I don’t need MAID right now, but someday I might.

I’m so rattled by the current discourse on medical assistance in dying (MAID) that the first time I sat down to write this, I was so scattered, I had no idea where to start. 

I became a paid journalist/writer for the first time more than 20 years ago. Fortunately, I’ve rarely had a spell of writer’s block. 

Until now. 

So let’s try again.  

I’m Justin. I work in communications, primarily in mental health. I love my wife and my kid, and have family who loves me. By most standards, I’d consider myself generally successful. 

My personal philosophy is ‘do no harm.’ That is to say, if you approach people with kindness, open-mindedness and curiosity, we’ll get along just fine. Don’t do any harm. Try to be a catalyst for good. We need more of that. 

But if you think you should tell decent, honest, law-abiding people how they should live, or impose your will on others in a way that will negatively impact them, we’re going to have a problem. 

I also live with mental illness – depression, to be specific – which at times can be debilitating. 

Which brings me to the topic at hand – the current discourse on medical assistance in dying (MAID) when mental illness is the sole underlying medical condition, and the federal government’s next steps on this issue. 

To summarize, MAID in Canada has two broad categories: one for people whose death is reasonably foreseeable, and one for people whose death is not reasonably foreseeable but are experiencing intolerable pain and suffering. 

Neither category currently qualifies people with mental illness as a sole underlying condition in its criteria. 

The feds appointed a Special Joint Committee on Medical Assistance in Dying to investigate system readiness for MAID eligibility for individuals whose sole underlying condition is mental illness, since the current exemption on MAID access for this poulation expires in March 2027. The committee’s subsequent report, in my opinion, is fraught with bias and a glaring lack of due diligence. For example: 

• Committee co-chair Marcus Powlowski cited The Ten Commandments’ ‘thow (sic) shall not kill’ as his idea of a legitimate case as to why MAID shouldn’t be expanded for mental illness. (Is it appropriate for a government official to impose a Christian tenet on a secular society?) 

• Powlowski also suggested people who want to die just kill themselves with street drugs like fentanyl. (Does this sound like an unbiased party to you?) 

• The report includes the opinion of the heads of psychiatry at 13 Canadian medical schools that suggest MAID should not be available for persons with the sole underlying medical condition of mental illness,  but excludes the positions of many practicing psychiatrists and other experts, such as the Canadian Psychiatric Association, who feel the system is equipped to accept eligbility for this population. (Why not cast a wider net?) 

• The committee largely ignored the perspectives of people with lived experience of mental illness. (The people who are directly impacted by the possibility of eligibility.) 

Since people with lived experience of mental illness were mostly overlooked in testimony or written submissions, I’ll offer my thoughts here for anyone willing to listen. 

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms states everyone “has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination.” 

Parliament’s Special Joint Committee was supposed to be tasked with evaluating system readiness for removal of a temporary exemption only, meaning removal of the exemption is a matter of when, not if. Instead, the discourse has turned into whether MAID should ever be available for persons with mental illness as a sole underlying condition, and some whose testimony was heard have even suggested ‘Track 2’ – the category where death is not reasonably foreseeable – should be repealed entirely. 

Pump the brakes. How did this go from evaluating system readiness and safeguards for removal of a temporary exemption, to repealing aspects of MAID that are already in place? That’s not even supposed to be up for debate. 

I won’t name names in the interest of sparing Dying With Dignity Canada’s platform the ire of those I disagree with, but some ‘inclusion and disability groups’ calling for an indefinite pause on expansion and to repeal Track 2 are disingenuous at best and outright lying at worst. No health care practitioner acting in the best interest of patients is pushing people into MAID against their will (this is their claim). That would and should be grounds for licence revocation. It’s an unreasonable argument. 

Mental suffering is just as legitimate as physical suffering. 

People living with mental illness who have the capacity to make a choice deserve to have a choice. That is, if you’re willing to attempt the available interventions, accept a rigorous process and work within the appropriate safeguards – just as anyone else seeking MAID would – you deserve equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination. 

Despite every best effort in the field of mental health awareness and suicide prevention, the supports in place aren’t going to work for everyone. We should always continue to expand funding for mental health supports, create more awareness about resources, share our personal openness to caring about others, and work to create a society that treats people with mental illness with the same compassion and care as people with physical ailments. All these steps will help people and save lives. 

But the belief that everyone can be cured is not based in reality. Just like various physical ailments, not all are remediable. That shouldn’t be a controversial statement. Mental illnesses can be treatment-resistant, or so severe that no intervention helps enough to stop the suffering. 

Personally, I feel like I’ve tried a lot – countless professionals, talk therapy, medications out the wazoo, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. Nothing has stuck. 

My next options include ketamine therapy and electroconvulsive therapy, neither of which sound like a picnic. They can have some nasty side effects and have no guarantee of working.  

With my depression comes suicidal ideation, which has varying degrees of severity from time to time, but is fairly persistent. I have a good life and people who love me, yet I can’t shake this dread.  

I get by OK most days, but sometimes it’s overwhelming. I have ways of coping, and the intensity wanes. For the most part, I have a sense of control. 

I’ve lived with this most of my life. Gradually, it gets harder and harder to deal. I’m here for my family, and I’m motivated by the mental health awareness work I support in my career.  But as I age, will my mental illness become too much to manage? 

I don’t know, but I deserve the right to self-determination, to decide for myself when the suffering becomes intolerable, once I feel I’ve exhausted my health care options. I deserve the option to die with dignity. I deserve to discuss this with my family, make the choice together, and go out peacefully. The alternatives are bleak, undignified and traumatic for the loved ones left behind.  

To deny me the right to a dignified death through MAID is to do harm. To deny me that right is to extend my pain and suffering, and contribute to the pain and suffering of those who care about me. Full stop.  

Yes to more funding for mental health care and supports. Yes to strong safeguards that ensure checks and balances are in place for MAID. But we also ought to collectively agree that any competent person with the ability to choose should maintain their right to choose if they determine their pain and suffering are intolerable. Anything less is harmful. 

So to those who want to advocate against my right to medical assistance in dying, please tell me why I don’t deserve it. And keep in mind, I wouldn’t do that to you. 

All I’m asking: please do no harm. 

My thoughts were scattered coming into this, but I’ve never been more clear on that.

_______________________________________________

If you are struggling and need to speak with someone, you can connect with a crisis responder 24/7 for judgement-free support by calling 9-8-8. You are not alone.

If your sole underlying medical condition is a mental illness, you are not eligible to apply for MAID until March 17, 2027. 

On June 17, 2026, the Special Joint Committee on Medical Assistance in Dying issued its report, Medical Assistance in Dying and Mental Disorder as the Sole Underlying Medical Condition: A Complex and Challenging Conversation Among Canadians. In it, they recommend an indefinite exclusion from MAID eligibility for persons whose sole underlying medical condition is a mental illness. The Government of Canada will now consider the report and its recommendation before it responds. Their response will likely come in the fall of 2026 or early 2027. Currently the law has not changed and the date of March 17, 2027, still stands as the date at which persons with mental illness as the sole underlying medical condition will be eligible for MAID.

82% of people across Canada agree that with the appropriate safeguards in place, an adult with the capacity to provide informed consent should be able to seek an assessment for medical assistance in dying for a severe, treatment-resistant mental illness for which they experience intolerable suffering.

To learn more and find out how you can join the conversation, please visit our advocacy page.