liberties Association, which is the group that carried the Carter case through the British Columbia trial court and then up to the Supreme Court of Canada is warning that euthanasia has become too easy to obtain and the government must enact safeguards. Schreiber reported that:

Liz Hughes, who has served as BCCLA executive director since June 2023, said in a statement to the National Post that the group is “aware of concerning reports of people being offered MAID in circumstances that may not legally qualify, as well as people accessing MAID as a result of intolerable social circumstances.”

Hughes called for government action: “Governments must put in place, actively review, and enforce appropriate safeguards to ensure that people are making this decision freely.”

The BCCLA’s work around MAID has evolved, Hughes said, and the organization “will continue to hold the government accountable.”

Schreiber points out that the BCCLA already agreed in September 2023 that the law was being abused.

In a video shared with the National Post by disability activists, a BCCLA litigation staff lawyer told a Zoom town hall on Sept. 27, 2023, that her work with the association “may very well involve adopting either a modified or a new policy around our position on MAID in light of the fact of, you know, that it’s being abused.”

She said she is “very uncomfortable with our previous work around MAID,” and said staff want to be “making sure people have adequate supports and access to health care and other financial resources.”

Another BCCLA staff member told the town hall “we’ve done an environmental scan, so that was a kind of review of what’s currently happening with MAID in Canada, and it’s very concerning … the whole coercive dynamic that’s inherent with, you know, disabled people and their health-care providers.”

The BCCLA were particularly concerned about euthanasia for prisoners and people with disabilities.

Of particular alarm to the staff members were reports of MAID being used in prisons while incarcerated people were shackled to their beds, the program’s lack of legal oversight, disproportionate representation of impoverished people receiving assisted suicide, and health-care practitioners offering assisted suicide when patients asked for support for living.

Disability activist, Roger Foley, told Schreiber:

In an interview, disability activist Roger Foley said it is significant that these comments come from the civil liberties group that spearheaded the inception of Canada’s MAID program: “BCCLA was the driving force and creator of the legal challenge that decriminalized euthanasia and assisted suicide in Canada,” Foley said.

Schreiber continues by outlining concerns with Canada's euthanasia data:

Health Canada’s Fifth Annual Report on Medical Assistance in Dying in Canada last week revealed that over 15,300 Canadians died by MAID in 2023, representing a 15.8 per cent increase in deaths from the previous year. In 2023, MAID accounted for 4.7 per cent of deaths in Canada.

Quebec accounted for 36.5 per cent of all Canadian MAID deaths in 2023. Quebec’s 5,601 MAID deaths represented 7.2 per cent of the province’s total deaths — about one in every 14. B.C. is not far behind; MAID now represents 6.1 per cent of all deaths in that province.

Health Canada’s report reveals that 47.1 per cent of non-terminally ill Canadians who applied for MAID reported “isolation or loneliness” as one of the causes of their suffering. Just under half of all Canadian MAID cases (terminal and non-terminal) indicate that they want an early death in part lest they become a “perceived burden on family, friends or caregivers.”

Health Canada's Fifth Annual Report released last week revealed that MAiD was responsible for about one in 20 deaths in Canada in 2023, including 622 people who received MAID for a non-terminal illness.

Previous article on this topic:

• The group that orchestrated Canada's euthanasia law admit abuse of the law (Link).

398 people killed by euthanasia and assisted suicide in New South Wales Australia.

The Australian Care Alliance published a report on the First Annual Euthanasia Report in New South Wales Australia which indicated that 398 people died by euthanasia and assisted suicide (November 28, 2023 to June 30, 2024). It is concerning, in the last four months of the report (March 1, 2024 - June 30, 2024) 267 people were reported to have died by euthanasia and assisted suicide representing 1.33% of all deaths in that period.

Euthanasia and assistance to suicide became legal in New South Wales on November 28, 2023, when the Voluntary Assisted Dying Act 2022 came into operation.

Euthanasia and assistance to suicide

The Act provides for the Voluntary Assisted Dying Board, which it established as an “agent of the Crown”, to issue a “a voluntary assisted dying substance authority” to a medical practitioner to prescribe a lethal poison either for the purpose of the patient named in the authority ingesting the poison in order to cause the person’s own death (suicide) or for the lethal poison to be administered to the person by a medical or nurse practitioner (euthanasia).

The number of deaths

An Interim Report covering November 28, 2023 - February 29, 2024 reports that 131 people had their lives ended under the Act. – 91 (69.5%) by receiving a lethal injection from a medical or nurse practitioner and 40 (30.5%) by ingesting a lethal substance prescribed by a medical practitioner. This represented 0.95% of all deaths in NSW in the three months December 2023-February 2024 – almost 50% higher (46.1%) than the rate in Victoria after four years of legalization. In 3 months, NSW ended the lives of the same number of people (131) as Victoria did in the first year of legalisation.

The first annual report covering 28 November 2023-30 June 2024 reports that 398 people had their lives ended under the Act - 315 (79.1%) by receiving a lethal injection from a medical or nurse practitioner and 83 (20.9%) by ingesting a lethal substance prescribed by a medical practitioner.

