Canadian woman was approved for euthanasia is now being treated by US doctors.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Jolene Van Alstine

On December 10, 2025 Joe Warmington reported for the Toronto Sun that Glenn Beck, an American political commentator, offered to cover the cost of medical treatment in America for Jolene Van Alstine, who lives in Regina Canada. 

Van Alstine was approved for euthanasia rather than provided surgery or medical treatment for her rare medical condition.

On January 7, 2026, Joe Warmington reported for the Toronto Sun that Glenn Beck has helped Van Alstine receive treatment and her condition is improving. Warmington wrote:

If not for American Glenn Beck, Canadian Jolene Van Alstine could have been dead today.

The day Jan. 7, 2026, was the day Jolene was eligible to end her life with medical assistance under the supervision of Canada’s Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) program.

Thankfully, that’s not happening now. Instead, the 45-year-old Saskatchewan wife and mother has not only chosen to live but is fighting hard. She’s getting a lot of help and prayers from across Canada and the United States.

Warmington continued:

Things are going in a better direction for Jolene. For this first time in years, things are looking up for a change.

A lot of that credit goes to iconic American conservsative podcaster and journalist Beck, who used his platform, respect and clout to put out a cold call to the American medical community to see if they would assist keeping this woman alive and also help her deal with her chronic gland issues best described as a rare and extremely painful parathyroid disorder.

Warmington explains what happened:

There is currently no Saskatchewan surgeon able to perform the operation she required.

Beck offered to fly Jolene and her partner Miles Sundeen to the Norman Parathyroid Center near Tampa, which pledged to cover the cost of her surgery or treatment.

The team of doctors are first providing treatment for Van Alstines condition with the hope of averting surgery.

Jolene Van Alstine recent selfie

Warmington explains:

Jolene said doctors told her “if it brings my parathyroid levels down to low normal, then I don’t need another surgery, I need an endocrinologist who deals with patients who need monitoring of their calcium, vitamin D and magnesium levels and can adjust them as needed.”

However, “if it does not bring my levels down then there is still another gland inside me somewhere that is overactive.”

Another operation is possible. But hopefully not.

Either way, she’s still in pain and discomfort. However, Jolene is starting to see a light at the end of what has been a very dark three-year tunnel. Now she has hope.

Warmington stated that Beck has been regularly calling Van Alstine about how she is doing. Jolene said that she is doing a lot better now. She told Warmington that:

“I never wanted to go through with MAID but I lost hope,” she said. “I’m Roman Catholic. Suicide is a sin, but I just couldn’t stand the pain and nausea and vomiting and overheating 24/7.”

She said she found herself “sleeping underneath a cooling blanket at night with the temperature turned down anywhere from 16.5 C to 13 C, sometimes sleeping on the cold bathroom floor with cold water running in the shower, throwing up my medications into a bucket in the bathroom and them fishing out my pills and then having to actually retake them (the ones I threw up) because a lot of them can’t be filled early because they are controlled substances.”

She joked that sometimes she thought about sitting in a Saskatchewan snowbank.

Her sense of humour was starting to show Wednesday, and she managed to put a smile on her face. She knows she’s not out of the woods yet. But she’s in a more positive mood knowing so many care about her and that the medical community is working hard on her problem now.

“I’m just praying that I get treatment, whether it be medication or surgery. I just want to feel well again,” she said.

In a couple of weeks, Jolene hopes to have a better idea of just where she stands.

Jennifer Brady

The December 10th article concluded with Van Alstine stating that she does not want to die by euthanasia (MAiD), she wants to receive effective treatment for her medical condition. Van Alstine is not the first Canadian to face this scenario.

An article by Angela McIvor that was published by CBC News on September 18, 2024 reported that Jennifer Brady, who lives in Nova Scotia, was approved for MAiD (euthanasia) after being unable to obtain treatment for Lymphedema.

The good news is that an update to the story that was published by CBC News on September 18, 2025 explained that Brady won a 6-year court battle with the Nova Scotia government and has received treatment in New Jersey.

McIvor had to fight to be approved for treatment, but had no problem being approved for euthanasia.

Allison Ducluzeau

In December 2023 I published an article about Allison Ducluzeau who lives in Victoria BC. Decluzeau was diagnosed with abdominal cancer and offered MAiD (euthanasia) rather than treatment. she was successfully treated at the Institute for Cancer Care at Mercy Medical Centre in Baltimore.

Allison Ducluzeau was offered euthanasia but not medical treatment. The Ducluzeau story concerned the fact that she was suing the BC Ministry of Health for the cost of the successful treatment that she received in Baltimore.

