I had typed a very long winded reply with data from the government regarding this but it doesn't seem that anyone here wants to engage in a proper discussion regarding it.

I will end it off on the opinion that the government isn't "empowering" citizens to kill themselves, rather they're offering those with intolerable suffering, pain, as well as medical conditions that will result in their timely death, a choice to die with dignity and go out on their own terms. Your wording and usage of empower implies the government is advocating for this and encouraging all of its citizens to do this, regardless of their condition, which it isnt.

Would you rather someone who has terminal bone cancer sit in a hospital doped up on morphine in intolerable pain while their bones physically sharpen themselves, instead of providing them a choice? I'd suggest to all of you who are against it or concerned about it's uses to spend some time in an old age home, or on a hospital ward providing palliative care to end stage cancer patients.

Mental illness patients will have safeguards in place to ensure they qualify for the service and have exhausted all other options, and I will reiterate again, are making the decision on their own free will. This is verified numerous times throughout the process through assessments as well as signatures/consent. In the link I provided above that breaks down who is using MAID and for what you will see:

Table 2.3a outlines the reasons why people were found ineligible for MAID, based on the legislative criteria. The most common reason for a request being determined to be ineligible was due to the person being assessed as incapable of making decisions with respect to their health. Other common reasons were that the person was determined as not: being in an advanced state of irreversible decline; experiencing intolerable suffering; or having a serious and incurable illness, disease or disability.

Just so everyone understands what this means, is that your concern for those who are only a little sad or going through a rough patch in their lives, are DENIED access to this service.

You still haven't identified the trend. The expansion of the services? This is one amendment that expands criteria to allow for mental health patients to be eligible under specific criteria.

One change to criteria doesn't indicate a trend. A trend would be the slow erosion of that eligibility criteria through numerous amendments.

This isn't a cost effective method to kill homeless people. That's ridiculous and you know it. And if you don't, there's no discussion to be had here.

If only we could merge maid and self defense laws somehow and pay home owners for services rendered in dispatching undesirables who are no longer functioning as productive members of society.