An Interim Report covering 28 November 2023-29 February 2024 reports that 131 people had their lives ended under the Act. – 91 (69.5%) by receiving a lethal injection from a medical or nurse practitioner and 40 (30.5%) by ingesting a lethal substance prescribed by a medical practitioner. This represented 0.95% of all deaths in NSW in the three months December 2023-February 2024 – almost 50% higher (46.1%) than the rate in Victoria after four years of legalization. In 3 months, NSW ended the lives of the same number of people (131) as Victoria did in the first year of legalisation.

The first annual report covering 28 November 2023-30 June 2024 reports that 398 people had their lives ended under the Act - 315 (79.1%) by receiving a lethal injection from a medical or nurse practitioner and 83 (20.9%) by ingesting a lethal substance prescribed by a medical practitioner.

The differences between Victoria and New South Wales euthanasia and assisted suicide deaths.

Firstly, in Victoria medical practitioners cannot suggest assisted suicide or euthanasia to a patient – the request has to come from the person whereas in NSW the option of euthanasia can be offered by a medical practitioner with no initial suggestion from the person that are considering this

Secondly, in Victoria administration of a lethal injection by the practitioner is only available if there is an identified issue with self-administration. In NSW death by practitioner administration can be freely chosen. Only 15% of Victorian cases involve practitioner administration – compared to 79.1% so far in NSW. International evidence indicates that overall rates are higher when euthanasia is freely on offer compared to jurisdictions where assisted suicide is the only or default option.

Underlying condition

The First Annual Report gives no details of the conditions involved in the 78 cases described as “other” conditions (that is, not cancer, neurodegenerative or respiratory conditions).

Prognosis

The eligibility criteria include a prognosis - determined by two medical practitioners neither of which need to have any specific qualification or experience in the relevant condition – on “the balance of probabilities” that death will occur within 6 months (or within 12 months for neuro-degenerative conditions).

The handbook prepared by NSW Health acknowledges that “predicting when a person is entering the final months of their life can be difficult”.

This means that there will inevitably be wrongful deaths of people who may have had years to live from errors in prognosis.

Curiously the NSW Health handbook states that a Board authority to prescribe will remain valid for six months (or 12 months in the case of a neurodegenerative disorder) but that the patient can wait a further six months from when the prescription is written to have it filled. So NSW Health is envisioning patients given a prognosis of six months to live still being alive 12 months after this prognosis has been given.

In the case of authority to suicide by prescribed poison there is not time limit on how long the supplied poison may be kept before it is ingested.

Decision-making capacity

The NSW Health handbook states: 

“In the event that a coordinating practitioner becomes aware that a patient has permanently lost decision-making capacity after supply of the voluntary assisted dying substance for self-administration, the substance must be returned and disposed of as the patient is no longer eligible for voluntary assisted dying.”

This admission points to a serious risk in the scheme set up under the Act. Once the final review is completed before the coordinating practitioner applies for an authority to prescribe the lethal poison for self-administration there are no further checks on a person’s decision-making capacity and no requirement for any further contact between the coordinating practitioner and the patient.

The person may well lose decision-making capacity before ingesting the lethal poison. In this case there is simply no protection and no way of ever knowing if the person was subsequently cajoled, bullied, tricked or even physically forced to ingest the lethal poison.

Agents

The Act provides for the collection of the lethal poison for self-administration from the pharmacy by an “agent” of the patient, without imposing any restrictions or qualifications – not even an age restriction – on who can be designated by the patient. The agent is authorised by the Act to collect and store the poison, and also to prepare it and supply it to the patient to ingest – but not to actually administer it to the patient. As there is no witness required to be present at the time the lethal poison is ingested, we will never know if agents (or others) breach this provision.

Homeless, prisoners and forensic mental health detainees

NSW Health is keen that no one miss out on access to euthanasia or assistance to suicide.

Its handbook suggests that “as a particularly vulnerable group” what the homeless need is a “respectful approach that honours their autonomy and treats them with genuine kindness at the end of life” by providing support if they request “assisted dying”. No hint is given in the handbook that the vulnerability of a homeless person may mean that any request for euthanasia or assistance to suicide is a desperate cry for real help.

NSW Health’s Policy Directive charges the Justice Health and Forensic Mental Health Network with the task of making sure prisoners and those in forensic mental health detention don’t miss out on euthanasia or assistance to suicide by linking them with “authorised practitioners, and assist[ing] those services and practitioners with accessing the patient in appropriate settings and circumstances.”

Euthanasiasts everywhere

NSW Health’s Policy Directive mandates every Local Health District to “endeavour to have a sufficient number of authorised coordinating, consulting and administering practitioners within their services to support timely access to each step of the voluntary assisted dying process for patients”. It has been advertising full time jobs for medical practitioners to be employed solely to facilitate assistance to suicide and perform euthanasia.

No safe spaces

NSW Health has also issued “guidance” for private residential aged care and health facilities which reflects the Act’s ultimate refusal to allow any private facility to remain truly euthanasia and suicide free.

Even health facilities which are operated on the basis of an ethic which rejects euthanasia, must allow the State’s “care navigators” on to their premises to link up patients with doctors willing to kill them. In making a decision about whether transferring a patient out of the facility for euthanasia or assistance to suicide, the patient’s treating physician must consult with the patient’s “coordinating, consulting or administering practitioner”.