The wedding picture of Ducluzeau was taken in Hawaii. After Ducluzeau went into remission she decided to get married.

Van Alstine, Brady and Ducluzeau were all able to die by euthanasia but were not offered medical treatment for their conditions. Brady and Ducluzeau were successfully treated in the US. These are three out of many stories of Canadians who were denied or not offered effective medical treatment.

What does it mean to coerce someone to death?

Alex Schadenberg

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

What does it mean to coerce someone to death?

Coercion the practice of persuading someone to do something by using force or threats. 

Subtle coercion means manipulating someone into doing something they don't want to do through non-physical, often gradual tactics.

This week I received a call from a woman who was very upset about the euthanasia death of her nephew who was in his 50's, was never married and had multiple health issues.

She told me that she spoke to him a few days before his death and during the conversation she realized that he was being offered euthanasia. She spoke to him about it and he told her that he wants to live.

Being offered euthanasia is common. Every major hospital in Canada has a MAiD team that not only approves and carries out the death, but they also offer death.

After his death she received a call from an immediate family member of the nephew concerning his death. The family member described the death with glowing language. 

When she stated that she had spoken to the nephew recently and he told her that he wanted to live, the immediate family member responded by saying it was for the best.

Who wanted the nephew to die?

Was it a medical practitioner?

Was it the immediate family member(s)?

Was it the nephew, even though he said to his Aunt that he wanted to live?

Subtle coercion is often all that it takes when someone is experiences multiple health issues and needs the love and support of close family members, but instead is told, it is for the best.

The woman who called me wanted to know how she could be assured that she would not be killed by euthanasia?

I told her that the law is problematic but the Life Protecting Power of Attorney for Personal Care clearly states that you do not want euthanasia or assisted suicide, as well as it lists how you would want to be treated or not treated. 

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition has documents that are designed for all 50 states and for the different Canadian provinces. (Article about the Life Protecting Power of Attorney)

“Disability Issues Lesson 4: Please Do Not Use The R Word”

Meghan Schrader

By Meghan Schrader

Meghan is an instructor at E4 - University of Texas (Austin) and is a member of the EPC-USA board. 

As I’ve said, I think it’s valuable for all euthanasia opponents to keep abreast of various trends in policy and culture that impact people with disabilities, in order to ensure that opposition to euthanasia remains linked to broader efforts to promote the inclusion and dignity of people with disabilities. So, this is a disability issues lesson about the terms “retard” and “retarded.”

Despite my facility with words, my Nonverbal Learning Disorder comes from a mild brain injury that I got while I was being born, and back in 1995, when “retarded” was still a formal medical term, a clinician accurately described my visual-spatial skills as falling into the “moderately retarded” range.

When I was growing up, bullies loved few things more than to band into groups that would follow me around and call me a “retard.” Sometimes random people I had never met would walk up to me at school to tell me that I was “retarded.” Often when bullies used that term, they followed it up by saying things like, “Everyone hates you,” and “I’m going to throw acid on you in science class.” Or, since the bullies knew how often my “retarded” visual-spatial skills caused me to get lost, they would try to disorient me on purpose, so that they could, you know, remind me that I was “retarded.”

Therefore, it hurts me to read that some people have decided to use the r word as what USA Today called “a principled stand against what they call "cultural Marxism" being imposed on the country by progressives.”

If that’s you, please stop. Using the r word reinforces a pattern of people from all ideologies and political perspectives using disabled people to make a political point. This is not a partisan issue; I’ve seen people who identify as political progressives and all other backgrounds engage in harmful behavior. I am quoting the aforesaid USA Today article simply because it recounts more recent uses of the r word by powerful, visible people.

It is not necessary to use the r word to take a political stand; there are plenty of other ways for people bickering over politics to express that they do not like their opponents’ ideologies. Yet, despite decades of disabled people and disability rights advocates asking people not to use the r word, people from across the ideological spectrum can’t seem to get the memo.

As most readers probably know, President Trump used the term “seriously retarded” to refer to Minnesota Governor Tim Waltz and then proudly doubled down on his use of the term. (Waltz then played ableist political rhetoric frisbee by telling President Trump to get an MRI.) Apparently Elon Musk has used the r word repeatedly, and radio host Seth Rogan has stated, “The word ‘r-----ed’ is back and it’s one of the great culture victories.”

