Select Page

UK Parliament Committee hears Canada euthanasia policy is “a warning sign to the world”

The “radical” and “rapidly expanding” euthanasia practices of Canada and the Netherlands were under scrutiny on Tuesday morning during the third oral evidence session of the UK Health and Social Care Select Committee’s (HSCSC) inquiry into assisted suicide. MPs heard testimony from six experts concerning euthanasia laws in Canada, the Netherlands and Belgium, jurisdictions where euthanasia is permitted for those who are not terminally ill.

Canada a “warning sign”

Prof Trudo Lemmens of the Faculty of Law at the University of Toronto explained how Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) in Canada is “accessible largely on demand in very broad circumstances” and is “the most rapidly expanding system in the world”. Speaking in follow up to Prof Lemmens’ comments, Steve Brine MP, the Committee’s Chair, put it to Scott Kim, professor of psychiatry at the University of Michigan, that Canada is “a warning sign to the rest of the world”. Agreeing with the assertion, Dr Kim labelled MAID in Canada as the “most radically medicalised system of providing assisted dying”, describing “the combination of very open eligibility that is implemented through a well-networked framework of medicalisation” as “sobering”.

Dr Kim further described the evolution of Canada’s MAID programme as “a very dangerous situation in my view” since, unlike in other jurisdictions, seeking an assisted death “does not have to be a last resort option in Canada”. Even when Canada’s MAID laws were limited to those with a terminal illness (the criteria some advocates of assisted suicide in the UK seek), Dr Kim warned that “the reasonably foreseeable death criterion has always been interpreted so broadly that it really includes many cases that many people would not see as terminal illness”. 

In March 2021, the ‘reasonable foreseeability’ of death criterion was removed from MAID laws. As a result, Dr Kim remarked that “it’s indisputable that a person with a chronic illness … would [qualify] for MAID” now.

Mental illness

However, Canada’s MAID provisions are soon likely to be expanded further. From March 2024, persons whose “sole underlying medical condition is a mental illness” are set to become eligible for MAID. This extension of MAID had previously been due to come into effect this year but has been delayed by a year. Criticising the lack of protections offered in the proposals, Dr Kim explained “I believe one of the reasons why … mental illness MAID has been delayed is because the committee that was charged with coming up with safeguards published a report which really didn’t have any safeguards”. Addressing claims that MAID for people with mental illness will be uncommon, Dr Kim warned “I think to say that [MAID for mental illness] is going to be rare is not a factual statement”.

Prof Lemmens also disputed the assertion that Canada’s government was forced by a ruling of its Supreme Court to expand MAID to people with mental illness, pointing out that the “Supreme Court … never ruled on circumstances related to mental illness and it explicitly stated in its reasons that it was not looking at cases … of mental illness”.

Members of the HSCSC were clearly concerned by the evidence presented from Canada. James Morris MP asked “Doesn’t this just lead potentially to a slippery slope where we’re opening up assisted dying to a whole range of potential mental health conditions … an incurable mental health condition is itself a pretty contested definition … the interpretation and the definitions here are pretty loose and isn’t that quite dangerous?”

‘Physician shopping’

Although Canada allows medics to refuse to participate in MAID, Prof Lemmens warned of “a duty of effective referral” that “risk[s] having a couple of very, let’s say flexible, physicians … who may attract a large majority of cases. This is a phenomenon of ‘physician shopping’.”

Prof Lemmens, questioning the quality of palliative care and disability support provision in his country, later told the inquiry how it is “often easier … to have access to MAID than to have access to… very important disability support”. 

Dr Kim further outlined the dangers of the Canadian system for vulnerable people arguing that in introducing a system like MAID, “you create a new set of vulnerabilities” relating to “[those] we traditionally think as a society we should connect with, engage with and support”. The law as it stands is such that he warned “I don’t believe there are safeguards that can fix the problem”.

In closing, Dr Kim explained that despite the name ‘Medical Assistance In Dying’, “less than 1 in 1000” MAID deaths in Canada were cases of assisted suicide, with almost all being euthanasia at the hands of a physician. He summarised Canadian practice as “a very aggressive medical delivery system of euthanasia”.

The Netherlands and Belgium

Earlier in the morning, the HSCSC had heard evidence from experts concerning euthanasia practice in the Netherlands and Belgium.

In response to attempts by Paul Blomfield MP to make a parallel between “palliative sedation” in end-of-life care, such as that practised in the UK, and euthanasia, Irene Tuffrey-Wijne,

Professor of Intellectual Disability and Palliative Care at Kingston University, explained that “the intention of palliative care is to … relieve suffering; the intention is not to bring about death”, which is “a fundamental difference in principle” from euthanasia.

Perhaps the most shocking moment of the hearing came when Prof Tuffrey-Wijne confirmed to the Committee that tinnitus is a permitted reason for assisted suicide in the Netherlands and had been approved as a basis for euthanasia.