Family sues after British Columbia man dies by euthanasia while on a psychiatric day pass.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director
Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The family of a British Columbia man with bipolar disorder and chronic back pain is suing the federal and British Columbia governments and Dr Ellen Wiebe after the man died by euthanasia under questionable circumstances.

Jason Proctor reported for CBC News on December 18 that:

In a lawsuit filed in B.C. Supreme Court, the man's family claims the 52-year-old — known as JMM — fell into a group of people whose concurrent physical and mental illnesses leave them "vulnerable" under Canada's medical assistance in dying (MAiD) framework.

"JMM received approval for medical assistance in dying, but he subsequently expressed that he did not wish to proceed with the procedure and instead, he wished to pursue other treatments, including rehabilitation," the claim reads.

"Regrettably, while receiving treatment at St. Paul's Hospital for his incapacitating illness, JMM left the hospital on a day pass, visited a clinic in the afternoon, and died through the improper administration of MAiD."

Proctor reported that "JMM's children, his former spouse and his father will be in court Friday seeking to keep their names anonymous and to seal any documents filed in the case beyond the notice of claim."

Dr Ellen Wiebe carried out the euthanasia

The case is challenging the blanket protections in law for medical practitioners who participate in euthanasia.

Even though Canada's euthanasia law provides an exception in the criminal code to homicide, one would think that breaking the law could result in homicide charges. The problem is that the law states that the medical practitioner only has to be "of the opinion" that the person they killed fit the criteria of the law. 

When Canada's parliament was debating the euthanasia (Bill C-14 in 2016) the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition lobbied members of parliament to remove the phrase "of the opinion" and change it to "must fulfill."

The family is claiming damages for wrongful death and they claim that the man was not eligible for MAiD. Proctor reports:

In addition to damages for wrongful death, JMM's family wants a judge to declare a breach of his right to life, security of the person and equal protection under the law guaranteed by Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

According to the notice of claim, JMM "had a long-standing history of mental illness and was formally diagnosed with mental illnesses including bipolar disorder in or around 2013."

"He also experienced chronic back pain," the claim reads.

"However his pain was neither grievous nor irremediable and therefore did not meet the statutory eligibility criteria for MAiD."

The lawsuit claims JMM was "wrongfully approved for MAiD" despite factors that should have disqualified him — including influence from external financial pressures and the lack of capacity to give informed consent.

JMM had a long history with mental health concerns. Proctor reports.

JMM's family claim they voiced their concerns but received no response from the parties they are now suing. In late 2022, they allegedly got a court order under the Mental Health Act, committing JMM to the psychiatric ward at St. Paul's.

According to the court documents, JMM's treating physicians were aware of the fact he'd been approved for MAiD but "opined that JMM should not receive MAiD due to his mental illness, which impaired his capacity to consent."

"Nonetheless, the defendants negligently or recklessly allowed JMM to leave St. Paul's hospital and undergo MAiD, thereby causing JMM's death," the lawsuit reads.

The family claims they "were not informed of JMM's departure from St. Paul's hospital until after JMM had undergone MAiD."

This is not the first British Columbia court case challenging Canada's euthanasia law. On October 29, Lisa Steacy reported for CTV news Vancouver that Justice Simon R. Coval signed an injunction on October 26 preventing Dr Ellen Wiebe from killing an Alberta woman on October 27. Wiebe is known to be Canada's most active euthanasia doctor. Steacy wrote:

The injunction, signed by Justice Simon R. Coval, is the first of its kind issued in the province and was issued on Saturday, the day before the woman was scheduled to die.

It prevents Dr. Ellen Wiebe or any other doctor from “causing the death” of the 53-year-old woman “by MAID or any other means.” It followed a notice of civil claim alleging Wiebe negligently approved the procedure for a patient who does not legally qualify.

The injunction prevented Wiebe from killing the woman. Steacy explained:

“If the defendants proceed with MAID, the death will constitute a battery of (the patient), wrongful death and, potentially a criminal offence,”

Canada's euthanasia law does not provide a mechanism for challenging a negligent approval but the judge establishes the role of the court by stating:

“It is within the inherent jurisdiction of this honourable court to enjoin allegedly criminal conduct, in this case the termination of a patient's life where it appears that legislative criteria has not been met, and/or the protection of a patient from injury,”

The woman who was approved for euthanasia by Dr. Wiebe remains anonymous. The woman was refused approval in Alberta but went to British Columbia because Wiebe approved her death. The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition supports the attempt by this family to gain some level of justice in the death of this man. The courts need to recognize uphold the wrongful death complaint and recognize how the law does not protect the Section 7 rights in Canada's constitution. 

Section 7 states that: Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.

Why is euthanasia (MAiD) by advance request more egregious?

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director
Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Health Canada has opened an online "consultation" on Medical Assistance in Dying (euthanasia) by advance request. When completing the online "consultation" we felt that some of the questions were a sham because they imply that you support euthanasia by advance request. This is why EPC created a Guide to completing the online consultation (Link to the EPC Guide).

The "National conversation" on advance requests for medical assistance in dying will be open until February 14, 2025. The online consultation link is found on the Consultation website below the words - Join in: How to participate (Consultation Link).

Before completing the online consultation, please read the EPC guide to answering the online consultation (Link to the EPC guide).