No. Using a term connected to disabled people’s personal experiences of hate and abuse is not a “cultural victory.” Irrespective of who a person is or what other political beliefs they hold, it is perfectly reasonable for disabled people to want a culture where the terms “retard” and “retarded” are treated like slurs.

Regardless of anyone’s intent, the r word is intertwined with humanity’s history of undermining the intrinsic human worth of disabled persons. Therefore, I urge all euthanasia opponents to refrain from using the r word as an act of respect.

At least 15 Canadian prisoners have been killed by euthanasia since legalization.

Alex Schadenberg

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

On December 3, 2025, Canada's Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness responded to a request by Garnet Genuis (MP) (Sherwood Park - Fort Saskatchewan Alberta) reported that from legalization until September 2025 - 15 federal inmates have been killed by (MAiD) euthanasia.

Considering the fact that Canada abolished the death penalty in two main stages: first for civilian crimes in 1976 (Bill C-84), replacing it with a mandatory life sentence, and then completely for all military offences in 1998. The last civilian executions happened in December, 1962, with the final military executions in 1945.

This is not the first concern about this issue. Tristan Hopper wrote an article that was published in the National Post in May 2023 asking if Euthanasia of Canadian prisoners is a form of capital punishment?

Hopper wrote that, at that time, nine prisoners had died by euthanasia in Canada. The APTN network reported that the first three prisoners to die by euthanasia were indiginous Canadians who remained shackled during the killing.

Ivan Zinger

Hopper's report stated that Ivan Zinger, Canada's Correctional Investigator, told Kathleen Martens, the reporter for the APTN network, that euthanasia should never be done in the prison. He stated:

“Under no circumstances should the procedure of MAiD be dealt with inside a penitentiary,”

“That is highly problematic, unethical and immoral in my view. I think we would be the only jurisdiction in the world who would do that.”Kim Beaudin, vice-chief of the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples and a member of corrections’ National Aboriginal Advisory Committee opposes (MAiD) euthanasia being done in prisons. 

According to Canada's Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness December 3 report that of the 15 Canadian prisoners who died by euthanasia, 14 were killed in an external facility and 1 died in the correctional facility.

I have always opposed capital punishment because I do not believe that the government should have the right in law to kill it's citizens.

In the same way, I do not believe that medical practitioners should have the right in law to kill people.

Canada’s Dr. Death — Ellen Wiebe Poisoned The Wrong Person This Time.

This article was published by Kelsi Sheren on her substack on January 8, 2026.

Article: The tragic death of a young man with mental illness (Link)

By Kelsi Sheren

Canada doesn’t lack villains. It lacks accountability. Trust me there are plenty of killers in this country and a significant amount aren’t the terrorist we harbour—its the Dr’s we employ.

If you want to understand how this country slid from “medical assistance in dying” to medical abandonment of the vulnerable, you don’t need to look at Parliament first. You need to look at Dr. Ellen Wiebe.

Ellen Wiebe is not obscure. She is not misunderstood. She is not a reluctant participant in a tragic system. She is one of the most prominent, outspoken, and ideologically committed MAiD killers in the country.

Ellen Wiebe

At a public event I attended on Salt Spring Island, she openly stated — without hesitation, without discomfort — that she has been involved in over 1,000 assisted deaths. She did not say this with gravity, she laughed actually. She did not say it with restraint, she was proud of this.

She said it as résumé, bragging about killing.

Canada is now expected to accept this as normal. I on the other hand, refuse.

This is the woman defenders of MAiD point to as experienced, compassionate, trustworthy. This is the physician organizations like Dying With Dignity elevate, protect, and cite while lobbying for ever-broader eligibility — including people who are poor, disabled, traumatized, or mentally ill.

And this is the doctor who approved the euthanasia of Kiano, a young man living with mental illness, despite Canada’s own acknowledgement that MAiD for mental illness is not supposed to be legal until 2027.

A loophole was found, several we said would be used and abused. Safeguards evaporated. A life was taken, one that was preventable.

That is not an outlier. That is a pattern of behaviour no one seems to want to stop.

Ellen Wiebe has repeatedly framed death as a solution — not a last resort — and suffering as justification enough. She has spoken publicly about MAiD as though resistance to it is naïve, emotional, or regressive. She does not speak like someone burdened by gravity. She speaks like someone convinced she is right.

That should terrify you, and when you look into her eyes you see nothing but death and darkness. Because certainty is what allows systems to stop asking questions, and its why she speaks with “authority.”

Mental illness is not terminal, not at all actually. Crisis is not consent, although these killers would like to think their untouchable. Despair is not clarity, quite the opposite actually.

