Canadians Support a More Prudent Approach to Medical-Aid-in-Dying than Parliamentary Committee, and Rightly So

Just when the federal government is about to table its bill on medically-hastened-death (or medical-aid-in-dying, physician-assisted dying, euthanasia, or physician-assisted-suicide), a new extensive poll of what Canadians want to see in new legislation suggests that Canadians support a more prudent approach than the open-ended access approach put forward by the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) report and, prior to that, a Provincial-Territorial Expert Advisory Group (PTEAG) report. Canadians continue to support access to ‘physician assisted suicide’ (PAS), the term used in the poll, but a majority (51.8%) opposes the idea of providing access to PAS when the request is based on psychiatric conditions and purely psychological suffering. A majority also appears opposed to PAS for mature minors (in the poll: 16 to 17 year olds).  The 1,000 people polled were also asked about what they preferred as review mechanism. 59% of those polled support the recommendation by the committee of a review by two physicians, while 41 % supports a review by a ‘panel of independent experts’.

Joint Parliamentary Committee Assisted Dying Report Goes Beyond Scope, Ignores Evidence

This blog post follows my earlier posting about Balancing Access to Physician Assisted Dying and Protecting the Vulnerable

The following op-ed with David Baker was first published on the Globe and Mail website on February 27, 2016. We also added a short note in relation to attempts by some colleagues to impose changes to our text after publication.

Assisted Dying Report Goes Beyond Scope, Ignores Evidence

David Baker and Trudo Lemmens

Published Globe and Mail Saturday, Feb. 27, 2016

David Baker is a constitutional lawyer who represented the national disability groups in Rodriguez and Carter. Trudo Lemmens is Professor and Scholl Chair in Health Law and Policy at the Faculty of Law of the University of Toronto

Balancing Access to Physician Assisted Dying with Protecting the Vulnerable

The federal government is currently working on legislation that responds to the Supreme Court’s Carter v. Canada (AG) decision, in which the Court invalidated an absolute prohibition on physician assisted dying and invited the legislator to develop a “carefully designed and monitored system of safeguards.” The Carter decision declared the criminal prohibition void insofar it prohibits physician assisted dying for a “competent adult person who (1) clearly consents to the termination of life; and (2) has a grievous and irremediable medical condition (including an illness, disease or disability) that causes enduring suffering that is intolerable to the individual in the circumstances of his or her condition.” The Court provided no further detail about how to implement these ‘parameters’, and stated explicitly: “the scope of this declaration is intended to respond to the factual circumstances in this case. We make no pronouncement on other situations where physician-assisted dying may be sought.” The case involved people who were terminally ill and/or, in the words of the trial judge in the case, people with “advanced weakening capacities with no chance of improvement.” In fact, at the trial level the claim made by the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association was also narrowly framed as a claim to recognize the right to physician assisted dying of those “who are suffering unbearably at the end of life.”

2015 Grand Moot

Freedom of Expression and The Right to be Forgotten

Thursday, October 1, 2015
Doors open at 4:30 p.m.

Victoria College Chapel
(Room 213, Second Floor)
Victoria College, 91 Charles Street West
University of Toronto

Sponsored by McCarthy Tétrault

New book "False Security" co-authored by Prof. Kent Roach featured in the media

Thursday, September 3, 2015

False SecurityThe new book about Bill C-51 by Prof. Kent Roach and Prof. Craig Forcese of the University of Ottawa, False Security: The Radicalization of Canadian Anti-Terrorism, has been featured on television and in the print media. Here are some of the stories:

JD student Riaz Sayani-Mulji writes "Hamilton police carding policies target vulnerable minorities" in Hamilton Spectator

Tuesday, August 11, 2015

In a commentary in the Hamilton Spectator, JD student Riaz Sayani-Mulji argues that Hamilton's police need to address the issue of carding and racial profiling ("Hamilton police carding policies target vulnerable minorities," August 10, 2015).

Read the full commentary on the Hamilton Spectator website, or below.


 

Prof. Kent Roach: "Your rights, your remedies"

Tuesday, February 3, 2015

In a commentary in the Ottawa Citizen, Prof. Kent Roach looks at the current state of court-ordered remedies for violations of constitutional rights ("Your rights, your remedies," February 2, 2015).

The commentary is a lead-up to his "Big Thinking" lecture on "Judicial activism and the role of courts in providing remedies" organized by the Federation for the Humanities and Social Sciences and the Trudeau Foundation, in Ottawa on Thursday, Feb. 5, 2015.

2014 Grand Moot wows the panel of justices

Tuesday, October 7, 2014

Students tackle issues of data tracking and privacy

By Lucianna Ciccocioppo

It was standing-room only in Alumni Hall on October 2, for the 2014 Grand Moot, sponsored by long-time firm partner, McCarthy Tétrault. More than 140 people attended, or watched on the video feed in an overflow room, to hear the best-of-the-best student mooters at the Faculty of Law argue issues about tracking data, privacy and the Charter.

Pages