The first principle for the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition is that we oppose killing people. So why is euthanasia by advance request more egregious?

Euthanasia was originally legalized in Canada under the guise of being limited to mentally competent adults, who are capable of consenting and who freely "choose." Euthanasia by advanced request undermines these 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 would then be killed, even though the person is not capable, at that time, of consenting. Therefore euthanasia by advance request is technically euthanasia without consent.

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 happy with life.

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 and 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.

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.

Every Canadian province has advanced directive laws. Therefore the federal government is debating an issue that is outside of their jurisdiction.

The "National conversation" on advance requests for medical assistance in dying will be open until February 14, 2025. The online consultation link is found on the Consultation website below the words - Join in: How to participate (Consultation Link).

Before completing the online consultation, please read our EPC guide to answering the online consultation (Link to the EPC guide).

Putting Suicide Prevention Stickers Over the Dignity in Dying Ads.

Meghan Schrader

By Meghan Schrader

Meghan is an autistic person who is an instructor at E4 - University of Texas (Austin) and an EPC-USA board member.

Before getting to the main topic of this post I want to acknowledge the recent passing of Not Dead Yet director Diane Coleman. I never had the pleasure of meeting Diane in person, but I was honored to have NDY post some of my articles on its social media accounts and republish one of my EPC blog posts on its blog. I am deeply grateful for Diane’s decades of disability justice work and my condolences go out to her family and friends.

The rest of this post will address the use of suicide prevention resources to defy the right to die movement’s ideology. Despite the fact that the UK’s subway system usually forbids advertisements for controversial social policies and the fact that suicidal people are known to take their own lives in subway tunnels, Dignity in Dying UK posted glossy, expensive assisted suicide advertisements on the walls of London England’s subway system, such as one that fit into the assisted suicide movement’s pattern of foregrounding the assisted suicide advocacy of upper middle class white women by featuring a young, attractive white woman jumping for joy over the prospect of being able to die by physician assisted suicide. In response, assisted suicide opponents covered the advertisements with posters with the contact information for the UK’s largest suicide prevention organization, the Samaritans.

In my opinion, the act of putting suicide prevention posters over Dignity in Dying’s posh advertisements is the kind of nonviolent cvil disobedience we need more of. It was a powerful statement that the death with dignity movement does not own the cultural lexicon; that not everyone is willing to buy into the death with dignity movement’s rebranding of assisted suicide as “aid in dying.” It was an example of regular people ignoring the desires of the elite; it was a case of someone putting the interests of marginalized, struggling individuals ahead of young, privileged white women leaping in exultation at the prospect of getting to die with champagne in their hands. I think it was the kind of action that Diane Coleman would have been proud to imitate.

In a culture where the assisted suicide movement enjoys a great amount of power and prestige, assisted suicide opponents need to find creative ways of resisting its influence. Covering Dying with Dignity’s advertisements with suicide prevention posters did just that.

At least 622 non compliant Canadian euthanasia deaths in 2023.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

On December 11, 2024, Canada's Ministry of Health released the Fifth Annual Report on Medical Assistance in Dying which indicated that there were 15,343 reported euthanasia (MAiD) deaths representing 4.7% of all deaths in 2023. According to the data there were 60,301 euthanasia deaths from legalization (June 2016) to December 31, 2023. By now Canada will have surpassed 75,000 euthanasia deaths since legalization.

Kamil Karamali reported for CTV National news on December 15, 2024 that at least 622 of the reported euthanasia deaths, in 2023, may have been non-compliant with the law. Dr Sonu Gaind, a psychiatry professor at the University of Toronto, said that how the system operates is troubling. Karamali reports Gaind as stating:

"It's particularly concerning for the path to MAID for disabled people who are not otherwise dying, because in that path, the nature of suffering parallels the traditional markers of suicide," he told CTV News in an interview Saturday. "That includes things like feeling a burden and a strong sense of loneliness."

The StatCan report found that, in the 622 MAID cases where natural death was not "reasonably foreseeable," 47 per cent suffered from isolation or loneliness and 49 per cent perceived themselves to be a burden to family, friends and caregivers.

"The only reason they died last year was because they were provided MAID," said Gaind. "We're talking about people, in some cases, that had more than 10 years to live. That should raise some red flags."

It must be noted that the report was released by Health Canada and not Statistics Canada.

Karamali then interviewed Isabel Grant, a UBC law professor who commented on the legal challenge to Track 2 euthanasia deaths that was launched by four national disability groups. Karamali reports:

...In September, a coalition of disability rights groups launched a Charter challenge in Ontario over a section of Canada's MAID law.

"It's discriminatory because when other people express loneliness or a loss of dignity or a desire with die, we usually respond with support or prevention -- but with people with disabilities, we respond with an offer for MAID," said UBC law professor Isabel Grant in a Saturday interview with CTV News.

Gaind commented further on the 622 concerning deaths. Karamali reports:

"For those situations, I don't think we're providing death under honest pretenses; it's false pretenses," said Gaind. "We're pretending we're providing it for illness suffering, when in reality those MAID provisions are being fuelled by very different sort of suffering -- so that's actually white-washing what we're providing death for, and medicalizing something that's actually a social situation.

