There’s little doubt that Canada’s right-to-die legislation will undergo a makeover.
All parties agreed with the need during the recent election campaign, and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says he’ll comply with a Quebec Superior Court ruling that struck down part of the law.
The law, which forms part of the Criminal Code, requires a full review in Parliament next year anyway, so debate over medically assisted death will get another full airing as a Commons committee fields submissions from all sides.
The movement comes little more than a year after Audrey Parker departed this life.
The Halifax woman spoke out prior to her death on Nov. 1, 2018, because she thought her situation was unfair. The law required her to consent to the life-ending procedure in the moments immediately prior to death.
In effect, you must give consent twice: first, when you make arrangements to have the doctor attend you, and second, in those final moments. This gives the patient one last chance to change her mind.
In order to do so, the patient needs to have the mental capacity to grant that final consent.
But what if after you make initial arrangements, you lose consciousness or your disease robs you of the mental capacity to give consent?
Yes, Ottawa should navigate this ethical minefield with extreme care. No one wants to open the door too wide. But time is of the essence for many people who are suffering, so hopefully Parliament will conduct this review promptly.
As it stands, no doctor can legally carry out the procedure. Parker was afraid that would happen, because her cancer had spread to her brain. Since she was concerned her last wish might not be carried out, she moved the date up.
Her point was that she could have had more time, if the law did not require that last-minute consent.
In September, the Quebec Superior Court struck that requirement down as unconstitutional, violating the sections of the Charter guaranteeing life, liberty and equality under the law. The judge gave Ottawa six months to amend the law.
The two patients in that case are severely handicapped, suffering from painful conditions that will eventually kill them. But it might have been years before they reached the stage where the current law would permit their wish.
They appealed after their requests for medically assisted death were turned down by their doctors.
As always, the question is: Where do you draw the line? No matter where the line sits, there will always be cases on the margins that seem unfair or cruel.
Yes, Ottawa should navigate this ethical minefield with extreme care. No one wants to open the door too wide. But time is of the essence for many people who are suffering, so hopefully Parliament will conduct this review promptly.
But Audrey Parker’s case is one example where an early consent spelling out conditions under which a medically assisted death could take place — where there is no hope for recovery and where the patient’s wishes are crystal clear — should be permitted even if there’s no opportunity for a last-minute confirmation of her wishes.
RELATED
