"A child in the Netherlands was recentlyeuthanizedat the behest of their parents and doctors. Normally, such a case would warrant arrests, trials and convictions. But one crucial fact changed what should have been a straightforward matter of law enforcement: the child in question was disabled — not brain dead, not dying — disabled. One would think that such a practice would be condemned by democracies worldwide, especially those that employ highfalutin jargon about human rights and dignity in common parlance." Let's be clear, infants cannot consent to being killed. Yet proponents of euthanasia appeal to autonomy as a fundamental principle of healthcare. Yet when someone is suicidal because of depression or despair, we rightly intervene to save their life. Why, then, is death considered an acceptable answer to suffering in some circumstances but not others? When adults decide that a child's life is no longer worth living, we must ask: When does the so-called “right to die” become a decision that someone else’s life is no longer worth living? Liana Graham asks if Canada is next? tinyurl.com/s2k4hm4s