Euthanasia report opens door for ‘mature’ teens

OTTAWA • A parliamentary committee says “mature minors” under the age of 18 should be able to access physician- assisted dying, as should people with advancing dementia who want to prearrange their deaths.

The findings are far from unanimous, with some Conservative committee members calling them “radical and dangerous.” This is even though young people would not be able to take advantage of the legislation for three years.

It would put Canada on a par with Belgium and the Netherlands, the only two countries that allow euthanasia of minors.

Justice Minister Jody Wilson- Raybould was attentive but careful in responding Thursday.

She said cabinet must weigh the recommendations from the Liberal- dominated body.

“We’re looking to ensure that we continue to take an empathetic approach, that we look to create balance in our approach that recognizes the autonomy of individuals, that recognizes the need to protect the vulnerable, that respects the conscience rights of medical practitioners, and that will take a little bit of time,” she said.

She would not say whether she agrees with assisted dying for people with mental illnesses and mature minors.

“I, like everybody else, have their own personal views on this, and all personal views are going to necessarily need to be considered in this dialogue and debate.”

The legislation must be enacted by June 6, when the existing law against physician- assisting dying ceases to be valid.

The report says all publicly funded health-care institutions must provide the service, but the procedure can be performed “in any appropriate location,” including in a person’s home.

Doctors should be free to object to performing the procedure but, at a minimum, must provide “an effective” referral for the patient.

Three of the committee’s six Conservative MPs authored a strong dissenting report, accusing the majority of failing to provide meaningful safeguards to protect vulnerable persons.

They oppose allowing the mentally ill to ask for assisted dying without an assessment by a psychiatric professional to determine whether they have the capacity to consent.

“There is no group of persons who are more vulnerable than people with underlying mental health challenges on the issues of capacity and consent,” said Alberta MP Michael Cooper, the committee’s vice-chairman.

The committee majority believes doctors are best placed to decide whether such assessments are needed, and expect that will hap- pen in some cases.

The dissenting report says any move to extend assisted dying to mature minors would contravene last year’s Supreme Court of Canada ruling in the Carter case, which declared desperately ill “adult persons” have constitutional right to arrange their deaths.

“Carter is the law of the land,” said Cooper. But, “the report opens the door to minors. I find it troubling that the committee would disregard a very clear pronouncement by the Supreme Court.”

The court decision, which struck down as unconstitutional the l aw against assisted- dying, also made no mention of advance directives for people who fear they may loose the mental competency required to access assisted dying.

But Cooper said it is wrong to interpret that to mean assisted dying is therefore available to people who anticipate suffering intolerably from a grievous and irremediable medical condition.

Finally, the dissenting Tories complain the report does not adequately address the rights of doctors to refuse any and all participation, which is the case in Quebec where the government last year legalized doctor- assisted dying, but only for the terminally ill.

“I would submit this is a very radical and, I would submit, a dangerous report,” said Cooper.

The committee heard from several legal experts who believe the Carter decision established minimum standards that Parliament has the power to broaden in seeking to balance the constitutionally protected right to die and the protection of vulnerable people.

Liberal MP Robert Oliphant, who co- chaired the committee with Sen. Kelvin Kenneth Ogilvie, fired back Thursday at dissenting Tories.

“I find it ironic that a group of people who have been railing against judges writing laws and feeling that there is no place for the Supreme Court to write a law, that is the place of legislators, ( is) now saying that somehow the Supreme Court decision in Carter should be the law.”

(TORIES ARE) SAYING COURT DECISION SHOULD BE THE LAW.