What readers think about MAID and faith-based hospitals

Recently, we published the story of Samantha O’Neill, whose transfer from St. Paul’s Hospital in Vancouver, B.C., became the centre of a case highlighting tensions around faith, funding and access to Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) in Canada. In response, we invited Broadview readers to share their thoughts and reflections. Here is a glimpse of what you had to say. These opinions are those of our readers and do not necessarily reflect the views of Broadview. Responses have been slightly edited for clarity.

“The federal government both writes the laws regarding MAID and provides funding to provinces for healthcare. It should not provide funding to healthcare providers that do not comply with federal law. This issue disproportionately affects people living in small rural communities, where care is often limited to faith-based hospitals that can refuse services such as MAID and certain women’s health procedures. If provincial governments — such as the Alberta government — fail to uphold the Charter of Rights and federal regulations, one potential solution may be to target federal funding to the province and tie it explicitly to meeting federal standards.”— Kathleen White-Hoar, Ponoka, Alta.

You may unsubscribe from any of our newsletters at any time.

“I do not think faith-based hospitals should be allowed to refuse MAID. They may believe it is up to God to decide when a person will die, but by refusing to allow it, they are effectively playing God.”

— Cathie Morgan Matula, Winnipeg

“A dear 92-year-old friend of mine experienced the same kind of problem as Mr. William Hune [who died in Edmonton’s Grey Nuns Community Hospital while awaiting transfer for MAID]. She was dying and had been approved for MAID, but unfortunately, she was in a Catholic hospital that would not allow it. This was during the COVID-19 pandemic, when ambulances were in short supply. Barely able to walk, she had to be transported by cab to a doctor’s office to receive MAID. What unnecessary suffering my friend endured at the end of a long and productive life! I was shocked that a hospital receiving funding from the province of British Columbia could refuse to perform a legal procedure.”

— Dorothy Watts, Vancouver

“Since hospitals are publicly funded, their boards have a duty to respect the wishes of every patient. Individual patients are entitled to determine what is right or wrong according to their own convictions — that is not in question. What is in question is the power of hospital boards to prohibit procedures that are both legal and desired by a patient.

Religious institutions in Canada have a long history of abusing their rights as publicly funded entities — most notably in the case of Residential Schools. In that instance, society eventually intervened, enforcing accountability and reparations. It is time the last remnants of that abusive culture are pruned away.”

— Freeman A. Dryden, Nanaimo, B.C.

“Yes, I feel faith-based hospitals should have the right to refuse MAID. If a person is near the end of life, they can surely be directed to a hospital that offers the option of MAID. I say kudos to Alberta for its recent decision to restrict MAID. It does disturb me to hear of the increasing number of people receiving MAID, including some younger adults. I can’t help but wonder whether they are choosing it due to a lack of medical support, given the shortage of doctors and mental health services in this country.”

— Jean Wightman, Tsawwassen, B.C.

“This is not a simple question. In my own view, I believe hospitals should not be allowed to refuse to honor a patient’s request. In an emergency, a patient is taken to the most convenient location and usually has no choice in the matter.”

— Gerry Johnson, Chesterville, Ont.

“The question you pose concerns public institutions being open to assisting individuals who wish to end their lives by providing publicly funded medical assistance. Private institutions, including religious ones, can set their own policies in this regard. Public institutions are more difficult to regulate because they are expected to reflect the broader ethical and moral views of society, yet the public is rarely directly involved in shaping those standards. It’s hard to see how they could ever be fully prescribed or predetermined.

Personally, I have been present for just one MAID situation. The person in question had made the decision and wanted to say goodbye to friends, arranging a social gathering to do so. Each of us said our personal farewells, and the following day, a medical professional administered the drug and my friend’s life ended. It was both a very difficult and precious moment for me. In the current debate, I do not have a firmly set opinion.

More on Broadview:

My sincere hope is that we can remain loving and kind to all the central players and not become so entangled in the debate that we lose the essence of love.”

— Dale Perkins, Victoria

“I feel that a faith-based hospital has the right to maintain policies that reflect its philosophy, but these policies must be transparent and clearly communicated upon admission. As a retired health professional, I understand the dilemma — given our limited resources — of being willing and able to transfer patients compassionately, should the need arise.”

— Michele Stobie, Gibsons, B.C.

“I appreciate that a faith-based hospital wants to integrate its faith beliefs into the healthcare it provides and that it has the right to do so. However, the concept of ‘separation of church and state’ is holistic. If a faith-based organization wishes to restrict the delivery of health services to those consistent with its faith, it should fund those services privately, not from public funds.

To me, it feels like a fundamental violation of a Canadian’s constitutional rights that the public purse pays for healthcare for all citizens, yet some healthcare providers receive a hall pass from offering certain types of care.”

— BJ Danylchuk, Toronto