Medical Assistance in Dying Committee on April 21st, 2026

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Sturgeon River, AB]

Okay.

Now, I want to follow up on—

[Dr. John Maher]

However, she had purchased her ticket and was ready to travel, and her parents were going out of their minds.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Sturgeon River, AB]

You indicated that you are aware of and you have reported homicides that were carried out under the guise of MAID. Can you elaborate on that?

[Dr. John Maher]

I haven't approached the police. I have dealt with one college in particular.

I also sought the assistance of my professional association's lawyer, and I was surprised to discover that the Canadian Medical Protective Association now has four lawyers whose only work is to deal with MAID issues that doctors keep bringing up for them. The restrictions on what we can do, given the limits of confidentiality, are extreme. The best I could do was to go to a college.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Sturgeon River, AB]

When you went to the college, what happened?

[Dr. John Maher]

As I said previously, I was told that, until the patient is dead, there can be no malpractice. The clear tone of the conversation was, “We're not going to do anything about MAID because the legislation is so broad that it really is a matter of individual clinical judgment whether or not someone thinks that the criteria are satisfied.” Because it's a subjective standard, there is no objective standard. If someone says they've suffered enough, that's enough.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Sturgeon River, AB]

We've heard in this committee documented cases of abuse under the MAID regime that have been cavalierly dismissed as anecdotal. What do you say in response to that?

[Dr. John Maher]

I'm not talking about anecdotal experiences myself. These are direct experiences with MAID impacting my patients and my teams. It's not even legal for mental illness yet, and it's already had a profound disruption in terms of undermining our efforts to maintain hope and to provide treatment for recovery. It gives people the message that we've given up.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Sturgeon River, AB]

Can psychiatrists accurately distinguish between suicidality and a rational request for MAID, yes or no?

[Dr. John Maher]

No. MAID is suicide. It's taking steps to arrange your own death. It's an artificial distinction.

[The Joint Chair, Liberal, Marcus Powlowski]

Thank you, Dr. Maher.

Next is Ms. Koutrakis for three minutes.

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to our witnesses for appearing before us this evening. My question is for Dr. Lyon.

My understanding is that you also do research internationally. From your research on how assisted dying has developed across different countries, could you walk us through a specific example where eligibility expanded over time? What drove that change in practice?

[Dr. Christopher Lyon]

I don't do research across jurisdictions on MAID. I focus mostly on Canada.

There's been some work in the Netherlands, for example, and in Belgium. I think people like Trudo Lemmens or Scott Kim might be better placed to answer questions about how those systems evolved.

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

In your research in Canada, have you heard any professionals talk about safeguards that may have looked strong on paper but didn't potentially do what they were intended to do when put into practice?

[Dr. Christopher Lyon]

I think quite a few of them have come before this committee.

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Dr. Maher, do you have something to add to that? In your experience and your practice, what have you seen through your patients, research or data?

[Dr. John Maher]

Is that in terms of expansion to other countries?

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Yes.

[Dr. John Maher]

I've been involved in many conversations with people in other countries looking at these issues. If you're asking why it is expanding, these are some of the more interesting questions: Why doesn't it happen in any of the Asian countries because of the values and perspective they have there? Why was it recently overturned in Slovenia? Why did the Scottish Parliament object? Why have we seen the chaos in the British discussions over this issue?

It's a values question. Fundamentally, you either support suicide prevention and helping your citizens live, heal and recover, or you don't.

I'm sorry. I have little more to offer than that.

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

I was touched personally by someone's story about their parent going blind and deaf and requesting.... This had a huge impact on their mental illness. They had asked for MAID, and it was rejected. As a result, this person took matters into their own hands, and they jumped off a balcony.

Would you agree that every Canadian deserves a dignified death?

[Dr. John Maher]

Yes, but we have different definitions of dignity. The greatest dignity is to have your autonomy restored and be able to continue to live.

The argument that somehow a messy death justifies supporting suicide misses the point completely. What it justifies is treatment to prevent getting to a messy death or MAID in the first place.

[The Joint Chair, Liberal, Marcus Powlowski]

Thank you, Dr. Maher.

Mr. Thériault, you have the floor for two minutes.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Dr. Maher, in the bioethics literature, there is a history of end-of-life care in a biomedical context. Remember that we have moved from futile medical treatment to the recognition of the right to die. Indeed, before palliative care, the recognition of the right to die was called passive euthanasia, and we heard virtually the same arguments regarding passive euthanasia as those I am hearing tonight.

We have thus moved from medical paternalism, which imposed futile medical treatment, to the recognition of a patient’s right to die through palliative care. We have therefore recognized that patients can avail themselves of comfort care, and, a little later, we arrived at medical assistance in dying, respecting the autonomy that you wish to restore to your patients. That is indeed the goal. A patient can decide on their own death in a situation of end-of-life care, isn’t that right? I hope you support that.

This respect for the autonomy and self-determination of the person, of the suffering patient, has led to what we now call good medical practices. I imagine you are not opposed to these good medical practices, which consist in recognizing the refusal of life-sustaining treatment and the cessation or withholding of treatment when it becomes futile.

I would like to know where you stand on the issue of end-of-life care and the medical paternalism you seem to exhibit—perhaps justifiably—in the field of psychiatry.

[Dr. John Maher]

I'm one of the earliest formally trained bioethicists in Canada, so I know the literature well. I've watched the pendulum swing around paternalism, and I have the greatest respect and gratitude for that. We should be free to make our own decisions.

Here's what it comes down to: I am free to kill myself. Why am I entitled to ask anyone else to do it for me? If you say we have to provide compassionate care and support, I know patients who bring their families to their homes with planned suicides, and they don't need a doctor to do it.

There's some sort of artificial claim here that when we bring a doctor in, it makes it better or prevents errors or all of these things. The paternalism here is saying you have to have a doctor to do it, but let me make this critical point: If you're not willing to kill yourself without a doctor helping you, that means the doctor is responsible for suicide inducement. It is facilitation.

[The Joint Chair, Liberal, Marcus Powlowski]

Thank you, Dr. Maher.

Senator Martin, you have two minutes.