Oh Canada!  Kill them in the womb, kill them fully-formed at 9 months, if they don’t measure up to our exacting expectations.  And now tell them to let you kill them, for just about any reason, to escape any down moments in their young lives.

What will the God of all creation say to you on the Judgment Day for the way you murdered your offspring?


Excerpts from Sharon Kirkey, National Post, Dec. 15/15

Terminally ill children as young as 12 should be given the option of physician-assisted death, an expert panel advising the provinces says in a report expected to shift the euthanasia debate into a whole new realm.

The nine-member committee argues there should be no “arbitrary age limits” for assisted death, and that eligibility should be based on maturity and mental competence, not age.

However, Taylor, a physician assistant, said, theoretically, a 12-year-old could have the maturity to make such life-and-death decisions. “I could definitely see 12-year-olds having that capacity, and I could see 16-year-olds not have that capacity.” Decisions would have to be made on an individual basis, she said.

In its landmark and unanimous decision last February known as Carter vs. Canada, the Supreme Court of Canada granted mentally competent adults suffering from a “grievous and irremediable” condition the right to a doctor-assisted death. It gave the federal government a year to draft a law.

But the advisory panel, struck to assist the provinces and territories as they grapple with legalized doctor-hastened death, argues in its report released Monday that the court didn’t define “adult.” In most provinces, the age of majority is 18.

The basis for the panel’s argument is the “mature minor” doctrine, which holds that minors can make their own medical decisions — including a decision to discontinue life support — if they understand the nature of their illness and the repercussions of their decisions.

“The idea of an arbitrary age limit, and people suffering intolerably and waiting days, weeks or months to die because they haven’t reached that limit, seems morally unacceptable,” he said.

There’s no age restriction to come off a respirator or ventilator, he said, or to refuse an antibiotic or stop kidney dialysis. “End-of-life decisions are being made every day in Canada by mature minors,” Schafer said. “Doctors make decisions about competence and capacity all the time.

“Setting an arbitrary age limit seems cruel and unfair.”

Schafer said parents couldn’t make the decisions for mature minors; they would have to make the decisions for themselves.

The advisory panel spent three months consulting experts and organizations across Canada. Its final report lists 43 recommendations, from criteria to qualify for a lethal injection or doctor-prescribed drug overdose, to the obligation of doctors who object on moral or religious grounds to refer the patient to another doctor or a third body that can arrange assisted death for them.


“It seemed to us wrong and against the spirit of the Supreme Court ruling that you would have to be competent at the very instant,” Schafer said.

The group also offered a definition of “grievous and irremediable,” recommending it be defined as any “very severe” or serious illness that can’t be alleviated by any means acceptable to the person suffering.

Taylor and other panel members rejected suggestions that this means “anything goes.”

The Supreme Court, in Carter vs. Canada, “already said it didn’t have to be a terminal illness; they already said the suffering could be psychological (and) they already said it could be a disability,” she said.

“We heard form stakeholders on both sides who agreed with each other that there shouldn’t be a list of conditions set out — ‘don’t list cancer and don’t list Lou Gehrig’s disease’ — because that list will always change.”What is incurable today might become curable tomorrow, she said. “Everybody said don’t come up with a list, it wouldn’t be workable.”

National Post