Friday, 29 May 2026

 

Canada Has Euthanized Almost 100,000 People

International  |  Brittany Campbell  |   May 27, 2026   |   12:42PM   |  Ottawa, Canada

Canada made a dark choice in 2016.

Instead of investing in more care, support, and hope for people who are suffering, the Canadian government legalized assisted suicide through a program called Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID). From the beginning, it was presented as a “last resort” for people with serious illnesses — treating death as the answer to suffering instead of offering true compassion, care, and support.

But nearly ten years later, the program has expanded far beyond that.

Follow LifeNews.com on Instagram for pro-life pictures and videos.

Today, people with disabilities, chronic illnesses, loneliness, and even mental health struggles are increasingly being offered death instead of real help and support.

And the numbers continue to rise:

  • Ontario’s latest MAID report showed a 7.2% increase in euthanasia deaths from 2024 to 2025.
  • Analysts estimate that about 17,650 Canadians died through euthanasia in 2025 alone.
  • Across Canada, MAID deaths rose another 6.9% between 2024 and 2025.
  • Since the program began, more than 94,000 Canadians have died through euthanasia.
  • At the current pace, Canada is expected to surpass 100,000 euthanasia deaths in 2026.

These numbers are alarming; assisted suicide is no longer rare in Canada. In fact, about 1 in every 20 deaths now happens through euthanasia.

Even more concerning, many of these patients were not close to dying. Some were living with disabilities, chronic illnesses, or emotional suffering.

Several heartbreaking stories have raised even more serious concerns about the program.

In one case, a woman was euthanized after her husband said he was exhausted from caring for her. In another case, a man struggling with loneliness and a medical condition chose euthanasia instead of receiving deeper support and care. Another woman reportedly left Canada to seek cancer treatment elsewhere after being told assisted suicide was her only option.

These stories point to a painful reality: many vulnerable people are choosing MAID not because death is their only option, but because they feel abandoned, unsupported, or unable to get the help they truly need.

Rather than strengthening support systems, Canada continues pushing to expand euthanasia eligibility even further. Leaders have worked for years to allow MAID for people whose only condition is mental illness.

That means someone suffering from severe depression, anxiety, or an eating disorder could potentially qualify for assisted suicide.

Medical Assistance in Dying is already a deeply troubling practice. Expanding it to people struggling with mental illness raises even more serious moral and medical concerns. Those facing depression, anxiety, or emotional suffering need compassion, treatment, and real support — not a system that presents death as the answer to their pain.

Canada’s experience should serve as a warning to the rest of the world.

True compassion does not end suffering by ending a life. Every human being has inherent dignity and value, regardless of age, disability, illness, or circumstance.

3 comments:

  1. Put that in your pipe and smoke it Detterling. This is what you want for England's green and pleasant land?

    ASSISTED SUICIDE
    IT SHALL NEVER BE
    NOT IN MERRIE ENGLAND
    LAND OF THE FREE

    ReplyDelete
  2. Gene: A voice in the wilderness; Thursday 10th August 2021

    New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has resigned after an inquiry found that he sexually harassed multiple women, prompting efforts to remove him.'

    Oh for God's sake! When is this sort of thing going to stop? Even if it turns out to be true his alleged misdemeanours are hardly crimes of the century are they? He was just being a man. I'm sure I have done worse myself. I have always been a bit tactile with the ladies. For example, in my teaching days if a new attractive member of staff joined us I would find a way to engage at a low level of sexual activity. My favourite ploy was to smoothie up on the way out of assembly or staff meeting and pat the young cutie on the backside in apparent avuncular fashion saying something like, "Settling in okay Sweetie?" Another ploy was to hug the young cutie to purportedly congratulate her on her, say, classroom wall display. Believe me no red-blooded middle-aged man gives a young gorgeous bit of stuff a hug with anything but lust his motivation. I have never had a complaint.

    Thursday, 26 December 2024

    NOW LET'S GET THIS CLEAR FOR ONCE AND FOR ALL...
    Firstly I have had a lot of Chianti and a lot of beer today and I am aware that one should not mix grape and grain. There may be typos and errors in what I write and I may not be expressing myself with my usual Churchillian clarity. But here goes.

    Detterling you have persistently accused me of groping young female teaching colleagues. This never happened. Yes, with my searing honesty, I have admitted that back in my teaching days I was wont to give a pat on the backside to shapely young female colleagues. But there was never any groping. As any red-blooded man will admit, a shapely derriere, particularly clad in figure-hugging slacks or leggings is extremely sexually provocative. And yes, I did take sexual pleasure from those avuncular-seeming pats on the backside. But the young ladies never knew this. As far as they were concerned this was just a middle-aged man being friendly. So no offence or misdemeanour took place. There was no groping. Got that?
    GENE

    "Sexual touching is a complex offence and the resulting legal process can be difficult to navigate. In order for sexual assault by touching to be proved in court, the following four criteria must be demonstrable:
    You have touched another person intentionally
    The touching of that person was sexual in nature
    The person touched did not consent to being touched by you
    You did not reasonably believe that the other person consented
    Section 79 (8) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 states that:
    Touching includes touching: (a) with any part of the body, (b) with anything else, (c) through anything.
    This means that skin-on-skin contact is not necessary to constitute sexual assault by touching; the part of the victim’s body may be fully clothed and the contact will still be the same under the law."Anonymous27 December 2024 at 07:30

    I GROPED WOMEN IN SCHOOL STAFFROOMS!!! Certainly not. Any backside-patting I did was out of the public eye - mostly in corridors or in classrooms when on one else was present.

    GENE
    Anonymous27 December 2024 at 08:11
    Bless you Gene for being more than usually stupid. Thank you for adding this relevant detail to your testimony.

    Not only did you commit the offence of sexual touching with the intention of obtaining sexual gratification, you took care to commit the offences unobserved - in empty corridors or classrooms. Apart from adding to the leering grubbiness of your behaviour, it proves that you knew that what you were doing was wrong - hence, your offences were committed with, as it were, malice aforethought.

    Oh, my word, what a memorandum I am going to be able to send to F---- Mc------ et al!

    Thank God for six pints of Carlsberg Special and a litre bottle of £3.99 Aldi El Taururina - it seems to have induced a mood of deranged arrogance in you whereby you can confess to anything and escape any consequences.

    You do realise what you have confessed to, don't you. Gene?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Ooh! Matron!

    ReplyDelete