In my article, Canada: 15,343 reported euthanasia deaths in 2023, I pointed out some other concerning data in the report:

• Of the 15,343 reported euthanasia deaths: 95.9% were Track 1 deaths (the person was deemed to have a terminal condition); 4.1% were Track 2 deaths (the person was deemed to not having a terminal condition).
• People with disabilities accounted for 33.5% of the Track 1 euthanasia deaths and 58.3% of the Track 2 euthanasia deaths. In 2022, 27% of Canadians were people with one or more disabilities. People with disabilities are over-represented in Canada's euthanasia statistics.
• 95.8% of those who died by euthanasia were Caucasian (White) while fewer than 1% were First Nations people. In 2022, 69.8% of Canadians euthanized were Caucasian and 5% were First Nations people.

I was also concerned that:

• Euthanasia for frailty was listed as a reason in 1,392 deaths, representing more than 9% of all euthanasia deaths. In 92 euthanasia deaths, frailty was listed as the only reason.
• Euthanasia for chronic pain was listed as a reason in 933 deaths, with 23 of the deaths listing chronic pain as the only reason.
• Euthanasia for dementia was listed as a reason in 241 deaths, with 106 of those deaths listing dementia as the only reason.

It is important to note that loneliness and isolation was listed in more than 21% of all euthanasia deaths representing more than 3200 people.

People with disabilities should be concerned that "other conditions" was the highest identified condition for euthanasia. For people with disabilities, 46.2% of the Track 1 deaths were based on "other conditions" and 62.9% of the Track 2 deaths were based on "other conditions." Other conditions is not further defined and indicates a serious concern with discrimination of people with disabilities.

There is also a difference in income levels for Track 1 and Track 2 euthanasia deaths. People who died by Track 2 euthanasia were more likely to have a lower income than the Track 1 deaths.

More analysis of The Fifth Annual Report needs to be done. The report includes more information than the previous years reports but it does not examine why people are asking for euthanasia nor does it uncover deaths that may be outside of the parameters of the law.

Community of Hope Outreach: Connecting with Seniors Project

Compassionate Community Care is starting a new calling service.

Regular check-ins by phone or Zoom with seniors who may not be able to receive an in-person visitor.

The calling service is for persons aged 55+ who may be socially or physically isolated and are looking for support, or a friendly person to talk to. We are looking for volunteers to make calls and seniors to receive them! Contact us if you are interested.

Calls are available in English and French. Volunteers who are proficient in French are needed.

For more information about the Compassionate Community Care calling service (Information Link).

This project is funded by the Government of Canada’s New Horizons for Seniors Program (NHSP), which provides funding for projects that make a difference in the lives of seniors in their communities.

Euthanasia Turning Suicidal People into ‘Kill and Harvest’ Natural Resource

This article was published by National Review online on December 13, 2024.

By Wesley J Smith

In the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, and Canada, people who want euthanasia can become organ donors. (A recent report in Spain showed that 13 percent of those euthanized donated organs.) Let’s call it “kill and harvest,” a policy heartily approved by our ever more crassly utilitarian medical establishment.

Indeed, a recent study in JAMA Surgery applauds procuring the kidneys of the euthanized because, after five years, the organs of those killed by doctors and then transplanted have worked well — even better than kidneys donated by people after brain death. From the conclusion of the study, which discusses donation after circulatory death from euthanasia (DCD-V):

This study found that DCD-V kidney transplantation yielded a lower incidence of DGF [delayed graft function] compared with DCD-III kidney transplantation [controlled circulatory death after removing life support] and yielded long-term results similar to those of DCD-III and DBD [donation after brain death] kidney transplantation. The findings suggest that DCD-V is a safe and valuable way to increase the kidney donor pool.

Yes, DCD-V, or kill and harvest, is now its own category in organ-transplant medicine.

This is so disheartening.

Allowing kill and harvest represents to me a collapse in organ-transplant ethics. The dead-donor rule is supposed to prevent people from being killed for their organs. Letting suicidal people who qualify for euthanasia know that they can become organ donors comes perilously close to doing precisely that, and in some cases, donating has been a factor in choosing when to be euthanized. Among the serious problems of this approach: 

• People who ask for euthanasia almost never receive suicide-prevention services, and instead, may be contacted by organ-donation organizations asking for their organs. This is a profound failure of true compassion and a form of abandonment, particularly since the ability to donate could become the tipping point on wanting to become dead.
• Perceiving the suicidal who want euthanasia as organ donors can lead to their objectification because obtaining or donating the organs can become the paramount consideration rather than their personal well-being.
• Many, perhaps most, of those killed and harvested are not terminally ill. Some of the mentally ill euthanized in the Netherlands and Belgium (and soon, in Canada) are mentally ill but physically healthy. In other words, the only reason they are dead is they were subjected to voluntary homicide.
• Hospitals are turned into killing centers because the euthanasia followed by harvesting must usually take place in a hospital adjacent to the surgical suite where the organs will be procured.
  

Where will this go next? Well, why not live harvesting as the means of euthanasia? After all, the patient wants to die and this could lead to even more viable organs! And don’t call me an alarmist. Killing by organ harvesting is already being discussed in organ-transplant medicine and bioethics journals.

