Posted on 01/16/2026 11:47:04 PM PST by Morgana
Anna Farrow wrote an article that was published by the Western Standard on January 3, 2026 titled: Canada's Chilling Next Step - MAiD for babies.
Farrow explains how the disturbing concept of euthanasia of newborns was introduced into Canada's euthanasia debate:
Most Canadians disagree strongly with the concept of euthanasia for babies. We know this because every time the topic comes up, the public’s response is one of instant horror. So why does it keep coming up?
The issue first surfaced in 2022 when Louis Roy of the Quebec College of Physicians (CMQ) appeared before Parliament’s Special Joint Committee on Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD). The committee was examining plans to expand MAiD beyond terminal illness to cover cases of mental illness as well as to accommodate advanced requests and mature minors. But Roy’s advocacy went even farther. He also suggested MAiD could be considered for “babies from birth to one year of age” who are born with severe deformities or disabilities.
Farrow continues:
The public response was immediate shock. On CBC Radio, Liberal Disabilities Minister Carla Qualtrough snapped, “There is no world where I would accept that.” The reaction was sufficiently negative that even pro-life activists assumed it was a dead-end issue.
This past September, however, several international media stories on Canada’s MAiD program have re-ignited the baby MAiD debate. A long feature in the magazine The Atlantic headlined “Canada is Killing Itself” compared Roy’s baby euthanasia proposal to the policies of Nazi Germany — an argument that caused instant outrage among pro-MAiD lobby groups. Then the British newspaper Daily Mail asked the CMQ for an update on its stance and was told the organization now believes “medical assistance in dying may be an appropriate treatment for babies suffering from extreme pain” and that “parents should have the opportunity to obtain this care for their infant.”
Farrow writes about the fact that the most recent Canadian euthanasia data indicates that in 2024 there were 16,499 euthanasia deaths with 76,475 recorded deaths from legalization until December 31, 2024.
Considering that we are now in January 2026, There has likely been at least 94,000 euthanasia deaths since legalization.
Farrow explains that, in the Netherlands, the Groningen protocol has been in place for many years, a protocol which permits euthanasia of newborns with disabilities.
Canada continues to debate euthanasia for mental illness alone.
In 2021, when Canada expanded its euthanasia law by passing Bill C-7, that legislation permitted euthanasia for mental illness alone, meaning that mental illness was the only criteria for approval. The issue of euthanasia for mental illness remains very contentious, which is why the previous Liberal government delayed the implementation of euthanasia for mental illness alone until March 2027.
Currently Canada is debating a private members bill (Bill C-218) that is sponsored by Tamara Jansen (MP) Bill C-218 would reverse the section of the law that will permit euthanasia for mental illness alone starting in March 2027.
Bill C-218 debate (Article Link).
As for euthanasia of children, the parliamentary euthanasia committee released a report in February 2023 calling on the extension of euthanasia in Canada to mature minors.
I responded to the February 15, 2023 (AMAD) report by stating:
The report by the Special Joint Committee on Medical Assistance in Dying (AMAD) was tabled in the House of Commons on February 15, 2023 calling for a drastic expansion of euthanasia (MAiD) in Canada. Among the recommendations, the report recommended that euthanasia be expanded to include children "mature minors."
Recommendation 19 in the report stated:
That the Government of Canada establish a requirement that, where appropriate, the parents or guardians of a mature minor be consulted in the course of the assessment process for MAID, but that the will of a minor who is found to have the requisite decision-making capacity ultimately take priority.
This means that parents or guardians may or may not be consulted, in the euthanasia death of a child that is deemed to have decision-making capacity.
To understand Recommendation 19 better we need to go back to the draft policy developed by the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto on euthanasia for "mature minors" that was published as a report in the Journal of Medical Ethics in September 2018.
* Article: Sick Kids Hospital Toronto will euthanize children with or without parental consent (Link).
Sick Children's hospital draft policy applied the same "ethics" for mature minors to make medical decisions as for making a decision to be killed.
Euthanasia for mature minors is one issue but euthanasia of newborns with disabilities can only be described as eugenics.
Sadly, once killing by euthanasia becomes a legal option the law will continue to expand. There is only one ethical line in the sand, that being, it is illegal to kill. Once killing is OK the only remaining questions are: who can do the killing and for what reasons.
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
Whaddaya mean, next.
Its already being done.
Nazi Germany circa 1940...
...must have blonde hair and blue eyes...
if you can kill a baby in the womb for convenience, you can easily rationalize killing one out of the womb for convenience.
The people making such insane suggestions are the same people who tell us they’ve eliminated Down Syndrome in their country, not from some advance in medical technology but aborting the child.
In my mind all abortion but certainly late term abortion is effectively euthanizing babies, I see no difference in the two.
Absolutely.
There’s no end to the justification for murdering people from the Satanically fueled party of death.
The bloodlust of the left will never be sated.
Does anyone deny that the end is near? He IS coming soon whether you believe in him or not!
Its already being done.
Beat me to it.
Diabolical eugenicists agree. Murder the innocent and make them pay for it. It’s an industry, a revolution of human depravity.
There does not seem to be any level of depravity too low for these people. There’s no bottom except in hell. They’ll do it if they can give it the veneer of legality.
YES
Already a big part of the program for a while, even if not explicitly called that.
If we can have pre-birth abortions, post-birth abortions is not that a far stretch.
Here’s another example of the cult of baal.
Worship: Worship of Baal was widespread in the ancient Middle East and included rituals like ritualistic prostitution and, at times, child sacrifice, notes Encyclopedia of the Bible.
Biblical context: The Bible warns against Baal worship, portraying it as a direct challenge to the worship of the Lord, notes Christianity.com.
The prophet Elijah famously confronted the priests of Baal on Mount Carmel.
Next? In Iceland the purge is already in effect. There are very few Down Syndrome babies there. Most get aborted.
Our Lord said:
“But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.” - Matthew 18:6
That spirit of anti-Christ is rising up for the last days and it needs ‘euthanasia’ established into its coming ‘beast system’ laws of nations to then be utilized to kill those who resist Satan’s evil.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.