Every suicide-prevention framework on earth is built on this understanding — except inside Canada’s MAiD apparatus, where the rules change the moment a white coat and an ideological mission enter the room. Ideology will kill more Canadians than anything else with a regime like this pro death cult at the helm.

Dying With Dignity insists this is about autonomy. But autonomy without protection is coercion. Choice without alternatives is abandonment. And death offered in a country that refuses to properly fund mental health care is not freedom — it is convenience.

What Margaret Marsilla is living through now is the consequence of elevating doctors who no longer see rescue as their role.

Her son lived once because people intervened. He died later because the system didn’t.

And Ellen Wiebe signed off, she has a pattern of this behaviour.

Canada once recoiled at figures like Harold Shipman and called them monsters. Today, we build platforms, panels, and praise around physicians who boast about body counts — as long as the paperwork is clean and the language sounds kind. Thats what the CAMAP conferences are for. To sit with other killers of the country and find other ways to kill more.

That is how ethical collapse happens. Not loudly. Not overnight. But gradually, bureaucratically, and with applause. The slow drip so many of you hear me speak about. The boiling pot.

Ellen Wiebe is not “helping people die.” She is wiping Canadians off the face of the earth, acting like she is helping people. The devil is real and lives very much inside her.

And until this country confronts what it has turned doctors like her into — not saviours, but executioners with good PR— more families will be destroyed, more loopholes will be exploited, and more vulnerable people will be quietly erased.

Kiano deserved care.
He deserved protection.
He deserved time.

Kiano

See Kiano’s mothers most recent post. Her anger is valid, her rage will know no bounds and thankfully this women won’t let the murder of her son go. Ellen killed the wrong person this time.

“With a broken heart, I am sharing that my baby boy Kiano passed away on December 30, 2025, after being euthanized.

Four years ago, here in Ontario, we were able to stop his euthanasia and get him some help. He was alive because people stepped in when he was vulnerable and not capable of making a final, irreversible decision.

Tragically, the Canadian system later allowed something very different to happen in Vancouver—where a doctor named DR ELLEN WIEBE AKA DR DEATH #2 approved his death based on mental illness. This approval occurred despite euthanasia for mental illness being banned until 2027. Somehow, DR DEATH #2 found a loophole in the system, one that now demands to be exposed so that no other parent has to endure this.

This is disgusting on every level. And I promise I will fight this tooth and nail for my son and other parents who too have children that suffer from mental illness.

As a mother and after watching and reading countless stories from other families, I can say this experience was not only devastating, but deeply disturbing. The actions of DR ELLEN WIEBE reveal a pattern of coldness and disregard for vulnerable human life that I can no longer stay silent about, just that scary smile shows her entitlement for taking peoples lives…..

No compassion.

No protection.

No effort to save a life, only to end it.

This is not healthcare.

This is a failure of ethics, accountability, and humanity.

No parent should ever have to bury their child because a system—and a doctor—chose death over care, help, or love.

In time, I intend to pursue accountability against DR ELLEN WIEBE and to stand alongside other families and associations who have been harmed by these same decisions. I know we are not alone.

Thank you to everyone who has supported our family, prayed for us, and stood by us through all these years of pain and hope. Please keep our family in your prayers during this unbearable time

Margaret & Joe

As a woman living with mental health challenges, I oppose euthanasia for mental illness.

This letter was sent to EPC by Liz Boersma, who has lived with mental health challenges.

If this law had been passed in 1978, I might not be alive today.

• Guide to supporting Bill C-218 (Link).
• No MAiD for Mental Illness (Link).

My Mental Health Challenges

I am a 74-year-old woman who has lived with a mental health condition called cyclothymia for nearly fifty years. Dark moods visit me when I least expect them, affecting my sleep and flooding me with shame, and negative, fearful and even suicidal thoughts. Feelings of condemnation and physical exhaustion weigh me down, making the simplest tasks feel like climbing a mountain. I also experienced postpartum depression with each of our three children. With the expert help I received, however, I learned to “ride the wave” until the dark feelings lifted.

Treatment and Support

Hundreds of hours of counseling from therapists and psychiatrists, along with medications, exercise, prayer, meditation, support groups (including Recovery lnc.—Dr. Abraham Low’s self-help system), nutritious food, reading, journaling, volunteering, and hobbies all contributed to my wellness, so I could stay as plugged into life as possible. 

