Health Law, Ethics & Policy Seminar Series: Colin Gavaghan

HEALTH LAW, ETHICS & POLICY SEMINAR SERIES

presents

Colin Gavaghan
Associate Professor and
New Zealand Law Foundation Director in Emerging Technologies,

Health Law, Ethics & Policy Seminar Series: Martin Hevia

HEALTH LAW, ETHICS & POLICY SEMINAR SERIES

presents

Martin Hevia
Professor and Executive Dean
Faculty of Law, University Torcuato di Tella

Health Law, Ethics & Policy Seminar Series: Luca Genovese

Health Law, Ethics & Policy Seminar Series
and
WHO Collaborating Centre for Governance, Transparency & Accountability in the Pharmaceutical Sector
present 

Luca Genovese
Researcher – Access to Medicine Foundation 

Health Law, Ethics & Policy Seminar Series: Andelka Phillips

Health Law, Ethics & Policy Seminar Series 

presents 

Andelka Phillips
Ussher Assistant Professor in Information Technology Law
School of Law, Trinity College, Dublin (Ireland) 

Contracting Away DNA - Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Tests for Health, Love, and More… 

Thursday, November 17, 2016

Health Law, Ethics & Policy Seminar Series: Rebecca Cook

HEALTH LAW, ETHICS & POLICY SEMINAR SERIES 

presents 

Rebecca J. Cook
Professor of Law Emerita
Faculty of Law, University of Toronto 

Lessons learned from the amicus brief for the Zika case pending before the
Supreme Federal Court of Brazil 

Health Law, Ethics & Policy Seminar Series: The Honourable Susan E. Lang

HEALTH LAW, ETHICS & POLICY WORKSHOP SERIES 

presents 

The Honourable Susan E. Lang
Retired Judge Ontario Court of Appeal

The Motherisk Testing Program: What Went Wrong and What to Do 

12:30 – 2:00
Thursday, October 20, 2016
Solarium (room FA2) – Falconer Hall

Health Law, Ethics & Policy Seminar Series: Mary Shariff

HEALTH LAW, ETHICS & POLICY SEMINAR SERIES

presents

Mary Shariff
Associate Professor & Associate Dean Research
Faculty of Law, University of Manitoba

Endgame: Clinical and Legal Distinctions Between Palliative Care and Termination of Life

Commentator:  
David Baker, B.A., LL.B., LL.M., L.S.M.

Prof. Trudo Lemmens co-authors "Should assisted dying for psychiatric disorders be legalized in Canada?"

Wednesday, June 22, 2016

In a commentary in the Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ), Prof. Trudo Lemmens and Dr. Scott Kim, a physician and bioethicist at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) argue that offering medical assistance in dying to people in Canada on the basis of psychiatric illnesses could put vulnerable people at risk ("Should assisted dying for psychiatric disorders be legalized in Canada?," June 21, 2016).

Read the full commentary on the CMAJ website.

Senator Murray Sinclair's Call for Senatorial and Legal Restraint Should Inspire All of Us

Trudo Lemmens
Monday, June 6, 2016

The deluge of op-eds, blogs, commentaries, media interviews and news reports about Bill C-14 on Medical Assistance in Dying has created a level of over-saturation. More careful, reflective statements are increasingly hard to find. What now dominates the debate are bold statements about the constitutionality of the Bill—University of Ottawa’s Amir Attaran apparently even inventing a new constitutional qualifier of ‘unconstitutional by the bucketfull’--and reports of difficult and emotional end-of-life situations, which Bill C-14 may indeed not necessarily solve. It is therefore perhaps no surprise that the eloquent, respectful and wise intervention in the Senate by the Honourable Murray Sinclair, former judge and former Chair of the Residential Schools Truth and Reconciliation Commission, did not receive much attention in the media.

New Bill Medical Assistance in Dying Balances Competing Charter Rights; Prior Review Still Needed

Trudo Lemmens
Thursday, April 14, 2016
The Canadian government just released its bill on Medical Assistance in Dying, in response to the Carter decision. The Government wisely decided that a criminal law prohibition should remain in place, but that in exceptional circumstances, medical acts that hasten a person's death are exempted from the criminal prohibition.  The Bill is emphasizing the importance of balancing competing Charter rights: the right for some people in exceptional circumstances to obtain active medical support for a life ending intervention (justified under Carter under the right to life, liberty and security of the person) and the right of those who are vulnerable and require our protection and full support, which--as Dianne Pothier aptly demonstrates--is associated with the Right to Life and Security of the Person and the Right to Equality. The access criteria reflect an appropriate balance, which was missing from previous reports that nearly exclusively focused on 'access' and individual choice, that ignored how contextual factors contribute to vulnerability, and that ignored growing evidence of problems in open-ended access regimes.

Pages