Canada Won’t fix MAiD until it Restores the Value of Human Life

Blocking MAiD for mental illness is the right decision, but it won’t last unless Canada rebuilds a culture that values every human life 

A special parliamentary committee has recommended that the federal government “indefinitely exclude” people whose sole underlying condition is mental illness from applying for medical assistance in dying (MAiD). 

While that recommendation deserves support, legislative changes alone cannot rebuild society’s foundational commitment to life’s inherent value. 

The most urgent priority facing Canadian society is restoring an ethical belief in the primacy of life, beginning with families and extending through educational institutions. This cultural transformation requires deliberate effort in homes where parents model life-affirming values and in schools where curricula emphasize human dignity, resilience and hope. 

Legalizing euthanasia, even when disguised with the euphemism “medical assistance in dying”, represents a dramatic civilizational departure from humanity’s universal prohibition against suicide. Western societies have moved from fixed standards that prioritized life to variable standards emphasizing personal autonomy. 

The solution begins in families, where children must learn that every human life possesses transcendent value regardless of circumstances. Parents must actively teach their children to view challenges as opportunities for growth rather than reasons for despair. Schools must reinforce these messages through curricula that celebrate human resilience and emphasize each person’s potential contribution to society. 

Educational institutions should integrate life-affirming ethics across all subjects, from literature classes that explore themes of hope and redemption to science courses that examine human biological resilience and history lessons that demonstrate humanity’s capacity to overcome challenges. Students need exposure to individuals who have survived mental health crises. 

When we lose our transcendent anchor for life’s value, we assume the power to make life-and-death decisions based on subjective criteria. Creating an active euthanasia regime in Canada has inevitably invited abuse and expanded criteria that justify more killing. Now we find ourselves extending active euthanasia to the mentally ill, ignoring that many such patients lack the mental competence to make such consequential decisions. 

Ancient medical ethics have always stressed physicians’ positive obligation to “do no harm.” Doctors serve as healers and life protectors, not agents facilitating death. This principle derives from universal recognition of life’s inherent value—a recognition that must be cultivated from earliest childhood. 

Jewish tradition teaches that seven universal moral principles, known as Noahide Ethics, apply to all humanity. These principles stress life preservation and prohibit euthanasia. Transmitting them requires intentional cultural work within families and schools that actively counters society’s growing acceptance of death as a solution to suffering. 

Jewish tradition exemplifies this approach to life’s sanctity while maintaining core commitments to life preservation. When diseases prove incurable and medical interventions would only prolong unbearable suffering, Jewish tradition supports rejecting such treatment. This reflects the distinction between actively causing death and allowing natural death when extraordinary measures would provide no meaningful benefit. 

Canada’s current MAiD system has demonstrated the consequences of abandoning foundational principles. Since Parliament legalized MAiD in 2016, successive legislative changes have steadily broadened MAiD eligibility, including removing the requirement that a person’s natural death be reasonably foreseeable for some applicants. 

What began as assistance for those facing imminent death has expanded to include chronic conditions, disabilities and now mental illness. This expansion validates concerns that once society accepts the premise that some lives aren’t worth living, the criteria inevitably broaden. 

The parliamentary committee’s recommendation provides an opportunity to reverse this trajectory by recognizing that mental illness alone should never justify medical assistance in dying. Mental health conditions, unlike terminal illnesses, often improve with proper treatment, support and time. 

Yet even if Parliament accepts that recommendation, cultural renewal remains essential. Families must teach children that mental illness is a treatable condition requiring support while schools must provide mental health education that emphasizes recovery and the temporary nature of mental health crises. 

Health care professionals require retraining that prioritizes life-preserving interventions. Medical schools must reinforce the principle that physicians exist to preserve life, treat illness and provide comfort, not intentionally end life. 

Religious and community institutions must actively teach that human life possesses transcendent value that cannot be diminished by suffering, disability or mental illness. Community organizations should create support networks that demonstrate society’s commitment to helping individuals through difficult periods. 

The media bears responsibility for promoting narratives that emphasize recovery and hope rather than presenting death as a solution to suffering. Public discourse should consistently reinforce that temporary suffering need not define permanent outcomes. 

Canada faces a fundamental decision. We can continue expanding criteria for medically assisted death, gradually eroding society’s commitment to life preservation. Alternatively, we can recognize that preserving life requires a comprehensive cultural commitment beginning in families and extending through all social institutions. 

Only by returning to universal principles that recognize life’s inherent dignity while providing compassionate care for those who suffer can Canada preserve its moral foundation and protect vulnerable individuals from a health care system that has lost its ethical moorings. The decision facing our society requires choosing life over convenience, hope over despair and commitment over abandonment, beginning with how we raise and educate the next generation. 

By Joseph Quesnel 

Joseph Quesnel is the founding director of the Canadian Foundation for Universal Ethics Education. A seasoned journalist and policy analyst with over 15 years of experience, he has provided expert testimony to both the Senate and the House of Commons on public policy. He holds a degree in political science and history from McGill University and a Master of Journalism from Carleton University. 

The views, opinions, and positions expressed by our columnists and contributors are solely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of our publication. 

Troy Media 

TAN 

Book