Canadians left with no choice but euthanasia when care is denied

Ontario’s euthanasia regulators have tracked 428 cases of possible criminal violations without a single criminal charge being laid.

Once again, a government report affirmed what every Canadian should know by now: People are being killed by euthanasia because they cannot access the care they actually need and in some cases are denied that care.

The “choice” that is left to them is a lethal injection. Ontario’s Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) Death Review Committee’s (MDRC) latest report, “Evaluating Incurability, Irreversible Decline, and Reasonably Foreseeable Natural Death,” highlights this fact once again.

As Dr. Ramona Coelho, an advocate for people with disabilities and one of the most eloquent opponents of Canada’s MAiD regime highlighted in her analysis of the report, Health Canada dictates that a “person can only be considered incurable if there are no reasonable and effective treatments available (and) explicitly state that individuals cannot refuse all treatments to render themselves incurable, and thereby qualify for MAiD.”

However, the MDRC’s report cites cases that do not appear to qualify:

Consider Mrs. A: isolated, severely obese, depressed, and disconnected from care; she refused treatment and social support but requested MAiD. Instead of re-engaging her with care, MAiD clinicians deemed her incurable because she refused all investigations, and her life was ended.

Or Mr. B: a man with cerebral palsy in long-term care, he voluntarily stopped eating and drinking, leading to renal failure and dehydration. He was deemed eligible under Track 1 because his death was consequently considered “reasonably foreseeable.” No psychiatric expertise was consulted despite signs of psychosocial distress.

Or Mr. C: a man in his 70s with essential tremor, whose MAiD provider documented that his request was mainly driven by emotional suffering and bereavement.

In short, Coelho concludes, “Canada’s legal safeguards are failing. Federal guidelines are being ignored. The public deserves to know: Is Canada building a system that truly protects all Canadians – or one that expedites death for the vulnerable?” It has been clear what kind of system we have created for some time, which is why Canada is considered a cautionary tale even in the UK, where assisted suicide advocates violently and indignantly object to any comparisons of their proposed legislation and the Canadian regime.

The National Post also noted examples found in the MRDC’s report, noting that: “A severely obese woman in her 60s who sought euthanasia due to her ‘no longer having a will to live’ and a widower whose request to have his life ended was mainly driven by emotional distress and grief over his dead spouse are the latest cases to draw concerns that some doctors are taking an overly broad interpretation of the law.”

None of this seems to concern the federal government, much less law enforcement. Horror stories are simply not addressed, as if ignoring them means that they did not happen. Constant revelations of lawbreaking are met with silence. “A quarter of all Ontario MAiD providers may have violated the Criminal Code,” journalist Alexander Raikin warned last year in The Hub. “Does anyone care?” In fact, Ontario’s euthanasia regulators had tracked 428 cases of possible criminal violations – without a single criminal charge being laid.

“Canada’s leaders seem to regard MAiD from a strange, almost anthropological remove: as if the future of euthanasia is no more within their control than the laws of physics; as if continued expansion is not a reality the government is choosing so much as conceding,” Elaina Plott Calabro wrote in The Atlantic recently. “This is the story of an ideology in motion, of what happens when a nation enshrines a right before reckoning with the totality of its logic.”

There is an opportunity to stop the spread of Canada’s MAiD regime. MPs Tamara Jansen and Andrew Lawton are championing the “Right to Recover” Act, which would make it illegal to euthanize someone whose sole qualifying condition is mental illness. I urge each and every reader to get involved today.

Jonathon Van Maren

Jonathon’s writings have been translated into more than six languages and in addition to LifeSiteNews, has been published in the National Post, National Review, First Things, The Federalist, The American Conservative, The Stream, the Jewish Independent, the Hamilton Spectator, Reformed Perspective Magazine, and LifeNews, among others. He is a contributing editor to The European Conservative.

