MAID in Canada

Allegations of MAID Being “Pushed”

• Some argue MAID is being offered to people who actually want better care or supports (housing, mobility aids, mental health care) but cannot get them, making death feel like the only realistic option.
• Others push back that this is based on a “handful of anecdotes” (e.g., veterans, wheelchair-ramp case) and not evidence of systemic practice; they demand data on what share of MAID-eligible patients experience pressure.
• There’s disagreement on thresholds: some say “one is too many,” others say you’d need ≥5% or more to call it systemic.
• A few note confirmed misconduct cases (e.g., a Veterans Affairs worker) but emphasize they were isolated and sanctioned.

Healthcare System, Costs, and Incentives

• One camp claims MAID is implicitly a cost-saving tool in an overburdened, single-payer system, with incentives to prefer a cheap death over expensive long-term care.
• Critics of this view say cost-growth is overstated, evidence of propaganda is thin, and MAID’s primary political driver is demand to avoid prolonged suffering, not budgets.
• Debate continues over whether any lack of access to care is causing people to choose MAID earlier than they otherwise would; this is asserted but not quantified.

Eligibility, Tracks, Safeguards, and Data

• Commenters stress the Track 1 (reasonably foreseeable death) vs Track 2 (not terminal) distinction and say criticism often ignores this.
• Official stats cited: ≈96% of MAID deaths are Track 1; ≈4% Track 2.
• Process described as requiring two independent assessments and written, witnessed consent, making “walk-in suicide” claims implausible.
• Anecdotes (e.g., aunts, hospitalized patients) lead to questions about capacity, timing, and how assertively staff should raise MAID; details remain unclear.

Autonomy, Ethics, and Lived Experience

• Strong pro-MAID voices focus on avoiding agonizing end-of-life experiences and valuing self-determination; some note that de facto euthanasia (sedation, withdrawal of treatment) has long existed.
• Opponents worry about “death as healthcare,” eugenics-like vibes for disabled people, moral/religious objections, and taxpayers funding what they see as killing.
• There is tension between preventing premature or coerced decisions and avoiding enforced suffering when life has become intolerable.

Public Opinion and Polarization

• Several note a rough split: many religious people (especially Christians) opposed, many secular people supportive or neutral, though others say experience with horrible deaths is a better predictor than religion.
• Polls are cited showing strong majority support, but also that most people misunderstand key legal details; one side sees this as democratic legitimation, the other as consent without informed knowledge.