Happily married for 48 years, my husband and I raised three children. My husband, the steady rock of the family, gave our children a sense of safety. All three completed university and have established homes and careers of their own, in insurance, education and church ministry, despite the instability and confusion of my condition. Our children have confronted me with the pain they endured. Despite the hardships, we had the advantages of a steady income, church community, and good neighbours. A beloved elderly church friend came over twice a week for four years, to help me through postpartum depression and beyond.

As a child I dreamed of becoming a teacher. A nervous breakdown during my first year of college robbed me of my confidence, so I worked for a while as a file clerk and receptionist. Thanks to an encouraging mentor, I was given a second chance. I completed my teacher training at S.F.U., hoping never to experience depression again. Unfortunately, a year and a half into my career, I had another breakdown. My husband and I were married at the end of the school year, and I left teaching. From then on part- time work was all I could manage. My jobs included secretarial, tutoring and child-care services.

To my delight, I was given a second chance at teaching, a do-able part-time position, when my children were teenagers. During that rewarding decade I also dealt with cancer and elderly parents. These stressors added to the challenges I already had. Even though I had much to learn about self-care, I was able to persevere and-contribute to the world around me.

Family of Origin

My mother, a survivor of the World War II occupation of the Netherlands, immigrated to Canada in 1957 with her husband and three young children. With no social safety net or counseling services, my mother coped the best she could. She struggled greatly with loneliness and anxiety. My father worked very long hours, leaving the bulk of the childcare to my mother. “I get up and I do,” she would say. With courage and perseverance, she raised five children who are all successful in their fields—the flower business, and the film and travel industries. Similarly, my paternal grandmother raised nine capable children despite living with food insecurity, chronic depression, and the PTSD she developed after World War II. The resilience of my mother and grandmother shaped my approach to mental illness, which is why recent legislative changes trouble me so deeply.

Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD)

The Government of Canada website on assisted suicide states:

“Important: On February 29, 2024, legislation to extend the temporary exclusion of eligibility to receive MAID in circumstances where a person’s sole underlying medical condition is a mental illness received royal assent and immediately came into effect. The eligibility date for persons suffering solely from a mental illness is now March 17, 2027.”

If Bill C-218 is not passed, I will qualify to be assessed for assisted suicide as of March of 2027. If this law had been passed in 1978, I might not be alive today. In my most vulnerable moment, dark waves of depression overwhelming my reason, I will be asked if I find the experience intolerable. I might be strongly tempted to say yes. Yet I have never been sorry that I held on through the suffering, which I would not wish on anyone, until the mood passed. If I said yes, I could die by the hand of a medical professional. It would be a yes borne out of desperation, believing I was worthless—a burden to everyone I loved. I am so glad I have never been asked.

Offended and Deeply Concerned

Along with many other members of the mental health and disability communities, I feel offended and deeply concerned. I feel offended by legislation that tells me and so many others, “We agree that you would be better off dead.”

A 2022 study published in the Lancet Psychiatry, found that comprehensive mental health care, the kind of care I was so fortunate to receive, “significantly reduces suicide risk among people with mood disorders.”

Sadly, after all the efforts made by me and medical professionals to treat my condition, I now live in a country that invests millions of dollars to “end lives where a persons’ only underlying condition is a mental illness,” a marked shift from previous requirements.

My Hope for Canada, My Beloved Adopted Country

You cannot have it both ways: build a great nation on one hand and bring in laws that allow medical professionals to kill patients on the other. Euthanasia has been practiced and tolerated as a social value in the Netherlands. My relatives tell me the results have been disastrous. Disabled people, including those with mental health conditions and dementia end up feeling increasingly disrespected.

With proper treatment, support and accommodation, many people with mental illness lead fulfilling lives and are valuable members of society. As a person living with mental health challenges, support Bill C-218 and oppose euthanasia for mental illness.

Tragic euthanasia death of young man with mental illness

The following message was sent out by Margaret Marsilla on her facebook about the tragic death of her son, Kiano by euthanasia by Dr Ellen Wiebe. Kiano was living with mental illness. Support Bill C-218. Say No to MAiD for Mental Illness (Link).

Please offer Margaret your condolences. Her facebook message is below

With a broken heart, I am sharing that my baby boy Kiano passed away on December 30, 2025, after being euthanized.

Four years ago, here in Ontario, we were able to stop his euthanasia and get him some help. He was alive because people stepped in when he was vulnerable and not capable of making a final, irreversible decision.

Tragically, the Canadian system later allowed something very different to happen in Vancouver—where a doctor named DR ELLEN WIEBE AKA DR DEATH #2 approved his death based on mental illness. This approval occurred despite euthanasia for mental illness being banned until 2027. Somehow, DR DEATH #2 found a loophole in the system, one that now demands to be exposed so that no other parent has to endure this.

