Legalizing Euthanasia in Canada

The SCC Carter case of 2015, known as Carter v. Canada (Attorney General), deals with the controversial question of whether or not the prohibition of assisted suicide is a violation of a Canadian’s right to life, liberty, and security. Under section 241 of the Criminal Code, it prohibits in the act of assisting another to commit suicide. The appellants argue that this prohibition is cruel on competent adults who have the mental capacity to consent to their own deaths and who are suffering from a medical condition that causes them endured suffering and pain. One of the appellants is Gloria Taylor, who was diagnosed with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS), which causes deteriorating voluntary muscles, preventing her from moving or even breathing

Canada, which began in 2009, Gloria Taylor was a women who was diagnosed with ALS. Her doctors let her know that a month after her diagnoses, she would likely be paralyzed within six months and most likely die within a year (Butler & Tiedemann, 2015). Taylor wanted to challenge the law on assisted suicide because she wanted the option to end her life in the presence of a trained professional before her quality of life would be extremely compromised (Butler & Tiedemann, 2015). Three individual plaintiffs joined Ms. Taylors claim. These individuals included, Dr. William Choichet, who was a physician that was willing to perform assisted suicide in safe circumstances if the laws in Canada were changed (Butler & Tiedemann, 2015). Lee Carter and Hollis Johnson were the other two plaintiffs who joined the claim. These two were the daughter and son-in-law of Kay Carter who was a woman who had suffered from spinal Stenosis. Spinal stenosis is a disease, which causes mobility limitation and pain, while leaving individuals cognitive abilities in tact (Butler & Tiedemann, 2015). Ms. Carter asked her daughter and son-in-law to bring her to an assisted suicide clinic in Switzerland where assisted suicide is legal. Both plaintiffs brought Ms. Carter even though they were aware they could face prosecution (Butler & Tiedemann, 2015). If assisted suicide had been legal in Canada at the time of Ms. Carters suffering she would have had the comfort of freely expressing her right to liberty in terms of wanting to end her life while she was still competent to make this decision and not having to travel so far while also putting her family at risk of

The Canadian Medical Association defines physician-assisted death (PAD) as “[when] a physician knowingly and intentionally provides a person with the knowledge and/or means required to end their own lives…”. (A, p29) In Canada, suicide has been legal for years, but euthanasia and physician-assisted death have only recently been decriminalized in a court of law. However, until 2016, PAD can still be charged as “culpable homicide” under section 222 and 229 of the Criminal Code of Canada. (B,K) The specifics of the debate on physician-assisted death in Canada has, over the decades, not significantly changed, but instead Canadians’ opinions have been shifted since information from Belgium, Columbia, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Switzerland,

The meaning of life differs for everyone but is commonly an opportunity to maximize overall individual happiness. The diversity of the Canadian society encompasses many different views on whether it is morally and ethically right for someone to suffer. Assisted death is providing people who are suffering the opportunity to die with dignity. This paper will focus on why assisted suicide needs to be readily available by elaborating on the quality of life versus quantity, how assisted death could be in the best interest of everyone impacted and the financial expenses of medical care.

Firstly, a man's father had not received doctor assisted suicide because he did not reach requirements even though he had prostate cancer. He needed a approval from 2 healthcare providers. One of them had approved and the other denied because the healthcare worker assumed that he wasn't in distress. As time passed, 2 weeks later the man's father died in a home that cared for the sick. Furthermore, even though the man had prostate cancer and he was going to die, he could not get doctor assisted suicide because it was assumed that he was not in distress. Secondly, a person with a grievous and irremediable medical condition can only be granted to get doctor assisted suicide. A doctor in Toronto said that just because of this law only 1 out of 10 requests for medically assisted dying are granted. Additionally, the doctor had also stated that there are many reasons why a patient can not be granted doctor assisted suicide and the most common one is that their condition might not be too severe and their death may not be foreseeable. Many kill themselves because they can not bear the pain that others can not see. Thirdly, the mentally ill are not being included for doctor assisted suicide. There are many organizations that fight for this right but the main one is "Dying with Dignity". This organization argues that the bill passed by Canada called C-14 discludes the mentally ill. Additionally, this is a violation to charter of rights. People have the right to make decisions about treatment according to Ontario's Health Care Consent Act. Although, they can only make these decisions if they are capable which means if they understand the information about the treatments and the consequences of refusing the treatment. Moreover, research states that the general public and health workers do not wish that the law includes these

As a result of this, the substantial issue unfolds. Assisted suicide is illegal under the terms of the Suicide Act (1961) in Canada, and is punishable by up to 14 years’ imprisonment, yet the attempt to kill yourself in not a criminal act in itself. Unfortunately, people seeking assisted suicide are incapable of committing the act themselves, which thus requires the aid of another person. Due to this, a number of Canadians have been prosecuted for helping ill patients or loved ones die. Marielle Houle, for example, was sentenced to three years by a Quebec court in 2004 for helping her 36 year old son, who suffered from multiple sclerosis, end his life; according to CBC News. Unfortunately, Canada is not alone in ruling assisted suicide illegal,

