Supreme Court opens door to doctor-assisted suicide
OTTAWA, ON—The Supreme Court of Canada has declared the ban on physician-assisted suicide unconstitutional, opening the door for Parliament to create legislation governing its use.
In a unanimous ruling February 6, the nation’s top court said “competent adults with enduring, intolerable suffering who clearly consent to ending their lives” may seek the assistance of a doctor to do so.
Assisted-suicide has long been considered a criminal act in Canada. However this decision strikes down those sections of the Criminal Code. The Court suspended its declaration that these sections are invalid for one year to give the federal government time to write new legislation regulating doctor-assisted suicide.
If the federal and provincial take no action regarding new legislation within the year, the Court’s current exemption for physicians will stand.
The Supreme Court ruling notes what it considers to be reliable safeguards set up in other jurisdictions where doctor-assisted suicide is legal. They say doctors are capable of assessing a patient’s competence to consent, and find no evidence that the elderly or disabled are vulnerable to being euthanized.
It also says a “(p)hysicians’ decision to participate in assisted dying is a matter of conscience and religious belief” adding that “In our view, nothing in the declaration of invalidity which we propose to issue would compel physicians to provide assistance in dying.”
But these and other questions remain, such as whether depression or severe mental illness would qualify as intolerable suffering.
“It will be logically impossible for Parliament or any legislature or court to enact safeguards that will be able to withstand future legal challenges,” says Mark Penninga, executive director of Association for Reformed Political Action (ARPA) Canada, an intervenor in the case.
“As we see in Belgium and the Netherlands, it is only a matter of time before these so-called safeguards are considered an unjust limitation on someone else’s rights, even allowing children or those who are depressed to be killed at the hands of the state.
“With this decision, autonomous choices have been raised as a higher value than life itself. This will have devastating consequences on the value of human life, especially for the most vulnerable in society.”
The case has been in the courts for years, brought by the B.C. Civil Liberties Association on behalf of Kay Carter and Gloria Taylor. Both have died since the legal battle began. Carter travelled to Switzerland to carry out her death, while Taylor died of ALS in 2012.
A lawyer arguing on behalf of Carter and Taylor said because their physical disabilities “didn’t allow them to kill themselves the way able-bodied people could,” they were being discriminated against.
While the B.C. Supreme Court struck down the laws prohibiting assisted suicide in 2012, the province’s Court of Appeal overturned the lower court decision and upheld the law in 2013. The Supreme Court of Canada heard the appeal of that decision in October 2014.
Christian organizations are voicing their dismay over the ruling.
The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada (EFC), an intervenor in the case, is calling on the government to respond quickly to the ruling, which decriminalizes not only assisted-suicide (defined as a person killing him or herself, with aid) but also voluntary euthanasia, in which case medical professionals do the actual killing.
“With the 12-month time frame given by the Court, Parliament must move quickly to ensure that stringent safeguards, protections and oversights are in place,” says EFC president Bruce Clemenger.
“The experience of other countries is that over time the safeguards are ignored or weakened, placing vulnerable people at risk. As Canadians, we need to ensure that high quality palliative care is available and comfort and care are provided so that no one comes to believe being killed is their best option.”
Larry Worthen, executive director of the Christian Medical and Dental Society Canada (CMDS), also has serious concerns, primarily regarding “the safety of patients who may get the message from society, explicitly or implicitly that they would be better off ending their lives prematurely.”
CMDS Canada is also focused on safeguarding physicians’ and other health care professionals’ freedom of conscience to decline involvement with these procedures. It continues to advocate for freedom of conscience and religion in physicians’ colleges, Parliament and provincial legislatures.
For additional resources on the EFC’s intervention in Lee Carter, et al. v. Attorney General of Canada, et al. including its factum go here.
Dear Readers:
ChristianWeek relies on your generous support. please take a minute and donate to help give voice to stories that inform, encourage and inspire.
Donations of $20 or more will receive a charitable receipt.Thank you, from Christianweek.
