Who's Shaping the Conversation On MAiD Expansion

As a special joint committee of MPs and Senators convenes to decide whether MAiD should expand to allow people whose sole underlying condition is mental illness to access euthanasia, a well-funded lobbying group with a history of meeting with committee members is actively shaping the conversation. The media is failing to provide critical coverage of the hearings and aren’t asking the right questions.

A History of Lobbying 

As described in The Walrus, Dying with Dignity is an extremely, well-funded lobbying group. Lobbying disclosures reveal their influence on the previous special joint committee, amounting to six meetings with committee members during the roughly six weeks of hearings between October 31st 2023 and December 12, 2023.

Dying with Dignity met three times with Sen. Pamela Wallin, two times with Sen. Stan Kutcher, and once with Sen. Marie-Françoise Mégie. Importantly, active board members and the CEO of Dying with Dignity did not speak at the previous round of hearings. The committee ultimately voted to delay expansion of MAiD for mental illness until March 17, 2027, because Canada’s health system wasn’t ready for expansion, gaps in MAiD practitioner training, and the impossibility of determining when mental illness is truly irremediable.

While lobbying disclosures won’t be available until after the hearings have concluded, the impact of Dying with Dignity on the committee is more direct. Daphne Gilbert, a law professor at the University of Ottawa and board chair of Dying with Dignity, was a witness at the April 21st 2026 hearing and the CEO of the group is set to speak on May 5th.

I emailed both co-chairs of the special joint committee with my concerns. I asked whether chairs are informed if committee members are meeting with lobbyists and whether Dying with Dignity has lobbied any members. I noted that Sen. Wallin, who was on the committee at the start but is no longer on it, was a key lobbying contact during the previous round of hearings.

William Fassett, the chief of staff for MP Marcus Powlowski, the co-chair of the committee responded that the office “knows nothing about the questions you are asking” and erroneously stated that Wallin still on the committee. I followed up with a link showing that Wallin is no longer on the committee. “Oh she was replaced she was there the first few meetings,” Fassett responded.

The office of the other co-chair, Sen. Yonah Martin, did not respond by the time of this publication. The committee should proactively disclose any meetings with relevant lobbyists to provide more transparency to the process.

A Gap In Speaking Times

Journalists are uncritically platforming pro-MAiD voices that claim the hearings are biased against expansion.

On April 23rd, The Canadian Press, whose stories that are syndicated across major news outlets, published an article warning that the committee hearing has “gone off the rails”, quoting Jocelyn Downie, a proponent for MAiD expansion, centering her concerns that the committee is going against its mandate. Downie was also recently featured on the CBC without critical pushback.

While it’s true that most of the witnesses are against expansion, in panels like Downie’s which included pro and anti-expansion voices, the proponents for expansion receive more speaking time. I added up the amount of minutes each speaker spent on their statement, and answering questions - starting from the moment they start answering a question, including any followups and responses.

Downie received nine questions and follow-ups from the committee, speaking for about 29 minutes while Trudo Lemmens, a University of Toronto professor opposed to expansion only received three questions and spoke for approximately 15 minutes. This pattern holds true across the majority of panels featuring both pro and anti MAiD viewpoints.

The Media Campaign Ahead of May 5 Hearings

In the days leading up to the May 5 hearings which will feature the CEO of Dying with Dignity, The Canadian Press, the New York Times, and CBC, have published features on a woman involved in a court case, funded by Dying with Dignity, seeking MAiD for mental illness.

There’s a fundamental failure among the media who are rushing to act as stenographers without interrogating whether the views they’re platforming are accurate and failing to engage with the actual content of the hearings on MAiD expansion.