https://revolver.news/2025/12/glenn-beck-rushes-to-save-young-woman-from-canadas-ghoulish-euthanasia-program/
"Saskatchewan woman named Jolene Van Alstine has a rare but treatable parathyroid condition (normocalcemic primary hyperparathyroidism) that causes severe nausea, vomiting, bone pain and disability. She has struggled with it for years. > "I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me." — Matthew 25:36
But she can't get the treatment she needs in Canada because of the medical bureaucracy. So she was actually considering assisted suicide to end the extreme pain and now Glenn Beck is offering pay to fly her to USA where doctors have already offered to give her the treatment -but there's a problem with passports - although it looks like they might be able to find a workaround.
There is an ironic twist to this story:
I asked ChatGPT,
Would she be better off
in a Canadian Federal prison ?
"This is an unsettling but very important question — because being in a Canadian prison would dramatically change her situation, and the contrast exposes a deep contradiction in the system.
Below are all the relevant realities, laid out clearly.
Short answer (plain truth)
If she were a federal inmate in Canada, she would be far more likely to receive expedited, specialized medical care than she is as a free civilian — and MAiD would be far less likely to be presented as the "solution."
That sounds upside-down, but it's accurate.
1. Prisoners have a constitutional right to healthcare
Under Canadian law (Charter of Rights and Freedoms + Supreme Court rulings):
Inmates must receive "essential health care" equivalent to community standards
Failure to provide necessary treatment can be ruled cruel and unusual punishment. The state has a positive duty to preserve inmate life
In other words:
> When the government locks you up, it legally owns responsibility for keeping you alive.That duty does not exist in the same way for free citizens.
2. Prison healthcare bypasses normal waitlists
Federal prisons (Correctional Service Canada – CSC):
Contract external specialists directly
Send inmates out of province or out of country if needed
Can authorize non-resident surgeons
Do not require the same referral bottlenecks civilians face
If a prison doctor says:
> "This condition is causing extreme suffering and deterioration,"
the system moves.
3. Cost arguments disappear in custody
For civilians:
Provinces argue about budgets
Waitlists are rationing tools
"Not enough specialists" becomes the end of the discussion
For prisoners:
The state cannot argue cost as a justification for neglect.
Courts routinely rule: expense is irrelevant when fundamental rights are at stake
Result:
> A prisoner can receive a surgery a free citizen cannot.
4. MAiD in prison exists — but under stricter scrutiny
Yes, inmates can technically access MAiD, but:
It triggers additional oversight
Ethics committees are more cautious
There is heightened concern about coercion and despair
Corrections officials are acutely aware of legal liability
A case like hers — treatable condition, lack of access driving despair — would raise red flags.MAiD would not be casually accepted as the outcome.
5. Suicide prevention obligations are stronger in custody
If an inmate expresses:
hopelessness
desire to die
unbearable suffering
The response is:
mandatory mental-health evaluation
increased monitoring
intervention plans
duty-to-preserve-life protocols
For civilians, that obligation is weaker — especially when MAiD reframes death as "choice."
6. Accountability is concentrated, not fragmented
In prison:
One authority (CSC) is responsible
Medical failures are traceable
Lawsuits are direct and damaging
In civilian healthcare:
Responsibility is diffused across ministries, colleges, hospitals, and waitlists
Everyone can say, "Not my call."
Institutions behave better when someone can be sued personally.
7. The dark irony (this is the core insight)
In Canada today:
Prisoners are wards of the state
Free citizens are clients of a rationed system
Wards get protection.
Clients get options — including death.
8. What this comparison exposes
If she were incarcerated:
Her suffering would be legally intolerable
Her condition would trigger action
Her death would be a state failure
As a free citizen:
Her suffering is reframed as autonomy
Her death is reframed as consent
The system absolves itself
Bottom line (no rhetoric)
If she were in a Canadian prison:
She would almost certainly receive faster, more decisive medical intervention
MAiD would be less likely, not more
The government would be forced to act
That alone tells you the problem is not medicine.
It's how the state defines responsibility.
So if Glenn Beck doesn't come through should she commit a non- violent federal crime without doing anybody any harm to get herself in prison for a year ⁉️