Canada’s Liberal Government Pushes Bill Allowing Doctors to Euthanize Unwitting Dementia Patients

Canada’s Liberal government has introduced legislation that would allow doctors to euthanize unwitting dementia patients.

The bill, introduced Tuesday, would allow Canadians to request euthanasia in advance, meaning doctors could carry out the procedure after a patient becomes incapable of providing informed consent.

Justice Minister Sean Fraser said the legislation would ensure that people diagnosed with incurable illnesses could have their wishes respected even if their condition deteriorates.

He insisted that the government would introduce safeguards to prevent patients from being pressured into ending their lives.

The proposal marks another expansion of Canada’s Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) program, which allows the euthanasia of vulnerable and seriously ill patients.

Keep reading

Alberta to make sharing intimate deepfakes an offence punishable by up to two years in jail

Albertans who share intimate images, videos or audio of someone without consent could face a fine of up to $10,000, up to two years in jail, or both, under legislation tabled Tuesday. The new law would also apply to content that is AI-generated or digitally altered.

The changes are in Bill 33, the Justice Statutes Amendment Act, 2026 (No. 2). The bill would rename the Protecting Victims of Non-consensual Distribution of Intimate Images Act as the Intimate Content Protection Act.

The current law gives victims the right to sue when intimate images are shared without consent. Under it, they can seek compensation and court orders to have the content removed. It does not create an offence.

According to a government fact sheet, the bill would replace “intimate image” with “intimate content” to include audio recordings and livestreamed material. It would also add a definition of “altered intimate content” to cover modified or artificially generated media.

Victims could sue when someone threatens to distribute intimate content, even if it is never shared. They could also withdraw consent they gave earlier.

People whose negligence causes intimate content to be distributed could be held accountable. Courts could order community service in place of some or all punitive damages.

Technology and Innovation Minister Nate Glubish said the bill “would make sure our laws keep pace with the technology.”

Haley Scott, co-chief executive officer of the Association of Alberta Sexual Assault Services, said the association welcomes the changes.

The intimate-content changes are part of the same bill that would ban diversity, equity and inclusion programs in public-sector hiring and training.

Keep reading

While Ireland Deteriorates with Unchecked Migration, Government Lectures Grandparents on Hugging Their Grandchildren ‘Without Consent’

Like many countries in Europe, the very essence of Irish culture is being destroyed from within as Ireland grapples with the violent consequences of a torrent of migrants flowing into the country without any apparent limit and the financial and social implications that follow.

Reports suggest there are at least 322 migrant plantations spread across the country, some in rural parts of the island nation, which are changing the very fabric of the nation.

In 2025, MMA Champion Conor McGregor visited the White House for St. Patrick’s Day and delivered a devastating message about what is happening in his homeland thanks to Ireland’s globalist leaders.

A Sudanese migrant was charged over a medieval, barbaric knife attack in north Belfast that left a man with horrific injuries.

The Gateway Pundit reported on the stabbing of five people, including children, in 2023 in Dublin by an Algerian migrant.

Protests have erupted across the country, including in Ballinrobe, Co Mayo, over plans to bring 50 male migrants to the small town.

The International Protection Accommodation Service reported roughly 33,250 people in its accommodation system at the end of 2025, a 450 percent increase since 2021.

Keep reading

Left-Wing Author and Professor Camille Paglia Talks About Cornell Rape Allegations, Rips Today’s Feminists for Trying to Have it Both Ways on Sexual Consent 

In case you haven’t heard, there is a new high-profile college campus rape case, this time at Cornell University. A young woman claims she was raped during a party by more than one male student, but others say she gave consent to the sexual activity.

During a recent interview, left wing professor Camille Paglia tore into today’s feminists for trying to have it both ways on the issue of sexual consent, suggesting that women cannot claim to be empowered and then demand to be treated like children.

It’s not the first time that Paglia has made this type of point and it probably won’t be the last.

Transcript via Real Clear Politics:

QUESTION: You don’t think there’s a problem with sexual assault? Because a lot of women are coming forward now.

CAMILE PAGLIA: No. In cases of real rape, of course it should be prosecuted. Of course real rape is a crime.

But this is not real rape.

We’ve been arguing about dating encounters with miscommunications now for decades. It’s absolutely infantilizing to women. It must stop.

QUESTION: But you know that a lot of women are afraid of sexual assault or have been sexually assaulted.

Should they not be able to go and drink and play beer pong and get drunk like the guys do? They live in fear.

CAMILE PAGLIA: If you go to a fraternity-house party, with the chaos going on in the living-room area, and a young man says to you, “Would you like to go up to my room?” I’m sorry — you are consenting to sex.

Keep reading

The War on Drugs Has Come to the Maternity Ward

At first glance, a new mother taking part in a drug screening seems reasonable. For the sake of the mother and child, a doctor performs a clinical test to rule out any complications or signs of risks to the newborn.

