- Canada’s radical assisted dying law
- Steady increase in assisted deaths
- Controversy over eligibility expansion
Canada, out of all the countries that have legalised assisted dying, has adopted the most radical approach.
Those opposed to the legislation have referred to it as an example of how the anticipated addition of further eligibility criteria could lead to a “slippery slope.”
In 2016, Canada decriminalised assisted suicide following a Supreme Court decision.
Individuals who have a terminal illness or are experiencing “intolerable suffering,” defined by the Canadian government as “suffering that cannot be alleviated under conditions the individual considers acceptable,” are now permitted to opt for assisted dying.
On constitutional grounds, the legislation was expanded in 2021 to include individuals whose death was “reasonably foreseeable,” thereby broadening eligibility to those with “grievous and irremediable” conditions.
There are plans to further extend the law to include individuals with mental illness by March 2027.
Since its inception four years ago, monitoring data on the number of people choosing to use the assisted dying laws show a consistent increase.
In 2022, 13,241 assisted deaths were recorded in Canada, accounting for 4.1% of all deaths. This number represented a 31.2% increase compared to 2021.
According to the report from the Health and Social Care Committee, Canada was often mentioned by those concerned that a legal change could necessitate a series of incremental adjustments.
Members of Parliament noted, “In support of their positions, members of both groups frequently cited jurisdictions where AD/AS [Assisted Dying/Assisted Suicide] is legal.”
“A number of respondents who support the current law said, ‘If the law were changed to allow AD/AS, it would be a ‘slippery slope’: eligibility criteria would be expanded over time, and intended safeguards would not protect vulnerable groups,'” the report stated.
“Canada emerged as the jurisdiction most frequently referenced by this group.”
Ethics experts also testified in the report, expressing concerns about the model’s implementation in Canada.
Ethical Debates and Controversial Incidents
Columbia University’s Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons’ Centre for Clinical Medical Ethics is directed by Dr. Lydia Dugdale.
She told the committee, “[AD/AS] will continue to expand once it is legalised.” The terminology shifts from ‘guardrails’ to ‘lack of access.’ That is very dangerous. Guardrails are meant to protect society as a whole by preventing us from sliding into a state that facilitates death.
Conversely, Professor James Downar is the Head of the Division of Palliative Care at the University of Ottawa. He argued that expanding eligibility did not necessarily mean liberalisation.
“Our system started as a response to the typical and exceptional cases of suffering, where there was a perceived need to allow euthanasia and assisted suicide for a person with a degenerative disease nearing their natural death,” he explained to the committee.
A Canadian paralympic athlete said she was offered euthanasia for wheelchair access.
Christine Gauthier represented her country in the 2016 Paralympic Games and served ten years in the Canadian armed forces. She was told by a caseworker from Veterans Affairs Canada that she had the “right to die.”
“Start your investing journey with a gift! Claim your free Webull shares.”
The remark was made after the government employee contacted Ms. Gauthier to “update her on the status of the lift.”
Ms. Gauthier recounted the conversation, saying, “I stated that I simply could not continue in this manner. I cannot keep living like this. It’s essential that this issue be resolved.’
“And the person replied, ‘Madame Gauthier, if you really feel you cannot continue in this manner, if you feel you can no longer do it, you have the right to die.'”
