View this post on the web at [link removed]

An elderly Canadian woman withdrew her request to die, asked instead for hospice care, and was euthanized [ Alt%20Text%20An%20empty%20hospital%20bed%20in%20a%20cold,%20frost-covered%20medical%20room,%20with%20a%20visible%20body-shaped%20imprint%20left%20in%20the%20sheets%20after%20a%20patient%20has%20been%20removed.%20Photo%20Caption%20An%20empty%20hospital%20bed%20remains%20after%20an%20elderly%20woman%20who%20withdrew%20consent%20for%20assisted%20death%20was%20euthanized%20under%20Canada’s%20MAiD%20system.%20Tags%20Canada%20MAiD,%20assisted%20dying,%20euthanasia,%20end%20of%20life%20care,%20hospice%20denial,%20medical%20ethics,%20caregiver%20burnout,%20elderly%20care,%20medical%20coercion,%20state%20power,%20sanctity%20of%20life%20FB%20and%20Substack%20Note%20She%20asked%20to%20live.%20She%20withdrew%20consent.%20She%20asked%20for%20hospice%20care.%20Instead,%20she%20was%20euthanized%20the%20same%20day.%20This%20is%20not%20compassion.%20It%20is%20what%20happens%20when%20a%20system%20decides%20death%20is%20more%20efficient%20than%20care.%20Focus%20Key%20Phrase%20Canada%20assisted%20dying%20controversy%20Meta%20Description%20An%20elderly%20Canadian%20woman%20withdrew%20consent%20for%20assisted%20dying%20and%20asked%20for%20hospice%20care,%20yet%20was%20euthanized%20within%20hours.%20A%20disturbing%20case%20exposing%20failures%20in%20Canada’s%20MAiD%20safeguards%20and%20the%20deadly%20consequences%20when%20consent%20is%20ignored. ] that same evening.
She was offered no reprieve. No second chance. And no appeal. Death was her only option.
The decision unfolded in hours, not weeks. And it happened inside a system that insists it has safeguards.
According to a report released by Ontario’s Medical Assistance in Dying Death Review Committee, the woman, referred to as “Mrs B,” was in her 80s and recovering from complications following coronary artery bypass surgery.
Her condition declined sharply after returning home, where she received palliative support and was cared for by her husband.
As her health worsened, the burden on her husband increased. Even with visiting nurses, he struggled.
The report later described him as experiencing caregiver burnout, which anyone could empathize with.
At some point, Mrs B reportedly expressed interest in Medical Assistance in Dying, or MAiD, to her family. On the same day, her husband contacted a referral service on her behalf.
But when an assessor met with Mrs B, she changed her mind.
She told the assessor she wanted to withdraw her request for assisted death [ The%20Deadly%20Push%20for%20a%20Fashionable,%20Painless%20Suicide ], citing personal and religious beliefs. Instead, she asked for inpatient hospice care.
That should have ended the process.
It did not.
The morning after withdrawing her request, Mrs B was taken to hospital. Doctors found her medically stable, but documented that her husband was exhausted and overwhelmed.
Her palliative care physician applied for inpatient hospice care, citing caregiver burnout. Despite her request, hospice was denied as she didn’t qualify under strict criteria—leaving death as the apparent ‘solution.’
Later that same day, her husband requested an urgent second MAiD assessment.
A different assessor arrived and deemed Mrs B eligible. That assessor asked to meet Mrs B again the next day.
But that request was declined.
A third assessor was brought in. This assessor also agreed with the second.
Mrs B, however, wasn’t awarded inpatient hospice care. Instead, she was euthanized that evening.
This is not a tragedy caused by confusion. It is not a “complex ethical dilemma.” And it is not compassionate care gone awry.
Mrs B said she wanted to live. She withdrew consent. She asked for hospice. And the state killed her anyway.
If a person explicitly revokes permission to die and is then deliberately put to death, that is not assisted dying. That is not medical care. That is not autonomy. That is state-sanctioned murder.
Words matter
There was no crime. No trial. No sentence. No judge. No jury. No appeal. There was only exhaustion, denial of care, bureaucratic urgency, and a system that decided death was the fastest solution.
Hospice was denied. Time was denied. Her stated wishes were denied. But death was expedited.
This is what happens when a society treats human life as a problem to be solved instead of a gift to be protected. When caregiver burnout becomes justification for killing the person who is hardest to care for. When speed matters more than consent. When safeguards exist on paper but vanish in practice.
Canada’s assisted dying system did not fail Mrs B. It worked exactly as it is designed to.
And that is the most terrifying part.
Because once a government accepts killing someone who wants to live as an acceptable outcome, no safeguard matters anymore. The elderly become vulnerable. The disabled become expendable. The sick become negotiable. And anyone who becomes inconvenient can suddenly be declared “urgent.”
Mrs B did not choose death.
Death was chosen for her.
And if that is not murder, then the word no longer has meaning.
This is why we must pray, advocate, and protect the sanctity of life—before more stories like Mrs. B’s become normalized. Share this if you believe every life deserves to be defended.
Martin Mawyer is the President of Christian Action Network, host of the “Shout Out Patriots” podcast, and author of When Evil Stops Hiding [ [link removed] ]. For more action alerts, cultural commentary, and real-world campaigns defending faith, family, and freedom, subscribe to Patriot Majority Report [ [link removed] ].

Unsubscribe [link removed]?