When a society treats dependency as a reason to end a life, it may also change how people think about human worth. 

Kevin Finn | September 28, 2026

While scrolling through the channels the other day, I caught part of a wildlife documentary. The narrator explained how predators such as wolves and coyotes often target the weakest members of a herd, usually the young, the old, and the infirm. As I watched the program, I wondered if something similar might be happening in our own society. I started thinking about how our society treats people who are dependent on others -- particularly the unborn, the elderly, and the seriously ill.

For most of American history, the socially accepted limit for abortion was the "quickening," roughly 16 to 20 weeks into pregnancy. The Clinton-era slogan of "safe, legal, and rare" has gradually evolved degenerated to the point where abortion is routinely described as "health care" or "reproductive justice." Some now defend even the most controversial abortion procedures, and we have seen a disturbing number of people defending a mother who strangled her three children, ages five, three, and eight months.

The same concern arises at the other end of life. Elderly and infirm people who require assisted living or costly medical care are increasingly being advised to consider "Medical Assistance in Dying" (MAiD).

In cultures that prioritize youth and economic productivity, those who need extensive care may start to look like burdens rather than people who need our support. This issue is emerging across North America and parts of Europe.

Canada has become the leading example of the expansion of euthanasia. Approximately 90,000 Canadians have died through MAiD since its legalization. An estimated 16,500 people used MAiD in 2024 alone, representing roughly five percent of all deaths in the country. The numbers are bad enough, but a closer look at individual cases shows........

© American Thinker