This is disgusting on every level. And I promise I will fight this tooth and nail for my son and other parents who too have children that suffer from mental illness.

As a mother and after watching and reading countless stories from other families, I can say this experience was not only devastating, but deeply disturbing. The actions of DR ELLEN WIEBE reveal a pattern of coldness and disregard for vulnerable human life that I can no longer stay silent about, just that scary smile shows her entitlement for taking peoples lives…..

No compassion.

No protection.

No effort to save a life, only to end it.

This is not healthcare.

This is a failure of ethics, accountability, and humanity.

No parent should ever have to bury their child because a system—and a doctor—chose death over care, help, or love.

In time, I intend to pursue accountability against DR ELLEN WIEBE and to stand alongside other families and associations who have been harmed by these same decisions. I know we are not alone.

Right now, we are making arrangements for my son’s funeral this Saturday Jan 10. Details will be shared once finalized.

Thank you to everyone who has supported our family, prayed for us, and stood by us through all these years of pain and hope. Please keep our family in your prayers during this unbearable time

Margaret & Joe

Previous stories of Kiano seeking death by euthanasia (Articles Link).

Disabled Canadians should never feel compelled to die.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Dr Ramona Coelho

Dr Ramona Coelho has written another excellent article about Canada's experience with legalized euthanasia. Her most recent article, that was published by the Hub on January 5, 2026, explains how Canadians with disabilities are feeling pressured to die by euthanasia rather than providing them the support that they need to live. The data referred to in this article is based on the 2024 euthanasia report. Ramona writes:

At his appointment, a Canadian man with ALS, a neurodegenerative disease, was told by his specialist that he was the only patient left in the practice who had progressed this far; everyone else at his stage of the disease had chosen MAiD.

As a physician who writes extensively on the topic of Canadian euthanasia and assisted dying, called medical assistance in dying (MAiD), I hear stories like his often. They reveal a truth that Health Canada’s Sixth Annual Report on MAiD mentions but barely analyzes: MAiD deaths among people with ALS far exceed natural ALS deaths. Health Canada suggests this is because treatments are limited, but that explanation is insufficient.

People with ALS, like many disabled Canadians, have many health-care needs but face limited services, inadequate disability supports, and fears of burdening others. When their MAiD deaths outnumber natural deaths, it likely reflects a system unable or unwilling to provide what they need to live.

This pattern of system failure is evident in individual stories like Sathya Kovac’s, who had ALS. “It was not a genetic disease that took me out, it was a system.” The system failed to provide adequate home care but gave her MAiD instead. Her experience echoes warnings from the Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention: MAiD can create a perceived duty to die among those who feel unsupported.

Health Canada’s report relies primarily on data from MAiD assessors and providers, but it does not include the detailed case reviews such as conducted by Ontario’s MAiD Death Review Committee (MDRC), of which I am a member. Without this scrutiny, Canadians cannot be reassured that coercion, deprivation, or system failures are not contributing to deaths. While Ontario’s MDRC reports included recommendations to Health Canada, it has declined to implement them, despite previously producing national MAiD guidelines. This abdication leaves no one responsible for preventing harm.

The scale of the program continues to grow. MAiD now accounts for 5.1 percent of all Canadian deaths. In 2024 alone, 16,499 Canadians died by euthanasia. Since legalization through 2024, 76,475 Canadians have died under the program. Health Canada maintains MAiD shouldn’t count as a cause of death, yet on a proportional basis, it is Canada’s fourth leading cause of death.

Track 2 MAiD, for people whose natural death is not reasonably foreseeable, rose 17 percent in one year, with 62 percent of these cases occurring in Quebec. Of these recipients, 56.7 percent were women, younger than Track 1 recipients (for people whose death is reasonably foreseeable), and women in both tracks were more likely than men to live in lower-income neighbourhoods. These patterns should alarm anyone concerned about structural vulnerability.

The report also downplays poverty and unmet care needs as factors in choosing MAiD, relying on limited statistical evidence. Some findings are based on postal code data, which, as disability activist Gabrielle Peters notes, can misclassify lower-income residents who live in subsidized housing located within middle-income neighbourhoods. This likely understates the true burden of poverty among MAiD recipients. The analysis also minimizes the many patients who cite fear of being a burden, loneliness, or social isolation as drivers of their suffering, all of which represent a profound social failure.

Ramona has provided an excellent analysis of how Canada's euthanasia program is causing Canadians with Disabilities to feel compelled to be killed.