Canada: 15,343 reported euthanasia deaths in 2023

Euthanasia (MAiD) in Canada increased by 15.8% --- 4.7% of all deaths in 2023

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

On December 11, 2024, Canada's Ministry of Health released the Fifth Annual Report on Medical Assistance in Dying which indicates that there were 15,343 reported euthanasia deaths representing 4.7% of all deaths in 2023. 

As of December 31, 2023 there have been at least 60,301 euthanasia (MAiD) deaths in Canada since legalization.

On February 6, 2024, after obtaining the euthanasia data from Alberta, Ontario, and Québec, EPC published an article stating that there were approximately 15,300 euthanasia (MAiD) deaths in Canada in 2023.

On July 8, 2024 we published an article with links to the euthanasia data from Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, Nova Scotia, Ontario and Québec. We again predicted that there were about 15,300 euthanasia deaths in 2023.

Why did Canada's Ministry of Health wait until December 2024 to release the 2023 euthanasia data when the report essentially concerns numbers and data while lacking information on the actual reason for people wanting to be killed by euthanasia?

Interesting data in the report:

• Of the 15,343 reported euthanasia deaths: 95.9% were Track 1 deaths (the person was deemed to have a terminal condition); 4.1% were Track 2 deaths (the person was deemed to not having a terminal condition).
• People with disabilities accounted for 33.5% of the Track 1 euthanasia deaths and 58.3% of the Track 2 euthanasia deaths. In 2022, 27% of Canadians were people with one or more disabilities. People with disabilities are over-represented in Canada's euthanasia statistics.
• 95.8% of those who died by euthanasia were Caucasian (White) while fewer than 1% were First Nations people. In 2022, 69.8% of Canadians euthanized were Caucasian and 5% were First Nations people.

What is happening in British Columbia, Ontario and Québec?

When analyzing the 5th Annual Report we question, "What makes British Columbia, Ontario and Québec different than the rest of Canada?" In 2023, euthanasia deaths increased by 36.5% in Québec, 30.3% in Ontario, and 18% in British Columbia. When examining the data from the other seven provinces, the next highest rate of increase was Alberta with a 6.4% increase in euthanasia deaths.

Québec has the highest euthanasia rate with 5601 reported euthanasia deaths --- this represents 7.3% of all deaths and 36.5% of all Canadian euthanasia deaths. Canada's 2021 Census indicated that 23% of Canadians live in Québec.

We question the accuracy of the Québec euthanasia data. CBC Radio Canada reported on March 9, 2024 that the Québec government had reported that there were 5,686 reported euthanasia deaths in 2023, but the 5th Annual report states 5,601.

The analysis of the Québec Commission on End-of-Life Care Eighth Annual Report (April 1, 2022 - March 30, 2023) by Amy Hasbrouck indicated that there were 190 euthanasia deaths that may not have been reported by the doctor or nurse practitioner who carried out the death. 190 unreported euthanasia deaths is serious.

Euthanasia for frailty was listed as a reason in 1,392 deaths, representing more than 9% of all euthanasia deaths. In 92 euthanasia deaths, frailty was listed as the only reason.

Euthanasia for chronic pain was listed as a reason in 933 deaths, with 23 of the deaths listing chronic pain as the only reason.

Euthanasia for dementia was listed as a reason in 241 deaths, with 106 of those deaths listing dementia as the only reason.

Similar to other jurisdictions, the reason for seeking euthanasia was highly oriented to the person's social condition. 

• 96% listed "Loss of ability to engage in meaningful activities",
• 87% listed "Loss of ability to perform activities of daily living",
• 70% listed "Loss of dignity",
• 55% listed "Inadequate pain control".

It is important to note that loneliness and isolation was listed in more than 21% of all euthanasia deaths representing more than 3200 people.

People with disabilities should be concerned that more than 50% of those who died identified "loss of independence" and almost 50% listed being a perceived burden on family, friends or care givers.

People with disabilities should be concerned that "other conditions" was the highest identified condition for euthanasia. For people with disabilities, 46.2% of the Track 1 deaths were based on "other conditions" and 62.9% of the Track 2 deaths were based on "other conditions." Other conditions is not further defined and indicates a serious concern with discrimination of people with disabilities.

We recognize another concern related to the difference in income levels for Track 1 and Track 2 euthanasia deaths. People who died by Track 2 euthanasia were more likely to have a lower income than the Track 1 deaths.

More analysis of The Fifth Annual Report needs to be done.  The report includes more information than the previous years reports but it does not examine why people are asking for euthanasia nor does it uncover deaths that may be outside of the parameters of the law.

In October 2024 the Chief Coroner of Ontario released a report from the Ontario MAiD Death Review Committee reporting that between 2018 and 2023 there were euthanasia deaths driven by homelessness, fear and isolation and that poor people are at risk of coercion indicating that Canadians with disabilities are needlessly dying by euthanasia. The data from the Ontario Death Review report indicates that in the reported time period there were at least 428 non-compliant euthanasia deaths and 25% of the euthanasia providers violated the law.

The Ontario MAiD Death Review report has three parts (Part 3) (Part 2) (Part 1).

 

The federal government needs to do a complete review of Canada's experience with euthanasia.

Questionable Study on Assisted Suicide/Suicide Correlation

This article was published by National Review online on December 12, 2024.

