Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

MAiD

Canada’s euthanasia regime considers death less harmful than offering help to live

Published

6 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

A Canadian judge has ordered an injunction from a father to be lifted so that his 27-year-old autistic daughter can be permitted to undergo a doctor-assisted suicide.

On March 14, I reported on the story of a 27-year-old Albertan woman with autism who had been approved for euthanasia in December; she was planning to receive a lethal injection on February 1 when her father, whom she lives with, successfully obtained a temporary court injunction the day prior. Her father argued that her autism and “possibly other undiagnosed maladies do not satisfy the eligibility criteria for MAiD [Medical Assistance in Dying]”; the daughter’s attorney argued that it was “none of [her father’s] business.”  

It fell to Court of King’s Bench Justice Colin Feasby to examine the approval process and to determine whether the young woman was eligible for suicide-by-doctor. He admitted to being troubled by the case. “As a court, I can’t go second guessing these MAiD assessors… but I’m stuck with this: the only comprehensive assessment of this person done says she’s normal,” Feasby stated. “That’s really hard.” It shouldn’t have been. 

The desperate father has received another brutal setback in his quest to save his daughter from Canada’s euthanasia regime. On March 25, Feasby ruled that the injunction preventing her death be lifted. As the Calgary Herald put it: “Preventing a Calgary woman’s medically assisted death would cause her irreparable harm, a judge ruled Monday.” Reread that sentence a moment and let it sink in: preventing a woman’s death would cause her irreparable harm. In Canada’s euthanasia regime, words mean nothing. Suicide is healthcare. Stopping suicide causes irreparable harm. Death… doesn’t, somehow. 

“The harm to MV [the woman in question] if the injunction is granted goes to the core of her being,” Feasby stated in his written ruling. “An injunction would deny MV the right to choose between living or dying with dignity. Further, an injunction would put MV in a position where she would be forced to choose between living a life she has decided is intolerable and ending her life without medical assistance. This is a terrible choice that should not be forced on MV, as attempting to end her life without medical assistance would put her at increased risk of pain, suffering, and lasting injury.” 

Note here that there is no limiting principle to this ruling. That logic, such as it is, would apply to any suffering person experiencing suicidal ideation. It is also a false choice. The choice is not between dying by lethal injection or dying by some other form of suicide; it is between dying by lethal injection or being cared for by her loving father, who is ready and willing to do whatever he can for her. As Feasby himself said in his previous comments on the case: “The only comprehensive assessment of this person done says she’s normal.” Apparently, that didn’t matter. 

Addressing the young woman in his ruling, Feasby added: 

What I know of your journey through the health-care system from the evidence in this case suggests that you have struggled to find a doctor who could diagnose your condition and offer appropriate treatment. I do not know why you seek MAiD. Your reasons remain your own because I have respected your autonomy and your privacy. My decision recognizes your right to choose medically assisted death; but it does not require you to choose death.

Feasby did admit that his ruling would be deeply harmful to the parents of the young woman. “The harm to WV [the father] if the injunction is not granted will be substantial,” he wrote. “The pain of losing a child, even an adult child, is not something that any parent should experience. (The parents) have devoted their lives to raising MV from birth and have continued to support her since she has come of age. They will understandably be devastated by her death. For many parents, the loss of a child is a life-changing event that they never truly recover from. The loss is immeasurable.” 

He is right. He could have made a different decision. The 27-year-old had to shop around for doctors willing to sign off on her application for euthanasia; she initially struggled to find the necessary two. But in the end, she succeeded. The father can appeal Feasby’s decision, but his attorney has not commented on whether he will do so. If he does not, he will face what so many Canadian families have endured over the past several years: the knowledge that his family member will expedite her death, and that he is helpless to stop it. 

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

International

Switzerland’s new portable suicide ‘pod’ set to claim its first life ‘soon’

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

In what feels like a dystopian movie, Switzerland’s new portable death “pod” to allow people to kill themselves is on track to claim its first victim this year. 

In a July 16 press conference, Florian Willet, chief executive of pro-euthanasia organization The Last Resort, announced that Switzerland will “soon” use its portable suicide pod to end a life for the first time.

“Since we have people indeed queueing up, asking to use the Sarco, it’s very likely that it will take place pretty soon,” Willet said, eerily describing it as a “beautiful way” to die.   

The pod is called Sarco, short for sarcophagus, the name of the coffins in which ancient Egyptian pharaohs were buried. The futuristic-looking 3D-printed capsule was first unveiled in 2019 for assisted suicide in Switzerland but was met with controversy.  