Wesley Smith - Criticism of organ donation article. My article stands.

This article was published by National Review online on December 31, 2025.

I republished Wesley Smith's article - Bioethicist: Let Surgeons Kill Patients During Organ Harvesting on December 29, 2025. This is Wesley Smith's response to criticism of his article.

Wesley Smith

By Wesley J. Smith

I welcome Lawrence Masek’s response to my criticism of his journal article. I am sorry he didn’t appreciate my perspective, but I take nothing back.

Let’s start with a matter of little importance. Masek claimed I said his article would curl your toes. No, I wrote that I cover articles published in the professional journals because “some” of them would. Whether your digits react to his effort thusly is a matter for you to decide.

As to the substance of his rebuttal, Masek claims at great length that the dead donor rule, which forbids killing for organs, would also prohibit many common interventions in clinical medicine as “suicide.” He writes:

Permitting lethal organ procurement would enable patients to commit suicide by donating their vital organs, but the same is true of permitting lethal palliation and the refusal of life support.

This is verifiably untrue. Dying from a side effect of an ethical medical treatment like palliation is not suicide any more than a patient dying during heart surgery is euthanasia.

As for refusing life support, that is beyond a reasonable doubt, not suicide.

• First, the patient might not die. Take out a vital organ and there can be no other outcome.
• When refusing life support, if the patient dies, it is from the illness or injury. In contrast, removing a vital organ causing death is not a natural demise.
• Finally, the issue of whether removing or refusing life support is suicide was decided in 1997 by the Supreme Court in Vacco v. Quill, in which the Justices ruled unanimously: “The distinction between letting a patient die and making that patient die is important, logical, rational, and well established.”

I can understand that as a professor at a Catholic university (which I didn’t think relevant), he would eschew a utilitarian label. But his article is certainly utilitarianish. The following is from his conclusion. You be the judge (my emphasis):

I conclude with an assertion that seems plausible but for which I do not have an argument: If an action would save someone’s life without killing anyone, then the burden of proof is on those who say that the action is wrong, not on those who say that the action is right. If this principle is correct, the burden of proof belongs to proponents of the DDR, specifically the version that prohibits procuring vital organs in a way that would not kill the donor.

Someone might adopt this version of the DDR as a way to avoid killing a donor, but I have argued that procuring a vital organ in a way that kills the donor is not always wrong. I hope my arguments will persuade proponents of the DDR to reconsider the rule or to defend it without relying on principles of ethics that are too strict or views of intentions that are too broad.

In the real world, you can’t procure vital organs without ultimately killing donors. Distorting definitions to allow the ethically impermissible to serve a greater good sure seems utilitarian to me.

That Masek doesn’t offer specific policy proposals is irrelevant. The implications of his argument are quite clear.

Frankly, if his intention was to toe the line of permissible ethical argumentation from a sanctity of life perspective or to somehow fortify the defense of the DDR, it didn’t work.

Join our EPC leaders meeting on Wednesday January 21.

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition is sponsoring an update and directions event (online and in-person) on Wednesday, January 21, 2026 from: 1 - 3 pm (Eastern Time) at the Ethics and Public Policy Center at: 1730 M Street NW Suite 910 Washington DC.

To attend in-person, email info@epcc.ca

To attend online register in advance: (Zoom registration Link)

Our focus:

Delaware, Illinois and New York legalized assisted suicide in 2025. Each state had an excellent team of people working to stop the assisted suicide bill. The assisted suicide lobby is emboldened, as no new state had legalized assisted suicide since New Mexico did in 2021.

A recent assisted suicide lobby online strategy meeting informed us that they plan to introduce assisted suicide legalization bills in 18 US states in 2026. How do we respond?

The Canadian government is scheduled to extend euthanasia to mental illness alone, starting on March 17, 2027. Canada's parliament is debating Bill C-218 that would prevent euthanasia for mental illness. How do we respond?

Aleš Primc

The event features:

Aleš Primc, the organizer of the successful referendum in Slovenia that overturned the assisted suicide law that was passed in the Slovenian parliament. The Slovenian referendum was successful against all projections. Primc will be in Washington DC to share his successful strategy.

Alexander Raikin

Alexander Raikin is a visiting fellow in Bioethics at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. Raikin has been published by multiple journals and news agencies and has become a key expert researcher on issues related to euthanasia and assisted suicide. Link to some of the articles by Alexander Raikin (Articles Link).