Up Next

Charlie Kirk Shooting Suspect Revealed: Here’s What His Ammunition Said

Don't Miss

“Hey fascist! Catch!”: Authorities confirm writing on alleged Kirk killer’s bullet casings

Todayville

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

Watchdog Presses Ottawa to Release Hidden Lobbying Rulings

Opinion / 23 mins ago

Bill Gates Shakes Up the Climate Discussion

National / 40 mins ago

Watchdog Asks Whether RCMP Brass Shielded Lobbyists in Ottawa’s Influence Scandals

Health

Leslyn Lewis urges Canadians to fight WHO pandemic treaty before it’s legally binding

Published on October 29, 2025

Todayville

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

Conservative MP Leslyn Lewis is urging Canadians to demand a parliamentary debate on the WHO Pandemic Agreement, highlighting risks to national sovereignty.

Conservative Member of Parliament (MP) Leslyn Lewis called on Canadians to petition against the World Health Organization’s (WHO) pandemic treaty before it becomes legally binding.

In an October 23 post on X, Lewis encouraged Canadians to demand that politicians debate the WHO Pandemic Agreement before it becomes law after warnings that the treaty could undermine national freedom and lead to global surveillance.

“I have raised red flags about its implications on Canada’s health sovereignty and the federal government’s willingness to enter a legally binding treaty of this weight without any input from Parliament,” she declared.

In May, Canada, under Liberal Prime Minister Mark Carney, adopted the treaty despite warnings that the agreement gives the globalist entity increased power in the event of another “pandemic.”

However, Lewis revealed that since the agreement has yet to be officially signed, Canada is not bound to it and can still make amendments.

“We are now in a critical window of opportunity to ask tough questions and debate the treaty before it is signed by the Minister of Foreign Affairs and binds our nation,” she explained.

Lewis encouraged Canadians to sign a petition calling for a debate of the agreement as well as contacting their local MPs to request a parliamentary review of the treaty.

Lewis revealed that Canadians’ persistent opposition to the treaty has already resulted in some of the more dangerous clauses, including restricting free speech, freedom of movement, and government surveillance, being removed from the final agreement.

“The removal of provisions on vaccine mandates, misinformation and disinformation, censorship requirements, travel restrictions, global surveillance, and mandatory health measures happened because people paid attention and spoke up,” she continued.

Among the most criticized parts of the agreement is the affirmation that “the World Health Organization is the directing and coordinating authority on international health work, including on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.”

While the agreement claims to uphold “the principle of the sovereignty of States in addressing public health matters,” it also calls for a globally unified response in the event of a pandemic, stating plainly that “(t)he Parties shall promote a One Health approach for pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.”

Business

Bill Gates walks away from the climate cult

Published on October 29, 2025

Todayville

MxM News

Billionaire Bill Gates — long one of the loudest voices warning of climate catastrophe — now says the world has bigger problems to worry about. In a 17-page memo released Tuesday, the Microsoft co-founder called for a “strategic pivot” away from the obsessive focus on reducing global temperatures, urging leaders instead to prioritize fighting poverty and eradicating disease in the developing world. “Climate change is a serious problem, but it’s not the end of humanity,” Gates wrote.

Gates, 70, argued that global leaders have lost perspective by treating climate change as an existential crisis while millions continue to suffer from preventable diseases like malaria. “If I had to choose between eradicating malaria and preventing a tenth of a degree of warming, I’d let the temperature go up 0.1 degree,” he told reporters ahead of next month’s U.N. climate conference in Brazil. “People don’t understand the suffering that exists today.”

For decades, Gates has positioned himself as a leading advocate for global climate initiatives, investing billions in green energy projects and warning of the dangers of rising emissions. Yet his latest comments mark a striking reversal — and a rare admission that the world’s climate panic may have gone too far. “If you think climate is not important, you won’t agree with the memo,” Gates told journalists. “If you think climate is the only cause and apocalyptic, you won’t agree with the memo. It’s a pragmatic view from someone trying to maximize the money and innovation that helps poor countries.”

The billionaire’s change in tone is sure to raise eyebrows ahead of the U.N. conference, where climate activists plan to push for new emissions targets and wealth transfers from developed nations. Critics have long accused Gates and other elites of hypocrisy for lecturing the public about fossil fuels while traveling the globe on private jets. Now, Gates himself appears to be distancing from the doomsday rhetoric he once helped spread, effectively admitting that humanity faces more immediate moral imperatives than the weather.

(AP Photo/Alex Brandon)