‘Morally Superior’ Canucks Murdered Old Woman Who Wanted To Die With Dignity
It's a little hard to buy their moral superiority when they're quietly killing their own citizens
When Americans stop to notice what Canada has to say at all, it tends to be long on poorly-sourced moralizing finger-wagging and short on specifics.
Canadian Pravda (sorry, the government-run Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) ran a segment on air something-something Trump Nazi kidnapping and killing his own citizens. Canadians also got in a flap about Greenland, about five minutes before the matter was settled, and their Prime Minister went to China bragging about the New World Order he was going to usher in… including new trade deals with China, trade deals he has since denied having struck.
They love to brag about their heath care being ‘free’, while glossing over the fact that slightly more than 5% of Canada’s 326779 deaths in 2024 were willful acts of government intervention. (Official number that, via ‘MAiD’, died by the government’s own hand in 2024: 16,499.) The wait times they see while waiting for advanced diagnosis and treatment in hospitals, but not in, say, veterinarian clinics or dentists where the customer pays, is the direct result of rationing of access to those services.
Critics of the program were laughed off when concerns were raised that the government would eventually get to the point where either the patient is actively invited, or pressured to off themselves for reasons with no connection to end-of-life considerations — which has already been documented. But that the ‘you are a burden’ argument would be used by either the government or family members to pressure them into ending their life.
We can now add homicide to the list of objections, but even this was only a matter of time.
The Daily Mail detailed an incident of a woman in her 80s. She had complications with a coronary bypass, and was sent home to receive the palliative care she had agreed to. Her elderly husband was suffering caregiver burnout and was unable to support her even with in some degree of in-home nursing support. Her condition worsened and care became increasingly difficult.
‘Mrs. B’ as she was identified in the story, expressed a desire for MAiD to her family, who called on the same day for an assessor. She regretted the initial decision, citing, among her reasons, her religious objections, withdrawing her initial request and asking to be cared for in the hospital during her final days. Palliative care doctor, citing caregiver burnout pushed to have her admitted. She was not admitted.
Husband contacted MAiD again asking for an urgent assessment. One assessor gave the green light. The second opinion (a required step) had reservations.
Their request to meet Mrs B the next day was declined by the MAiD provider as ‘the clinical circumstances necessitated an urgent provision’.
‘This MAiD practitioner expressed concerns regarding the necessity for “urgency” and shared belief for the need for more comprehensive evaluation, the seemingly drastic change in perspective of end-of-life goals, and the possibility of coercion or undue influence (i.e., due to caregiver burnout),’ the report explained.
Instead, a third assessor was sent who agreed with the second one, and Mrs B was euthanized that evening.
The Canadian taxpayer was unable to give Mrs. B a dignified death. But they were able to throw her into the assembly line with the others.
Congrats, Canada. Your moral superiority is exactly that of Ebenezer Scrooge when he said, ‘if they would rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population.’