Alicia Duncan

Alicia Duncan, has become an incredible leader after first attempting to prevent her mother's death by euthanasia, and after becoming an advocate for others, families, friends to prevent euthanasia deaths. Alicia was recently featured in the film Life Worth Living.

Alex Schadenberg

Alex Schadenberg is the Executive Director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition and world-wide commentator and speaker on issues related to euthanasia and assisted suicide since 1998.

You can attend in-person or online.

The event is Wednesday, January 21, 2026 from 1 - 3 pm (Eastern Time)

To attend in-person, email info@epcc.ca
To participate online (Registration Link).

They said assisted suicide was for terminal cases. Now they're putting pressure on disabled people.

Alex Schadenberg was interviewed by Guiliano Guzzo for the Italian La Verità newspaper. The article was published on January 5, 2026. (google translated).

Alex Schadenberg

By Guiliano Guzzo

You can examine data, scientific studies, and reports—indeed, it's essential—to understand the phenomenon as a whole. But if you want to dig deeper, there's no better way to truly understand the scourge of assisted dying in Canada than, of course, to talk to a Canadian. Ideally, someone who also follows and monitors the issue regularly. For this very reason, La Verità contacted Alex Schadenberg, 57, an activist born in Woodstock, Ontario, and an expert on these issues as Executive Director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition.

Schadenberg, how do you describe the reality of assisted death in Canada?

"Euthanasia was legalized in Canada in 2016 with the promise of being strictly controlled and limited to terminally ill and suffering people. From the beginning, however, the law was poorly defined and began to expand immediately; This meant that assisted dying was given to people with a terminal condition but who were not likely to die anytime soon. The law was then expanded in 2021 to include people who are not terminally ill, but rather suffering from an undefined "serious and irreparable medical condition." The 2021 extension also included euthanasia for mental illness only, the implementation of which has now been postponed to March 2027.

What does all this mean in practice?

"There are euthanasia deaths of people with disabilities experiencing homelessness, poverty, or difficulty accessing medical care. Some Canadian doctors now specialize in euthanasia, which means they are involved in many deaths and tend to administer death more widely."

What are the next frontiers?

"The next frontiers of Canadian euthanasia law, as I mentioned earlier, are the implementation of euthanasia only for mental illnesses—scheduled for March 2027—the extension of the law to advance euthanasia requests, meaning doctors will be able to terminate an incapacitated person who had previously requested death while still capable of discernment, and to children defined as "mature minors."

What consequences is the spread of assisted dying in the country having for the sick and disabled?

"The point is that since March 2021, people with disabilities have the right to euthanasia based on a "grevious and irreparable medical condition," not defined by law. There are now many stories of people with disabilities being urged to request euthanasia, including Roger Foley and Heather Hancock, to name just two. Because many people with disabilities live in poverty or have difficulty finding affordable housing, they often already feel devalued. Add to this Canada's health crisis—with people with disabilities having great difficulty receiving the care they need—and it becomes clear how legalized euthanasia is threatening their lives.

Are people in Canada aware of the bitter fruits of the euthanasia mentality?

We note that some groups recognize the changes that have occurred in Canada since the legalization of euthanasia. For example, there is a group of veterans who publicly reacted when, instead of the treatment they needed, they were offered assisted death. Not only that, there are people with disabilities who are afraid of going to the hospital. During a hearing before the Canadian Parliament's Finance Committee, Krista Carr, CEO of Inclusion Canada, a national federation of people with disabilities, stated:

"People with disabilities today are very afraid, in many circumstances, to present themselves to the healthcare system with recurring problems, because assisted dying is often proposed to them as a solution to what is considered intolerable suffering, caused by issues such as poverty and the situations in which people with disabilities find themselves disproportionately compared to other Canadians."

What role do the media play in all of this?

"The majority of mainstream media outlets fully support euthanasia, despite the many articles questioning its implementation. It is very difficult for our views to be reflected in mainstream media in Canada."

In Italy, Parliament is debating the introduction of a law on assisted suicide following several rulings by the Constitutional Court. 

What would you say to Italian parliamentarians?

"My message to Italy is not to legalize euthanasia or assisted suicide. Almost all jurisdictions that have legalized assisted death, even if they did so with "good intentions," have subsequently expanded their laws. Laws are expanded by practice, meaning that a doctor performs the act in a controversial case and, when nothing happens, others follow suit. They also act as if they were forced to expand the law on the basis of discrimination. Once legalized, it is argued that the "restrictions" are actually discriminatory because they deny equal access to the law.

Even when examining American assisted suicide laws, we see this phenomenon.