Canadian paper alarmed by MAiD law

A leading Canadian newspaper has issued a strong editorial against the country's assisted suicide (MAiD) legislation.

National Post reflects that in less than a decade, MAiD "has expanded from a system limited solely to those with terminal illnesses, to one that is now used by people who lack adequate housing. And it will soon be available to those with mental illnesses, such as depression, bipolar disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder".

It adds: "After Quebec became the first Canadian jurisdiction to allow assisted suicide in 2014, we warned that, 'A great deal of research and reporting on those jurisdictions that permit euthanasia and/or assisted suicide suggest that the words ‘slippery slope’ are more than mere alarmism, as proponents of euthanasia tend to insist. In every state or country in which the practice has been normalized, it has also, to some degree, become banalized, with eligibility criteria increasingly relaxed."

"We sincerely wish we’d been wrong. We’re not against the idea of assisted death in some strict cases, but this country has evolved into one where the lives of those in pain are treated cavalierly, as if they don’t matter. Canada has not only adopted a nationwide MAID program, it has extended it to those who are not at imminent risk of dying and will soon see many more vulnerable Canadians become eligible."

CARE is campaigning against proposals to legalise doctor-assisted suicide in the UK. We are also concerned that legislation will inevitably be widened over time, and that no 'safeguards' will be sufficient to prevent abuse against the vulnerable.

CARE’s CEO, Ross Hendry has said:

“The prescription of lethal drugs is not a moral response to suffering and permitting it would undermine the safety, dignity, and equality of many groups. CARE stands with the many charities, medical associations, disability groups and others that oppose assisted suicide and euthanasia.

“Evidence shows that these practices place invisible pressure on sick and vulnerable people, that ‘safeguards’ are ineffective, and that laws are inevitably widened over time. We must not open the door to them in the UK.”