19

As reported on FoxNews. This immediately triggers my skepticism since it seems pretty extreme.

From the link above:

Creighton School of Medicine professor Charles Camosy joined 'Tucker Carlson Tonight' to discuss a new Canadian law that would allow minors to be euthanized by state doctors without the consent of their parents.

Carlson says:

By March a new law in Canada is expected to allow children to be killed without their parents consent.

Robert Columbia
  • 3,396
  • 3
  • 20
  • 43
Tony Ennis
  • 317
  • 2
  • 8
  • 12
    On Skeptics.SE, we require claims to be notable - they must be widely believed. It is hard to show that, so we accept a proxy of being widely seen or read. A popular article is perfect. Sometimes people confuse this meaning of notabiity with meaning the claim must come from a reliable source. That is not required. I have deleted such comments from this question, to avoid further confusing new users. – Oddthinking Oct 30 '22 at 00:45
  • @Oddthinking indeed, the best questions here come from *unreliable* sources. If the source is reliable, does it really need skeptical investigation? If I read an article in *Science* that claims a certain drug causes cancer, that's probably the best source there is. If a politician claims it, we can dig into scientific literature to try to verify or debunk it. – Robert Columbia Oct 30 '22 at 13:47
  • 14
    Note, the terminology 'state doctor'. This is chosen deliberately to make it sound like the doctor is acting on behalf of some 'state'. Which would be terrifying indeed. A better choice here would be 'their doctor' since the doctor is acting on behalf of their patient. It's very subtle but it does the trick quite nicely. – user2705196 Oct 30 '22 at 14:09
  • 3
    @user2705196 They *are* state doctors. – user76284 Oct 30 '22 at 17:42
  • 1
    Let us take this to chat: https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/140277/canadian-state-doctors – DJClayworth Oct 31 '22 at 17:58
  • Also, though not part of the question, the wording chosen by Carlson makes it seem as the law allows to kill children against their will, in other words, murder them. – SQB Dec 05 '22 at 12:51

1 Answers1

69

Currently Canada's euthanasia law does not permit the euthanasia of minors, with or without parental consent.

With the passing of Bill C-7 (taking effect March 2023) the criteria have been expanded to include purely mental illnesses, but the minimum age remains 18. CBC Justice Dept.

There is a review of the law under way, and extension to include "mature minors" (those with the capacity to make medical decisions on their own) is one of the contentious items under discussion. The review is not yet completed and even if it were to recommend such an extension that would not necessarily mean it would make it into a proposed law, still less that such a law would be passed.

Any suggestion that minors are eligible for Medical Assistance in Dying is false. Likewise any claim that such a law will be in place by March is unfounded. No law has been drafted that would make minors eligible.

Also note that Carlson's example is of a 23 year old. Even in an adult what Carlson describes is NOT a legal basis for MAID in Canada. To be medically eligible for MAID you must:

  • have a serious illness, disease or disability and:
  • be in an advanced state of decline that cannot be reversed and:
  • experience unbearable physical or mental suffering from your illness, disease, disability or state of decline that cannot be relieved under conditions that you consider acceptable

Either the story Carlson told is false or he has deliberately minimized the seriousness of the condition.

Carlson is confusing discussion of the possibility of extending MAID to mature minors with a legal amendment that does something different.

DJClayworth
  • 57,419
  • 26
  • 209
  • 195
  • 7
    [CBC](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mature-minors-advance-requests-mental-illness-maid-assisted-death-1.6021717): The Senate has passed Bill C-7, which expands access to medical assistance in dying, including, eventually, to people suffering solely from mental illnesses. [...] Those whose suffering is caused solely by mental illness will gain access to MAID in March 2023. – user76284 Oct 29 '22 at 17:01
  • 5
    So yes, if passed as is minors (at least some of them) could receive MAID without parental consent. – jwenting Oct 30 '22 at 06:22
  • 7
    @jwenting **No**. That portion of the original bill was not amended. The only change due to Bill C-7 is that a purely mental condition now qualifies. Minimum age is still 18. [CBC](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mature-minors-advance-requests-mental-illness-maid-assisted-death-1.6021717) [Justice Dept.](https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/pl/charter-charte/c7.html#:~:text=Bill%20C%2D7%20would%20amend,condition%20is%20a%20mental%20illness.) – DJClayworth Oct 30 '22 at 13:09
  • 11
    [AP](https://apnews.com/article/covid-science-health-toronto-7c631558a457188d2bd2b5cfd360a867): Next year, the country is set to allow people to be killed exclusively for mental health reasons. It is also considering extending euthanasia to “mature” minors — children under 18 who meet the same requirements as adults. – user76284 Oct 30 '22 at 16:58
  • you could add an 'and' between the bulletpoints to make sure that everyone comprehends it is the combination that is the basis, not any of the points on their own – bukwyrm Nov 02 '22 at 08:35