But the story quickly takes a dark turn. If there’s a positive test result, it doesn’t stay between the doctor and the patient. In 24 states and Washington, D.C., a positive test alone is enough to initiate a child welfare report, according to a report by the Legislative Analysis and Public Policy Association. Depending on the state, that test could land the mother on a child abuse registry. Worse still, the mother may be notified the test has occurred only after the fact.

This seems to run afoul of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Ferguson v. City of Charleston (2001), where the Court found it unconstitutional to drug test pregnant women without consent solely for “law enforcement purposes.” 

However, Enrima Ukoha, an obstetrician-gynecologist and maternal-fetal medicine specialist at the Mount Sinai Hospital in New York, tells Reason this practice—known as “test and report”—is “common” and “often happens in non-consensual ways.” In fact, over six years, The Marshall Project found “at least 70,000 cases in 21 states” where parents were referred to law enforcement after a positive test for drug or alcohol use.

Ukoha says a lot of medical professionals are influenced by “stereotypes and stigma” associated with people who use substances in pregnancy, leading them to make “false assumptions about their ability to parent.”

The practice developed as part of the response to the opioid crisis roiling the nation. Each year, nearly 10 percent of births in the U.S. are affected by drug or alcohol use. 

To deal with the issue, Congress amended the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act of 1974 in ways that made it easier for these nonconsensual tests to occur. The 1974 law ties federal grant funding to state-level development of “plans of safe care” for infants “born and identified as being affected by substance abuse or withdrawal symptoms.” It also requires healthcare providers involved in the “delivery or care” of affected infants to “notify the child protective services system”; however, it also states that nothing in the law should be read as requiring “prosecution for any illegal action.”

In 2016, Congress passed an amendment changing the requirement to include infants affected by all substance abuse by striking the word illegal from its substance abuse clause. In 2018, lawmakers passed another amendment that put money behind the idea, authorizing grants to assist state agencies with “developing, updating, implementing, and monitoring” their plans of safe care. And in 2019, the law was again amended to provide “civil and criminal liability” to anyone who makes a “good-faith report of child abuse or neglect.”

There is no federal definition for child abuse or neglect. Left to their own devices, each state has adopted different standards for reporting and treatment. Ukoha says the process “varies across providers, institutions, and states,” but the result is that “individuals are tested in pregnancy without their knowledge or consent.” 

Apart from potentially being separated from their newborns, mothers risk placement on child abuse registries—which would prevent them from holding certain jobs or participating in school activities—or incarceration. In the case of Idaho mom Nicole Hamann, one positive test for THC got her 10 years on the state’s child protection registry, according to a joint report by CBS News and The Marshall Project. 

But moms can find themselves facing criminal charges even when the substances are legal. In South Carolina, Ayanna Harris-Rashid was arrested and faced a 10-year felony sentence after testing positive for THC. Harris-Rashid admitted to using CBD, which is legal in the state and can contain trace amounts of THC, to “relieve cramping and nausea.” Her charges were dropped a year after her arrest. 

Keep reading

Leading Ethics Journal Floats Forced Abortion For Minors

Pro-abortion rhetoric has long rested on a slick focus group-tested “pro-choice” mantra, which claims that abortion is necessary for women to have “bodily autonomy.” But pro-abortion “ethicists” are now asserting that “justice for girls” demands that all underage pregnancies end in the death of the unborn child — even if it requires physically or chemically subduing the mother against her will.

That is precisely the case made in a new essay in the April edition of Ethics, the University of Chicago’s elite philosophy journal. Across 31 full pages, our two authors, Alyssa Izatt, a Ph.D. candidate at the University of British Columbia, and Kimberley Brownlee, her UBC professor, explain why compulsory abortion is essential for feminine justice. In fact, in two places they explain enforcing this upon objecting females “might then require sedation or physical restraint” even though it “could be traumatizing,” but still, “the use of restraint (chemical or physical) … is justified as a last resort when it is necessary to provide adequate care.” By “adequate care,” of course, the writers mean killing the mother’s preborn child.

You heard that right. Good-bye, “My body, my choice!” Hello, “Do as you’re told, honey!” Leftist patriarchy parading as feminist empowerment. The pro-abortion ethic is growing ever more sinister.

The authors’ reasoning consists of a basic syllogism, which they admit even the most radical pro-abortion warriors have previously failed to piece together. 

First, abortion is a fundamental, uncontested good. This prejudice is crystal clear in their paper. The only negative observation of abortion they could muster is this: “Having an abortion can be challenging and distressing, even for adult women.” That’s it. They add, “It can be a life-and-death decision, a reality that is far beyond the scope of appropriate childhood responsibilities.” Can be? They never confess whose life is at stake, but one clearly assumes they mean the young mother if she brings her unborn child to term.