Wesley Smith

By Wesley J Smith

Previous studies have shown an association between states legalizing assisted suicide and increases in suicide rates for other suicides. Now, pro-euthanasia activists are touting a new study which claims no impact. But the study actually finds a significant impact in the raw numbers. From the study published in the American Journal of Bioethics:

927,929 Suicide deaths were represented in the study. Ten states and the District of Columbia had legalized MAID within the study period. In an univariable analysis, states that legalized MAID differed significantly from non-MAID states with respect to mean monthly suicide rate (non-MAID States: 1.46; MAID states: 1.78; p < 0.0001), as well as several covariates.

Oh. But wait, adjustments were made:

We constructed geographically-weighted regression models controlling for annualized state-level sociodemographic factors, such as racial distribution (percent Caucasian), average age, income levels, unemployment rates, rates of spiritual engagement, firearm ownership rates, gender ratios, and education levels.

And voila:

Our study failed to find evidence that suicide rates were positively associated with MAID legalization or MAID implementation, when controlling for geographic variation and multiple sociodemographic factors associated with suicide risk. This finding contrasts with other studies that have reported a positive association between suicide rates and MAID, and so calls into question one argument against MAID legalization.

Please note that thousands of suicides are not included in these statistics because state laws legalizing assisted suicide redefine the act — like saying a dung beetle is a butterfly — as not suicide because the decedent was ill. But suicide is a what, not a why. That approach falsifies vital statistics for political purposes.

In any event, with the study’s pre-adjustment data showing “states that legalized MAID differed significantly from non-MAID states with respect to mean monthly suicide rate,” this study’s weighted conclusion of no impact seems subjective and could itself be called into question.

We believe in HOPE --- not euthanasia

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

As we approach the New Year let us focus on the importance of hope.

Many people seek death by euthanasia based on a loss of hope, meaning and purpose.

There were 15,343 Canadian euthanasia deaths in 2023 representing 4.7% of all deaths. Were these deaths about freedom, choice, or autonomy? We believe these deaths were about abandonment. 

We believe in HOPE.

A medical practitioner should provide hope, not death. Euthanasia and assisted suicide undermine hope and send the message that your life is not worth living.

Sometimes hope is for a cure. Sometimes hope is for better health. Sometimes hope is for a peaceful death. Hope always upholds life. 

An excellent article by Sharon Worchester titled: One Patient Changed This Oncologist’s View of Hope was published by Family Practice News on June 19, 2024. 

Worcester writes about an experience of Dr Richard Leiter:

Carlos, a 21-year-old, lay in a hospital bed, barely clinging to life. Following a stem cell transplant for leukemia, Carlos had developed a life-threatening case of graft-vs-host disease.

Dr Leiter, a palliative care doctor in training, spoke with Carlos's mother. The mother had hope that her son would get better. Dr Leiter knew that Carlos would not survive but he didn't offer hope to the mother.

Dr Alan Astrow:

Hope is not only a feature of human cognition but also a measurable and malleable construct that can affect life outcomes, Alan B. Astrow, MD, said during an ASCO symposium on “The Art and Science of Hope.”

“How we think about hope directly influences patient care,” said Dr. Astrow, chief of hematology and medical oncology at NewYork-Presbyterian Brooklyn Methodist Hospital and a professor of clinical medicine at Weill Cornell Medicine in New York City.

Hope, whatever it turns out to be neurobiologically, is “very much a gift” that underlies human existence, he said.

Physicians have the capacity to restore or shatter a patient’s hopes, and those who come to understand the importance of hope will wish to extend the gift to others, Dr. Astrow said.

Dr Steven Z. Pantilat explained how doctors need to ask their patients what they hope for. Dr Pantilat told this story of one of his patients:

Dr. Pantilat recalled a patient with advanced pancreatic cancer who wished to see her daughter’s wedding in 10 months. He knew that was unlikely, but the discussion led to another solution.

Her daughter moved the wedding to the ICU.

Hope can persist and uplift even in the darkest of times, and “as clinicians, we need to be in the true hope business,” he said.

Dr Pantilat recognizes that hope can differ from one person to another:

While some patients may wish for a cure, others may want more time with family or comfort in the face of suffering. People can “hope for all the things that can still be, despite the fact that there’s a lot of things that can’t,” he said.

“We want to be honest with our patients — compassionate and kind, but honest — when we talk about their hopes,” Dr. Pantilat explained. Sometimes that means he needs to tell patients, “I wish that could happen. I wish I had a treatment that could make your cancer go away, but unfortunately, I don’t. So let’s think about what else we can do to help you.”

Hope provides benefits. Worchester explains:

One recent study found, for instance, that patients who reported feeling more hopeful also had lower levels of depression and anxiety. Early research also suggests that greater levels of hope may have a hand in reducing inflammation in patients with ovarian cancer and could even improve survival in some patients with advanced cancer.

Worchester concludes the article by suggesting how Dr Leiter could have offered hope to Carlos's mother:

For Dr. Leiter, while these lessons came early in his career as a palliative care physician, they persist and influence his practice today.

“I know that I could not have prevented Carlos’ death. None of us could have, and none of us could have protected his mother from the unimaginable grief that will stay with her for the rest of her life,” he said. “But I could have made things just a little bit less difficult for her.