It’s founder, Philip Nitschke, who has been nicknamed “Dr. Death” for his attempt to “glamorize” suicides, explained how the pod works in a recent interview with the South China Morning Post.  

Once a person is inside the pod, they are asked who they are, where they are and if they know what happens when they press the button. 

The death in the pod can also be activated by a button, gesture, voice control, or blink of the eye for those who cannot vocally or physically communicate due to severe illness or mobility issues.  

After they answer, a voice says, “If you want to die press this button.” Once the button is pressed, the pod is flooded with nitrogen causing the oxygen to plummet from 21 per cent to 0.05 per cent in the air in less than 30 seconds. 

“They will then stay in that state of unconsciousness for … around about five minutes before death will take place,” Nitschke explained.  

The death inside the pod is filmed, and the footage is handed to a coroner. 

The push to debut the pod this year comes after the pod was banned earlier this month after prosecutors questioned the legality and ethics of the pod, pointing out that it is unclear who is responsible for the death and who operates the pod.   

Switzerland has allowed assisted suicide since 1942, with its only requirements being that the person freely chooses death, is of sound mind, and that their decision is not motivated by selfish reasons. 

The county’s broad euthanasia policy has made it a tourist attraction from those around the world who wish to end their lives.  

In addition to the legal question of who is responsible for the death, pro-life organizations have condemned the pods for trivializing death and undermining the dignity of life.   

“Philip Nitschke’s device has been condemned by a broad range of commentators,” James Mildred, director of engagement for pro-life organization Christian Action Research and Education (CARE), said 

“Many people feel that it trivialises, and even glamourises, suicide,” he explained.  

“We believe that suicide is a tragedy that good societies seek to prevent in every circumstance,” Mildred continued. “There are ethical ways to help human beings that don’t involve the destruction of life.” 

Continue Reading

Great Reset

Canadian author with cerebral palsy says nurse called her ‘selfish’ for refusing euthanasia

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

She was shamed by a nurse in 2019 for refusing MAiD at Medicine Hat Regional Hospital

In 2019, an Alberta nurse reportedly told Christian author Heather Hancock that she was “selfish” for not ending her life through the Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) euthanasia program. 

In a July 12 interview with the Daily Mail, Heather Hancock, a 56-year-old Christian author who suffers from cerebral palsy, said that she was shamed by a nurse in 2019 for refusing MAiD at Medicine Hat Regional Hospital in Alberta.   

According to Hancock, during a lengthy hospital stay in 2019 for a bout of muscle spams, a nurse told her while helping her to the bathroom that Hancock “should do the right thing and consider MAiD,” and that her refusing MAiD was her “being selfish” and she is “not living” but “merely existing.”

Hancock recalled feeling “gobsmacked” and told the nurse that her life had value even if she spent most of it in a wheelchair. 

“You have no right to push me to accept MAiD,” she says she told the nurse.  

“They just view me as a drain on the medical system and that my healthcare dollars could be spent on an able-bodied person,” Hancock told the Daily Mail. 

In addition to the alleged 2019 incidents, Hancock says she has been routinely encouraged to end her life via euthanasia.

Hancock, who has cerebral palsy, says she has been encouraged to take MAiD on three separate occasions since Canada launched its euthanasia program in 2016. 

Hancock currently lives in an assisted-living center in Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan. Despite her disability, she remains an active writer and activist against Canada’s growing euthanasia program. 

In May, LifeSiteNews reported on a Canadian man who felt “completely traumatized” and violated that he was offered MAiD “multiple times” instead of getting the proper care he needed while in the hospital. 

First introduced in 2016, MAiD was initially only available to those who were terminally ill. However, in 2021, the Trudeau government expanded the deadly practice to be available to those who were not a risk of death, but who suffered from chronic illness.

While MAiD does not yet apply to the mentally ill, this is not due to a lack of trying on behalf of the Trudeau government, who decided to delay the expansion of euthanasia to those suffering solely from such illnesses until 2027 following backlash from Canadians and prominent doctors.

The most recent reports show that MAiD is the sixth highest cause of death in Canada. However, it was not listed as such in Statistics Canada’s top 10 leading causes of death from 2019 to 2022. When asked why MAiD was left off the list, the agency explained that it records the illnesses that led Canadians to choose to end their lives via euthanasia, not the actual cause of death, as the primary cause of death.

According to Health Canada, in 2022, 13,241 Canadians died by MAiD lethal injections. This accounts for 4.1 percent of all deaths in the country for that year, a 31.2 percent increase from 2021.        

While the numbers for 2023 have yet to be released, all indications point to a situation even more grim than 2022.    

Continue Reading

Trending

X