Assisted-Suicide Ban Struck Down by B.C Court

A British Columbia Supreme Court judge has declared Canada's laws against physician-assisted suicide unconstitutional. In a 395-page ruling released Friday, Justice Lynn Smith called the law discriminatory. In her judgment, Smith speaks directly to the situation faced by Gloria Taylor, a B.C. woman with ALS, also known as Lou Gehrig's disease, who was one of five plaintiffs seeking to overturn the legislation. Suicide itself is not illegal, and therefore, Smith ruled, the law against assisted suicide contravenes Section 15 of the Charter, which guarantees equality, because it denies physically disabled people like Taylor the same rights as able-bodied people who can take their own lives. "The impact of that distinction is felt particularly acutely by persons such as Ms. Taylor, who are grievously and irremediably ill, physically disabled or soon to become so, mentally competent and who wish to have some control over their circumstances at the end of their lives," Smith writes. "The distinction is discriminatory … because it perpetuates disadvantage."

Smith also says the law deprives both people like Taylor and those who try to help them of the right to life and liberty guaranteed under Section 7 of the Charter. She argues the legislation could force a person to take their life sooner than they want to in order to kill themselves while still physically capable.

And Smith says the risk of incarceration denies the right of freedom to relatives who assist by taking their loved ones to jurisdictions where physician-assisted suicide is legal.

The impact of the ruling will not be immediate. Smith has suspended the declaration of invalidity for one year in order to give Parliament time to take whatever steps it sees fit to draft and consider new legislation. But in the meantime, Smith says Taylor must have a constitutional exception to seek physician-assisted suicide if she chooses to end her life.

Smith's ruling also addresses the risks raised by defendants in the case: "For example relating to the patients' ability to make well-informed decisions and their freedom from coercion or undue influence, and to physicians' ability to assess patients' capacity and voluntariness."

"The evidence shows that risks exist," she wrote. "But that they can be very largely avoided through carefully designed, well-monitored safeguards."

At the end of the decision, Smith also stipulates that her ruling only apply to "competent, fully informed, non-ambivalent adult persons who personally (not through a substituted decision-maker) request physician-assisted death, are free from coercion and undue influence and are not clinically depressed."

CBC News

Your thoughts?

This is a real tough nut for me because of the possibility of coercion by relatives and also THE STATE. However I do think the individual should have the right to say they've had enough and want to end it. It must be hell on earth for some people who're stuck in a pain racked body thats never going to get better.

for the judge.

Originally posted by VoidHawk
This is a real tough nut for me because of the possibility of coercion by relatives and also THE STATE. However I do think the individual should have the right to say they've had enough and want to end it. It must be hell on earth for some people who're stuck in a pain racked body thats never going to get better.

for the judge.

IMHO I'm all for assisted suicide when it comes to those who are suffering from incurable disease that either have you in lots of pain or that makes your body is slowly shutting down like ALS & MS.

My younger sister was diagnosed at age 5 with an incurable auto-immune disease. 2 years later my Mom was diagnosed with Crohn's disease. Since then I have met many people who are sick. I've seen the kinds of lives they have to live. My Uncle passed away from ALS in 2009. He suffered 2yrs with it slowly shutting down his body until he was almost a vegetable. My boyfriend's Mom has MS so I get to see a little into her life. She's on step away from being in a care home.

I get where these people are coming from and if your doctor says it's ok for you to end your life and you haven't been coursed into it, then you should be allowed to end your life with a family member helping you instead of your doctor.

reply to post by knoledgeispower


I support euthanasia, but more than that I support human rights, whatever they may be. It's far more likely for me to side with the people who are making decisions about their own lives, on any matter, than with any organization or entity that tries to enforce its own ideas onto people.

But this made me wonder -- if there really is a world depopulation agenda, why won't they just let people die willingly if they wish to?


Khar

Wow you've had it hard. Hope I didnt offend in anyway.

Originally posted by Kharron
reply to post by knoledgeispower

 

I support euthanasia, but more than that I support human rights, whatever they may be. It's far more likely for me to side with the people who are making decisions about their own lives, on any matter, than with any organization or entity that tries to enforce its own ideas onto people.

But this made me wonder -- if there really is a world depopulation agenda, why won't they just let people die willingly if they wish to?

Khar

They can't make it look like they have a world depopulation agenda. If it looks like they are fighting against things like this then no one is going to think that they are secretly smiling inside and helping push it their way. They have to appear to be trying to be conflicted about it but they will "cave into pressure" and allow for laws like this. Distract you with this hand over here while the other hand reaches into your pocket.


VoidHawk - No you did not offend at all. I'm just saying I understand where they come from. It's hard for people who aren't sick or know someone who is sick to understand the toll it has on someone. Even my older sister has a bit of difficulty understanding some aspects of my Mom being sick and my recent gall bladder surgery and how long of a recovery it's taking because she is a personal trainer and not sick. She understands a little but there is a lot she has a hard time with because she's not sick. My ex was that way too, coming from a healthy household and his parents still be together there was a lot of my decision making he didn't understand and agree with.

reply to post by Kharron

But this made me wonder -- if there really is a world depopulation agenda, why won't they just let people die willingly if they wish to?

It's all about control. You die when we say you can die. Not before then.

They can't make it look like they have a world depopulation agenda. If it looks like they are fighting against things like this then no one is going to think that they are secretly smiling inside and helping push it their way. They have to appear to be trying to be conflicted about it but they will "cave into pressure" and allow for laws like this. Distract you with this hand over here while the other hand reaches into your pocket.

What I don't understand: if a pet dog gets ran over and breaks its back you take it to the vet and they say "We should put it down... HUMANLY.. so it doesn't have to suffer..

So we put down certain animals in pain 'humanly' yet we don't let people in pain have that choice?