“I could have acted as her guide rather than her cross-examiner,” he continued, explaining that he now sees hope as “a generous collaborator” that can coexist with rising creatinine levels, failing livers, and fears about intubation.

 “As clinicians, we can always find space to hope with our patients and their families,” he said. “So now, years later when I sit with a terrified and grieving family and they tell me they hope their loved one gets better, I remember Carlos’ mother’s eyes piercing mine ... and I know how to respond: ‘I hope so, too.’ And I do.”

Please consider giving hope to EPC this Christmas Season! The Canada Post strike is causing the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition financial distress. (EPC Donation Link). Thank you to all who have responded to our pleas.

More articles on HOPE.

• Psychiatrists: Do we offer hope or do we offer death? (Link). 
• Abandonment. That's what euthanasia is all about (Link).
• Jeanette Hall. I say NO to assisted suicide. (Link).

Britain: Don't follow Canada's lead! Vote NO to assisted suicide

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The Federalist published an article by Mary Vought, a disability advocate in the UK entitled: The UK Takes Another Step Toward State-Sponsored Euthanasia.

Vought --- who opposes assisted suicide --- discusses the recent second reading vote that supported Kim Leadbeater's bill.  She believes that Britain's parliament has been given an opportunity to further debate the issue and defeat the bill.

Kim Leadbeater said that the bill has the "strongest set of safeguards and protections in the world" as opening the door to legalization which, if legalized, will lead to expansions of the law. The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition doesn't consider the Leadbeater bill as having the strongest safeguards in the world. 

Vought refers to Canada's experience with euthanasia:

Indeed, that is exactly what has happened in other countries. Canada has vastly expanded its assisted suicide regime, loosening criteria to allow for same-day suicide and expanding the number of conditions that qualify. As a result, the number of assisted suicides in Canada rose by at least 13-fold from 2016 to 2022, and now numbers over 13,000 per year.

Beyond a move toward assisted suicide, Canada shares something else in common with Great Britain: a single-payer system of socialized medicine. Canadians have documented cases in which the health care bureaucracy has encouraged individuals to commit assisted suicide, presumably because such “resolutions” are far cheaper for the government-run health system than treating patients’ underlying conditions.

Vought refers to the financial pressures faced by Britain's National Health Service (NHS). She challenges the concept of assisted suicide based on her reality as the mother of a daughter with cystic fibrosis and as a disability advocate and former member of the National Council on Disability. 

Vought writes:

The most vulnerable in our society — those who have no one to speak for them — are most at risk in this brave new world. We must reinforce the message that vulnerable people are valuable people and make a commitment to provide them with the health care and mental and psychological support they need, such that they never feel pressured to take their own lives.

I hope that members of Parliament will come to their senses and reject the assisted suicide measure before it makes it onto the statute books. For human life — any life and every life — is a terrible thing to waste.

 

• UK Assisted Suicide bill. A disability perspective (Link).
• Baroness Tanni Grey Thompson. Legalizing assisted suicide could cause a seismic shift (Link).

Eating disorders are not "untreatable" ---- and not a reason for euthanasia

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Chelsea Roff

The assisted suicide lobby wants to redefine chronic conditions as terminal conditions in order to expand the number of people who have availability to euthanasia and assisted suicide. In America, most assisted suicide laws require a person to have a six month prognosis to be approved for death by assisted suicide.

On July 30, a landmark study was published by Frontiers in Psychiatry that analyzed 60 known cases of euthanasia or assisted suicide deaths based on eating disorders.

Chelsea Roff, the Executive Director of Eat, Breathe, Thrive, an organization that helps people recover from eating disorders, is challenging the concept that people with eating disorders are "untreatable" and can be approved for euthanasia and assisted suicide. The Eat Breathe Thrive update states:

It's been a big year. Since January, we've published three studies on our interventions with Dr. Catherine Cook-Cottone, including a large international randomized controlled trial showing our four-week program can be effective for people with long-standing eating disorders. It’s a huge step in showing that even those who have struggled for years can benefit from the right care and support.

We’ve also faced sobering realities. In August, we learned that over 60 people with eating disorders have died by assisted death. 95% were labeled as “untreatable.” For me, this was a turning point.

Roff is challenging the concept that eating disorders should qualify someone for being killed by euthanasia or assisted suicide. Her study was published in early December in the International Journal of Eat Disorders. Roff successfully helped 277 people with eating disorders,  70% of whom had been living with a chronic eating disorder for at least 10 years.

Eat, Breathe, Thrive stated in their press release:

The randomized controlled trial evaluated the Eat Breathe Thrive Recovery program (EBT-R) and included 277 participants from 27 countries, aged 18 to 65. Nearly 70% of participants had been living with eating disorders for over a decade—a population often labelled as having “severe and enduring eating disorders” and described as resistant to treatment. Notably, 64% of participants had previously attempted therapy, and 22% had undergone inpatient treatment, yet had not achieved recovery prior to participating in this study.

The assisted suicide lobby is not concerned with the science or treatment opportunities that may be available to those people who seek death. They are only concerned with expanding access to death by lethal poison. The philosophy of these pro-death people, that killing people is about personal freedom, choice or autonomy, is actually a propaganda tool --- leading people in need to abandonment and death.