The first documented case of a child under 12 being euthanized by a government health care system has been reported in the Netherlands.

Allow that to sink in. A minor's life has been ended by the system that is supposed to protect them. Was this an act of compassion? Or is the assisted suicide of a child something else entirely?

The child in question was euthanized in 2025, according to a report presented to the Dutch Parliament on Monday. No details about their age, gender or precise medical condition were released. The report simply noted that the child was suffering from a severe illness.

In 2002, the Netherlands became the first country in the world to legalize voluntary euthanasia (doctor-assisted medical death). Two years later, the law was extended to include children under 12. Now, more than two decades on, pediatric euthanasia has become a reality.

The laws in Holland that regulate euthanasia are complex and often confounding. Children under 12 years of age and older, for instance, can request to be euthanized, with the caveat that they 'must be capable of assessing and understanding what is best for them in their situation' and have their parent's consent.

Parents do have a say in this process and must approve assisted suicide for any patients 15 and under. But Dutch 16 and 17-year-olds can ultimately decide to end their lives without their parents' consent.

How can kids too young to drive a car or buy a home be certain their lives are no longer worth living? 

The idea that teenagers are capable of choosing to be euthanized is nothing less than absurd. Indeed, rather than demonstrating compassion towards young people in distress, The Netherlands is allowing them to enter into a death contract. 

According to Dutch authorities, euthanasia (for all ages) is only permitted for those 'whose unbearable suffering with no prospect of improvement has a medical dimension.' These medical conditions include cancer and cardiovascular disease, but also psychiatric disorders.

The Dutch government hasn't made clear how 'unbearable suffering' is measured, but, presumably, it is self-reported. Nor is it clear how authorities decide whether a patient faces no prospect of improvement. 

Does this mean a lack of current prospects? Perhaps additional treatment options are available outside of the Netherlands. Are these considered as well?

The phrasing 'medical dimension' doesn't sit well either. Without such precision, 'dimension' could mean a range of minor illnesses bundled together but not necessarily a terminal diagnosis.

In my own country, Canada, medical assistance in dying (also known as MAID) is even more common. Since legalization in 2016, euthanasia has become the fifth leading cause of death in the entire nation. Canada's assisted death industry, to be frank, is booming, rising from 1,108 deaths in 2016 to 16,499 eight years later.

While laws in Canada currently do not allow euthanasia for anyone under 18, a 2023 parliamentary committee recommended amending the code to include 'mature minors.' 

Like in Holland, these young people must possess the 'requisite capacity' to make crucial healthcare decisions on their own. And young people seeking assisted suicide must be facing death from their current conditions in the 'reasonably foreseeable' future.

But there is no precise definition for either 'reasonable' or 'foreseeable.'

The Canadian committee suggested that parents and guardians should be involved in the assessment process for assisted suicides. But ultimately, the Committee noted, the 'will of the minor' should 'take priority' in determining whether MAID is approved for patients under 18. The expansion law is still pending.

Canada's MAID program operates under a two-track system introduced in 2021. Track one applies to individuals whose natural death is 'reasonably foreseeable' for terminal conditions like cancer. Track two applies to those suffering from a serious, incurable illness, disease or disability causing enduring and intolerable physical or psychological suffering that cannot be relieved under conditions the patient considers acceptable.

Unsurprisingly, the vagueness around the specifics have led to what many consider abuses. There's 26-year-old Kiano Vafaeian, a depressed, diabetic struggling with vision loss. He was denied MAID in the province of Ontario but approved in British Columbia after shopping around for more compliant doctors. Despite strong objections from his family, he was euthanized in December 2025.

There was also quadriplegic Normand Meunier, who chose MAID in 2024 after developing a painful bedsore while confined to a hospital stretcher. Alan Nichols was euthanized in 2019 primarily for depression related to long-term hearing loss.

Canadian veterans have also testified before our government that they were offered MAID instead of adequate support for non-fatal conditions such as PTSD or mobility challenges.

Other disturbing MAID-related stories include a woman suffering with severe chemical sensitivities who chose euthanasia because she could not secure allergen-free public housing and an autistic woman approved for MAID despite being relatively physically healthy. 

Like with the depressed diabetic, these cases often feature families eager to support their suffering loved ones and desperate for them to reconsider assisted suicide.

Now, in Canada, the assisted suicide debate is shifting once again, this time to whether MAID can be obtained solely on the basis of mental illness. Originally approved for implementation in 2023, the move has faced repeated delays amid ongoing government debate.

The latest Parliamentary Committee Report issued on June 18 recommended that assisted suicide laws should 'indefinitely exclude persons whose sole underlying medical condition is a mental illness from eligibility.' But dissenting committee members branded the recommendations as 'fundamentally flawed' and 'biased.' If a formal resolution is not reached by March 2027, the mental health expansion will become legal.

In the US, so called 'Death with Dignity' is now available in 14 states and is currently being considered by 16 more. Under existing guidelines, assisted suicide is only available to terminally ill adults with less than six months to live. They must be capable of making their own decisions and able to act voluntarily in taking their own lives. 

The latter part is important: In the US, patients must administer their own deaths, while in Canada and Europe, they may be aided by medical practitioners.

While it's unlikely the US would ever consider MAID for minors, the potential for more permissive, Canadian-style 'euthanasia creep' cannot be discounted. States like Vermont, for instance, have removed residency requirements for assisted suicide and provide it to patients from states where it is not legal. 

And while MAID is still far more strictly regulated in the US than in Canada or Europe, at least three cases of assisted suicide approved for patients with 'eating disorders' have been recorded in America.

The Netherlands, Canada and the United States are all liberal democracies that claim to value core Western concepts such as personal freedom and respect for life.

Yet only America has prioritized restricting assisted suicide rather than expanding it to the most vulnerable among us, such as children and the mentally ill. Only America still understands that with freedom comes obligation, first and foremost the obligation to protect life.

A dystopian future where children and the depressed are aided by the government in taking their own lives might seem impossible to Americans, but once it seemed impossible in Canada and Europe as well. Now, in barely a decade, Canada has gone from zero MAID deaths to nearly 100,000. And today, one out of every 20 deaths in Canada is from assisted suicide and same-day approvals and facilitations are common.

Pay attention, America, because values can change and laws along with them. Don't repeat our mistakes here in Canada.

 Terry Newman is a senior opinion editor and columnist for the National Post