Concerns over people with disabilities

Tinnitus was not the only area of concern with regard to Dutch practice that was highlighted to the inquiry. Prof Tuffrey-Wijne, speaking about her area of expertise, explained in answer to a question from Chris Green MP that “people with disabilities in autism find it more difficult to really weigh up information and to consider alternatives”. She explained how such difficulties had led vulnerable people to choose euthanasia.

Prof Tuffrey-Wijne warned more broadly about how societal attitudes meant people with disabilities were particularly vulnerable to euthanasia provisions. She noted how “there is an underlying unconscious bias, I think, from society that disability and dependence is difficult to live with … the implicit message that maybe death is preferable to life in your situation.”

Child Euthanasia

In the Netherlands, there were 8,720 cases of euthanasia in 2022, accounting for 5.1% of all deaths in the country. And yet, the government has recently announced plans to follow Belgium in permitting euthanasia for children of all ages.

At present, children over the age of 12 and infants up to one year old are eligible for euthanasia in the Netherlands. One of the most remarkable moments of Tuesday’s hearing was when Caroline Johnson MP, herself a paediatrician, asked about the ‘Groningen Protocol’, which regulates the euthanasia of infants in the country. In reply, Professor Rutger Jan van der Gaag, former President of the Royal Dutch Medical Association, incorrectly claimed the protocol only relates to the withdrawal of ventilation from babies who would otherwise die, saying “there’s no active termination.” In reality, the Protocol allows for non-terminally ill babies with conditions such as spina bifida to be euthanised.

Eduard Verhagen, the Protocol’s author, recently co-published a paper explaining “the goal of the Protocol is to allow parents and doctors to end the life of infants in cases where the infant is suffering unbearably with no hope for improvement, but is neither actively dying nor dependent on medical technology (e.g. a ventilator) for life. Under the Protocol, physicians may administer substances to the infant to rapidly and painlessly end the infant’s life when specific criteria are met”. Many of the assumptions behind the Protocol have been widely criticised.

“We must continue to resist pressure to loosen the law”

Right To Life UK spokesperson Catherine Robinson said “the radical and expanding nature of euthanasia practices in Canada and the Netherlands is indeed a ‘warning to the world’. Both jurisdictions remind us that safeguards are soon eroded when euthanasia is permitted and people with mental illness, intellectual disabilities and children become particularly vulnerable. It is good that the HSCSC was able to hear evidence from these countries and we must continue to resist pressure to loosen the law in the UK”.

URGENT
APPEAL
to protect vulnerable lives

Help stop three major anti-life threats.

Help fight the next phase of our battles against major assisted suicide and abortion up to birth threats.

Dear reader,

We are facing two major threats in the Lords - an extreme assisted suicide Bill and an abortion up to birth amendment.

THE GOOD NEWS - OUR STRATEGY IS WORKING

At Second Reading of the Leadbeater assisted suicide Bill in the House of Lords, a record number of Peers spoke, and of those who took a position, around two-thirds opposed the assisted suicide Bill. That is more than double the number who supported it.

Our side also secured a significant win, with the establishment of a dedicated Lords Select Committee to further scrutinise the Bill’s proposals – and Committee Stage has been delayed until it reports.

This momentum has been built by tens of thousands of people like you. Thanks to your hard work, Peers are receiving a very large number of emails and letters by post, making the case against the Bill. 

Thanks to your support, we have been able to mount a major campaign in Parliament, in the media and online – alongside your own efforts – to keep us on course for our goal: that this dangerous Bill never becomes law.

BUT MORE CHALLENGES LIE AHEAD

We cannot become complacent. Well-funded groups - Dignity in Dying, My Death My Decision and Humanists UK - have poured millions into pushing assisted suicide. They can see support is slipping and will fight hard to reverse that.

This is not the only fight we are facing in the House of Lords.

At the same time, the Antoniazzi abortion up to birth amendment, which passed in the House of Commons in June, is moving through the House of Lords as part of the Crime and Policing Bill.

Second Reading will take place in a matter of weeks. It will then go on to Committee and Report Stages, where we will be up against the UK’s largest abortion providers – BPAS and MSI Reproductive Choices (formerly Marie Stopes) – who are expected to lobby for even more extreme changes to our abortion laws.

If the Antoniazzi amendment becomes law, it would no longer be illegal for women to perform their own abortions for any reason – including sex-selective purposes – at any point up to and during birth.

Thousands of vulnerable lives - at the beginning and the end of life - depend on what happens next. We must do everything in our power to stop these radical proposals.

WE NEED YOUR HELP

Our campaign against the Leadbeater Bill in the House of Lords is working, but the work we have already done has significantly stretched our limited resources.

We are now stepping up our efforts against the assisted suicide Bill while launching a major push to stop the abortion up to birth amendment in the Lords. 

To fight effectively on both fronts, we aim to raise £183,750 by midnight this Sunday (5 October 2025).

Every donation, large or small, will help protect lives, and UK taxpayers can add 25p to every £1 through Gift Aid at no extra cost.

Will you donate now to help protect vulnerable lives from these two major threats?

URGENT
APPEAL
to protect vulnerable lives

Help stop three major anti-life threats.

Help fight the next phase of our battles against major assisted suicide and abortion up to birth threats.