Hi folks, I’ve so far just followed this subject with interest - for the record I’m a firm believer in “where there’s life there’s hope” on the basis that today’s pain killing drugs should be sufficient to deal with any possible pain. The following article confirms my view that you can’t trust anyone who is advising victims death over life - everyone is of course entitled to their opinion but my experience with the UK medical profession and politicians passing laws on any health issue is that they cannot be trusted. The medical profession is already guilty of overuse of DNR to push people onto the death list.
The Canary article looked over-the-target to me, I would have wanted to see the reply given to the MP who raised the question.
He is exactly correct to include mention of Courts Of Protection, a shabby little antechamber of “wellbeing” arguments. It’s not called health as such in polite circles.
@LocalYokel : your story resonates strongly. Death Pathways, to sweep away the old and/or unhypnotised.
EDITED: to include Starmer’s hilarious non-answer, from Hansard
I am grateful to the hon. Member for raising that, and I will look at the particular example he has raised. As he will know, we are rolling out hubs. Some of those are already in place and there are more to come, and I will happily update him on where they are likely to be.
Following the work of the eating disorders all-party group, I was horrified to hear that 19-year-old Lilly Cliff, who suffers from anorexia, has been placed on an end-of-life care pathway, after Rotherham, Doncaster and South Humber NHS foundation trust obtained a Court of Protection ruling to withdraw her treatment. The decision directly contradicts guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, and the statement from the Minister for Care in September that eating disorders are not a terminal illness. Will the Prime Minister urgently review that case to ensure that Lilly and her family receive the support they need, and that Lilly is given every possible chance to recover and live, and remind all integrated care boards, the NHS and hospitals, that suffering from an eating disorder is not a terminal illness?
I would agree that there is more on bad-looking individual cases (which always make tempting headlines) than on ‘advancing policy’.
But I also read that In Ca, mental ill health had been added to the list of conditions for which MAID would be allowed, and that this has been given a postponement and this is planned to take effect until 2027.
This would seem to represent a wish to expand…?
The trouble is, ‘reputable’ sources who agree with the right to decide in principle, may not want to report on excesses to avoid harming the policy. Perhaps you are in that category yourself, Jackie!?
But does that not kind of suggest that a policy with excesses and permitting the embediment of political and financial vested interests, could be the inevitable end result!?
Simply because the excesses are not publicised or discussed using ‘sources’ as an excuse.
ED (still rooted on principle on both sides )
Some ‘reputable’ stories?
The Slippery Slope
MAiD was first legalized in 2016 for Canadians whose death was “reasonably foreseeable.” At the time, a person had to have a grievous and irremediable medical condition which caused enduring physical or psychological suffering to qualify for euthanasia. Think of someone with a terminal cancer prognosis.
In 2021, just five years after legalization, MAiD was expanded to include those whose “death is not reasonably foreseeable.” With this expansion, people with disabilities or non-terminal illnesses could choose to have a doctor end their lives. Think of someone who is wheelchair bound.
The next expansion has already been passed into law, but implementation has been delayed until March 17, 2027. This would allow Canadians suffering solely from a mental illness to be eligible for euthanasia. Think of someone suffering from depression.
… https://www.dordt.edu/in-all-things/the-cautionary-tale-of-euthanasia-in-canada
(No terminal illness required)
25/3/25 Calgary judge rules 27-year-old can go ahead with MAID death despite father’s concerns
8/1/25 Canada’s Euthanasia Experiment: Army Veteran Offered Suicide Instead of Stair Lift
Christine Gauthier, a physically impaired army veteran and former Paralympic athlete, testified before the Canadian Parliament in late November 2024. The paraplegic woman had applied for funding to install a stair lift. Instead, she received a proposal for “assisted suicide” from the Department of Veterans Affairs under Justin Trudeau’s left-wing government.
…
Next MAID Stop Europe?
WEF-affiliated Trudeau, whose policies made these euthanasia laws possible, is now backpedaling and describes the incidents as unacceptable. According to news from Canada, he faces defeat in the January election, as not only the opposition but also his own party has lost patience with the globalist clown.The British Daily Mail reports that over 10,000 people in Canada were euthanized last year. From 2025, the suicide law will be further expanded, allowing people with mental illnesses to be state-assisted in self-termination.
Dear Friends,
My name is Roger Foley. I live with a rare, progressive neurological disease called Spinocerebellar Ataxia Type 14 (SCA14) along with other severe disabilities. I’m currently a patient ‘trapped’ inside London Victoria hospital in Ontario because the self-directed home care I need has been cruelly withheld by public health authorities.
Hospital staff have repeatedly offered and pressured me to consider Canada’s infamous assisted suicide program Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) while simultaneously obstructing the very services and supports I need to live safely. Despite my condition, I have fought tirelessly for my rights, dignity, and the ability to return to the community.
On May 7, 2025, the hospital removed the specialized lighting accommodations that I had relied on for years. These accommodations were medically necessary due to my severe neurological photosensitivity and visual disability. To safely swallow liquids or pureed foods, I must be lifted with a mechanical sling and seated in a solid chair, where I can achieve more than a 90-degree forward neck bend to perform an effortful swallow technique with a chin tuck. This is essential to prevent choking, aspiration, and pneumonia. Without the lighting accommodations, I cannot safely eat, take oral medications, or even drink water. The hospital’s fluorescent and halogen lighting emits high-intensity blue wavelengths that cause intense eye pain and injury. My eyes require non-direct, low-intensity amber-wavelength lighting—the exact conditions provided by the longstanding accommodations that were removed.
Since then, I have also been starved of basic care: placed on IV fluids, subjected to ongoing dehydration and malnutrition, repeatedly berated and harassed by staff, violently woken under the guise of so-called “checks,” and assaulted with other abusive tactics.
…
Interesting coverage of this on UK Column News of 19th. Of particular interest, is the official figure how many Canada expects to “euthanise” and the money they will save. I don’t remember the figures but they were really shocking, or if you are the chancellor, mana from heaven.
One of Sandy um Adams’ better recent contributions on UKC News as I recall. Can’t be arsed to go through the news again but I seem to recall that she quoted an official Canadian source boasting that MAID would save Canada something over a trillion dollars over a period of time by disposing of over 14 million Canadians, mostly elderly but plenty of disabled etc.
Whatever the truth/provenance of SA’s report, come on everyone, this is the good old eugenics agenda being rolled out in plain sight. ‘We’ have succeeded in ‘our’ aim to make the unthinkable thinkable again* after that naughty Hitler gave ‘us’ a bad name.
How long before the mandates?
** Isn’t that what Julian Huxley publicly pined for when he launched UNESCO?*
“The proposed expansion of MAiD is projected to generate savings up to CAD $1.273 trillion over the next two decades.”
Just a kind of projection, you know.
I’ve seen a few mentions of people whose care/benefits cost more than their economic value
Got to spell it out to the people, so they know what it isn’t, and can see that what they are definitely NOT planning is kind of justified!
But if they save a trillion without meaning to, so much the better, right?
)
