Canadian doctors warn assisted dying approvals lack safeguards after woman’s case
Canadian psychiatry professors Gary Rodin and Madeline Li from the University of Toronto have raised serious concerns about their country's medical assistance in dying (MAID) system, warning that it approves cases too readily. In a high-profile example, an elderly woman was approved for assisted dying primarily because she had lost her ability to cook meals for her family—something she valued deeply as the family matriarch. The case exemplifies broader worries among Canada's healthcare professionals about insufficient safeguards in the approval process.
Canada's MAID programme began in 2016 with strict criteria requiring a "reasonably foreseeable" natural death, such as terminal cancer, but a 2021 law change removed this requirement, significantly expanding eligibility. The system now permits assisted dying for subjective suffering with a medical basis, making it among the world's most permissive. The woman in question was approved, but after receiving counselling she reconsidered her decision, eventually realising through therapy that her family valued her for who she was, not what she did for them—she ultimately chose not to proceed. Rodin and Li argue that current law does not require healthcare professionals to guide patients toward alternatives like counselling, and they cite growing numbers of approvals for reasons including loneliness and poverty.
- Top Canadian doctors warn MAID system lacks sufficient safeguards
- Woman approved for assisted dying over lost cooking ability reconsidered after counselling
- 2021 law change removed terminal illness requirement, greatly expanding eligibility
New here? Start with this
Canada's medical assistance in dying scheme began in 2016 as a restricted programme for those facing terminal illness with reasonably foreseeable death. A 2021 law change removed this requirement, making it one of the world's most permissive systems and allowing assisted dying for those experiencing subjective suffering with a medical basis.
Two psychiatry professors from the University of Toronto, Gary Rodin and Madeline Li, have raised concerns that the system lacks adequate safeguards. They point out that healthcare professionals are not required to guide patients towards alternatives like counselling, and cite cases approved for reasons including loneliness and poverty.
A high-profile example is an elderly woman approved for assisted dying largely because she could no longer cook meals for her family—something she valued deeply as the matriarch. However, after receiving counselling, she reconsidered and ultimately chose not to proceed, having realised through therapy that her family valued her for who she was rather than what she did for them. This case illustrates Rodin and Li's argument that many patients might reach different conclusions with proper support.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
The case demonstrates a critical gap in safeguards—a woman approved for MAID had suffered from lost ability to fulfil a cherished role, yet after receiving counselling she reconsidered and chose differently, suggesting initial assessment was premature. Psychiatrists argue that current law doesn't require healthcare professionals to guide patients toward alternatives like therapy, particularly where suffering stems from treatable psychological conditions, poverty, or isolation. Stronger safeguards requiring exploration of alternatives would honour both autonomy and healthcare's duty not to harm.
The case against
Expanding MAID to subjective suffering recognises that some people genuinely find their lives unbearable, and that respecting autonomy means trusting competent individuals to decide what constitutes a life worth living. The woman's case actually demonstrates the system working—she was approved yet retained freedom to reconsider and ultimately declined, showing safeguards operate at the point of voluntary choice. Mandating alternatives risks paternalistic gatekeeping that disproportionately burdens disabled people, the elderly, and those in poverty, who are already often denied decision-making authority over their own lives.
Read the full article at the source →
Originally published by Daily Mail as “Canada approved woman’s euthanasia request because she could no longer cook for her family, as country’s leading doctors warn system is far too permissive”.