Second, the authors assume that underage pregnancy and childbirth are always wrong because of risks to the mother. While the essay is mum on abortion’s risks, it spends pages detailing the physical and psychological dangers of pregnancy for girls and young women. In fact, the authors boldly state without qualification that “a child’s best interests are served by the provision of an abortion: Prioritizing her wellbeing necessitates that physicians and family members view her impregnation as a malady to be treated and take steps to terminate it.” Note that the authors consistently infantilize any female under 18 as “a child.”

Ergo, forced abortion upon underage girls and young women is clearly the most ethical action because they lack the maturity to realize abortion is life-preserving health care. As such, “medical professionals would be failing a child if they withheld abortion care, even if they did so because the child was averse to it.” That is their case.

Keep reading

Can You Be Vaccinated Against Your Will While Under Anesthesia?

A nurse whistleblower from within the hospital system has come forward with a grave warning: the term “vaccine” is quietly disappearing from medical consent forms — replaced with the broad and deceptive category of “Biologics” or “Biogenics.”

Under this new classification, patients could be injected with vaccines and other biological products —against their will, and without their explicit consent — even while unconscious under anesthesia. (source)

Evidence that giving vaccines against the patient’s will has been ongoing for some time:

• Patients in U.S. hospitals were given COVID-19 vaccines without their knowledge or consent while under sedation. Lawsuits are pending. (source)

• Legal teams claim health care workers have confirmed the practice, calling it an “abominable covert act.” (source)

• A mother in the UK fights to stop a hospital from vaccinating her Down syndrome child under sedation against her will. (source)

• Medical journals propose administering vaccines during “perioperative periods” to boost compliance, raising ethical concerns. (source)

The whistleblower warns that the danger lies in how these new forms are written. Patients and guardians may believe they are signing standard medical consent documents — but the language now allows for broad authorization of all biological agents, including vaccines.

Keep reading

CDC, NIAID, DARPA Infect 36 People with Lab-Made Epidemic Influenza Virus: Journal ‘Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses’

The U.S. military and Health and Human Services (HHS) have funded an experiment that infected 36 individuals with an epidemic influenza A/Wisconsin/67/2005 (H3N2) virus that was manufactured in a laboratory, according to a June study published in the peer-reviewed journal Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses.

Congress, the White House, the Department of Energy, the FBI, and the CIA have confirmed that the COVID-19 pandemic was likely the result of lab-engineered pathogen manipulation.

But the government is not only engineering outbreak pathogens in the lab—they’re intentionally infecting people with them.

The influenza strain A/Wisconsin/67/2005 (H3N2) used in the new study is associated with several influenza epidemics, notably during the 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 seasons, reportedly causing widespread outbreaks.

The DARPA-funded experiment’s implications reach far beyond academic inquiry, raising grave national security concerns because lab-engineered viruses have the potential to ignite epidemics and pandemics if accidentally or deliberately released.

It also raises serious informed-consent questions, since participants who became contagious could have exposed others outside the study to a laboratory-created pathogen without their knowledge.

Keep reading

The Death of Informed Consent

Through an open-records request, The New American has obtained documents that shed fresh light on the gravity of the decision in a landmark medical malpractice case — the only wrongful death jury trial in the country for a death officially declared to be caused by Covid. The decision in favor of the defense, handed down in June, should serve as a warning to us all.

Readers of The New American are already familiar with the story of Grace Schara, a Wisconsin teen with Down syndrome who lost her life in a Covid hospital in October, 2021. (Those new to the story can read about it here and can also access recordings of our livestream of the proceedings here.)

In short, the plaintiffs alleged that Grace died from intentional overdoses of sedative, benzodiazepine, and opioid medications, while the defense insisted that a SARS-CoV-2 infection ended her life.

Just days after the lawsuit ended, The New American interviewed Scott Schara, Grace’s dad, who said the outcome proves that informed consent, enshrined in the Nuremberg Code of 1947, is finished.

“Just by being in a hospital, you are giving implied consent,” he warned of the precedent this case sets. He said that the defense claimed, and the jury endorsed the idea, that the drugs in question were normal in an ICU, so no informed consent was necessary, nor did providers need bother to inform the family when Grace survived two drug overdoses early during her hospital stay. He also pointed out that the jury upheld defense witnesses who claimed that a “Do Not Intubate” order (DNI) is equivalent to a “Do Not Resuscitate” order (DNR), and that a doctor may unilaterally place either on a patient, also without informed consent.

Prior Complaints

However, before suing, Scott Schara filed a complaint with Wisconsin’s Department of Safety and Professional Services (DSPS), the state agency which oversees licensed professionals. It accused the physician who took care of Grace during the last two days of her life, Dr. Gavin Shokar, of “label[ing] the patient as DNR and overdos[ing] her on morphine.”