British Columbia, a 42-year-old mother diagnosed with a terminal illness is prohibited from undergoing assisted suicide. Her diagnosed disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, would leave her in detrimental conditions for the last expected year of her life. Rodriguez would be unable to adequately eat, communicate, move herself around, or breathe on her own without a respirator. Rodriguez requested permission to commit euthanasia, assisted suicide, when it would come to the point that she was no longer able to live an enjoyable and happy life. She applied to the Supreme Court of British Columbia to argue that her inability to commit euthanasia violated acts 7, 12, and 15 (1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Albert Camus once quoted, “But in the end, one needs more courage to live than to kill them self.” Today I will be discussing the topic of Euthanasia also known as “assisted suicide.” The word originated from the Greeks, meaning “good death”. Euthanasia refers to the ending of one’s life, primarily to end suffering and pain. Euthanasia is a controversial topic and generates many political and religious debates. Although euthanasia is illegal in Canada, in some jurisdictions such as the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland and the American states of Washington, Oregon and Montana, euthanasia is a legal and common practice.

They are suffering rare diseases , that don't have any cure, they have to live with that all their life and if those people decide they can not deal with the pain and everything else that comes with it, they should have the choice to pull the plug.7 out of 10 canadians approve of assisted suicide. “Basically because health care system is different agency than the federal government” Here is the thing that veronique said that they have a safeguard to ensure only terminal patients would be eligible for “medical and dying” “. The federal government nothing to do with this bill, it has to pass through

Euthanasia and physician assisted suicide are both types of medical assistance aiding in ending a suffering patient’s life. This pain may be due to a terminal illness and suffering as well as those in an irreversible coma. This practice of doctor assisted suicide is illegal in many countries, but is increasing in popularity as people start to recognize the positive aspects that euthanasia has to offer for those that fit the criteria. Euthanasia is essential for those, placed in such life diminishing situations, and whom no longer want to experience suffering. This is where the issue gets complicated, and many religious groups argue that individuals should not have the legal right to choose whether they get to die or not, but that it is simply in God’s hands. Suffering patients argue that they should be given the right to choose whether or not they have to experience this suffering, to end their life with the dignity they still have, and to alleviate the stress that their deteriorating life conditions have on their families, themselves and the entire healthcare system. Therefore, despite the many arguments, euthanasia can have a very positive impact on the lives and families of suffering individuals, as well as the Canadian healthcare system.

If Canadians know that it is against the law to assist in someone’s suicide why do they do it anyway? If the law is changed then more people will go and assist someone in killing themselves. If a person wants to kill themselves then they are obviously in a bad state of mind. Section 7 of the Charter is supposed to make everyone feel secure. So instead of letting that person commit suicide we should protect that person and get that person help, whether it be getting them some sort of therapy or getting that person medication to keep them feeling better for that period of time. Many Canadians are charged for helping someone ill or someone they love die. Marielle Houlle, for example, is a lady that was sentenced to get three years probation by a Quebec court in 2004 because she helped her 36-year-old son, who was in pain from multiple sclerosis, end his life (CBC, 2014). Another one of my concerns with assisted suicide is that some people might use it as a cover up for killing another person. If a person shoots someone and ends another their life that person can serve up to 14 years in prison. Yet this lady only gets 3 years probation for ending her sons life. This was a controversial decision as it was not considered fair by many people. The law should just stay the same and anyone who kills someone else should get an appropriate

Belgium is another place where Euthanasia has been made legal and its pro-Euthanasia health system is abused to the same extent as is the Dutch one. If Euthanasia was legalized in Canada, abuse would occur in the same manner. On top of the statistics, there are many other disadvantages of legalizing Euthanasia. For one, how would one go about committing Euthanasia? Most likely, drugs whose sole purpose is to end a human life would have to be legalized as well. It is quite possible that these drugs could fall into the hands of someone who would use them in illegal acts such as murder. Another flaw in legalizing Euthanasia would be that it would become possible for relatives of a dying patient to take advantage of life insurance policies or wills. Family may encourage a patient to choose Euthanasia so that they can receive money from the patients will or life insurance.

Margaret Somerville, who has authored, edited, and co-edited a number of books and newspaper articles opposing the use of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide and who also is the Samuel Gale Professor of Law, Professor in the Faculty of Medicine, and Founding Director of the Centre for Medicine, Ethics, and Law at McGill University, Montreal, wrote the internet article titled “Against Euthanasia.” In the article Somerville blatantly states that any type of euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide is completely and totally wrong under all circumstances. She offers the two major reasons why she considers the practice of euthanasia to be entirely immoral and unacceptable. The first main reason that is given is, “that it is wrong for

When euthanasia is allowed, it gives the patients their right to life, liberty and security of person, or Section 7 under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. By taking away their ability to relieve themselves of this pain, it takes away their ability to live safely and with liberty. It takes away their

A person has the right to life, why not death? These are two topics that are debated everyday in some form or another. Death is something that we all will face, it is inevitable. There is no miracle cure to fix it and to keep the subject in the dark could be considered irresponsible.