Implications of Supreme Court's assisted suicide ruling
Last week, the Supreme Court of Canada released its long-awaited decision in Carter v. Canada. This was the final appeal of an application brought by two British Columbia women with debilitating, terminal illnesses, who argued that the laws which prohibited them and others from obtaining assistance in ending their lives were unconstitutional. They sought a declaration that Section 241 (b) of the Criminal Code, which provides that everyone who aids or abets a person in committing suicide commits an indictable offence, was unconstitutional, in that this provision, together with s.14 of the Criminal Code (which provides that no person may consent to death being inflicted on them) prohibits the provision of assistance in dying in Canada. In that regard, the rights of the applicants, and other people who suffered debilitating illnesses, under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to life, liberty and security of the person under section 7, and to equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination based on physical disability under section 15, were violated, condemning them to a life of suffering.
In 2012, the British Columbia Supreme Court granted the application and struck down the laws as being unconstitutional.
However, the British Columbia Court of Appeal granted the BC and Canadian Governments' appeal, finding that the courts were bound by the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in Rodriguez v. British Columbia (Attorney General), which found that the laws prohibiting assisted suicide violated sections 7 and 15 of the Charter, but that this was justified under s. 1 , as there was “no halfway measure that could be relied upon with assurance” to protect the vulnerable.In a unanimous ruling, the Supreme Court of Canada upheld the trial judge's decision. The Court found that the prohibition on physician-assisted dying is contrary to the Charter in circumstances where:
a competent adult clearly consents to the termination of life;
the adult has a "grievous and irremediable medical condition, including an illness, disease or disability; and
the medical condition causes enduring suffering that is intolerable to the individual in the circumstances of his or her condition.
The result of the Supreme Court's unanimous decision is that the section of the Criminal Code which prohibits doctors from assisting patients in ending their lives is struck down, having been declared unconstitutional, and the Government of Canada has twelve months within which to craft a remedy.
The Court emphasized that nothing in the decision would compel physicians to provide assistance in dying, noting that it was for physicians’ colleges, Parliament, and the provincial legislatures to determine the legislative and regulatory scheme which will replace the invalid Criminal Code provision. However, the Court observed that a physician’s decision to participate in assisted dying is a matter of conscience and, in some cases, of religious belief, highlighting the Charter protections that applied to physicians who will be asked to assist patients in dying.