In order to obtain Shokar’s response to these charges, The New American requested the complete file pertaining to Grace’s DSPS case. We received some documents in late August, with only the patient’s name and certain private contact information redacted. However, the file merely included a reference to Scott’s complaint, a case which the agency closed on January 18, 2022 without investigation. We double-checked with DSPS, but the agency said it had nothing to add. (Interestingly, a second, unrelated complaint, filed in May 2023 against Shokar for “negligence/incompetence” and “unprofessional conduct” is listed among the documents received. DSPS reports the case as still open but offers no further details.)

Instead, the remainder of the 170 pages pertains to a complaint filed in July 2023, by Lorna Speid, Ph.D., a clinical pharmacist and president of the California-based drug development consultant, Speid & Associates.

In her initial letter to DSPS, she said she spent “many hours reviewing the medical notes and consulting with other experts in specialized fields” about Grace’s case.

Based on that collaborative analysis, she charged Shokar with “gross incompetence, gross negligence, medical malpractice, dishonesty and deliberate cause of death.” She called his actions deliberate “because the probability that one physician could make all these mistakes and errors, accidentally, is low. All reasonable physicians would know that the actions Dr. Shokar took would lead to the death of the patient.”

She also noted that “the degree and level of cruelty that Ms. [redacted] was subjected to was extraordinary, and repugnant.” According to Speid, part of that cruel treatment involved “recklessly falsif[ying] the medical records to insert a DO NOT RESCUSITATE [DNR] for a vulnerable patient, without the written and unequivocable consent of her parents/guardians,” and refusing to “administer NARCAN to reverse the Morphine overdose.” (Morphine is an opioid that Shokar ordered for Grace, and NARCAN is a brand name for the generic naloxone, an opioid reversal drug.)

Hollee McInnis was the registered nurse charged with Grace’s care on the last two days of the teen’s life, and about whom Speid filed a separate complaint with DSPS. Her report gives a play-by-play timeline of McInnis increasing a continuous infusion of Precedex (a sedative) throughout Grace’s last day on earth; Grace had survived two overdoses of this drug during the same hospital stay. The incidents are clearly documented in her medical record.

On top of that, McInnis piled three doses of the benzodiazepine lorazepam (two of which were given only three minutes apart), though this med is “contraindicated in patients in respiratory distress” (which McInnis recorded as Grace’s condition at the time). She then added a rapid intravenous (IV) push of morphine, which is also warned against for patients having difficulty breathing.

“There is no other explanation for a nurse with 20 years of experience, administering this cocktail of drugs.” Speid explained that it was instead McInnis’ duty to report Shokar for “inappropriate prescribing” and to “refuse to administer the drugs prescribed.”

Unfortunately, the doctor ordered, and the nurse delivered. Grace died a short time later.

Keep reading

National Guard “Accidentally” Gives Service Members COVID-19 Vaccine Instead of Influenza Shot

This week it was revealed that the US National Guard wrongly administered the Covid vaccine to a group of service members who were expecting to receive an influenza vaccine, according to The Epoch Times. The incident occurred during a mobile vaccination clinic for the Maine National Guard and at least one member who refused the mRNA vaccine on religious grounds received the experimental injection without his knowledge.

That service member, Mathew Bouchard, is no longer a member of the National Guard. After the incident, he felt that the trust was completely broken. He was ordered to take a flu shot and feels like he was duped. Because the incident happened close to the end of his service contract, he chose not to renew.

Bouchard explained his decision to The Epoch Times:

“Bouchard said he was ordered to receive an annual flu vaccine and went to the clinic to get that vaccine. He verified his name, date of birth, and part of his social security number, and told officials at the clinic he was there for the flu vaccine. But he was injected with a dose of a messenger RNA COVID-19 vaccine, officials told him.

‘You know how you went in for the flu shot? Well, that wasn’t a flu shot. That was a COVID-19 vaccine,’” Bouchard told The Epoch Times, recounting the meeting with superiors.

“I think, in my mind, at that point, it was like, I completely didn’t know if I trusted any people in the military,” he added.”

In addition to Bouchard, two other service members “were accidentally given a Covid vaccine” instead of a flu injection that day, Maine National Guard spokesperson Maj. Carl Lamb explained in an email to The Epoch Times. The clinic was administering both types of vaccine, which likely led to the egregious error.

“Accident” or not, the incident is inexcusable. Especially considering the recent data that has been revealed about the dangerous and deadly adverse reactions caused by the experimental mRNA vaccines – particularly among otherwise healthy young adults. Just this week, the surgeon general of Florida announced new guidelines about the vaccine that show the jab causes a stunning 84% increase in cardiac-related death among 18-39-year-old men. The state of Florida now officially recommends that young males refrain from receiving the mRNA vaccine completely.

Keep reading