The perfect is the enemy of the good

It is a public policy debate with legitimate and deeply personal arguments on both sides.

For anyone who has a parent or loved one who is clearly suffering every day, and has asked for a physicianassisted death, further delays in medical assistance in dying legislation is akin to torture.

There isn’t any middle ground for you in that world: politicians debate for ages while your loved one’s pain and suffering continues.

On the other side of the coin (perhaps a more hypothetical side at the moment), some physicians have argued they don’t want to present medically assisted death as an early option when people newly facing disease or injury may be at their lowest psychological ebb, saying legislative rules shouldn’t make it seem like a medically assisted death is the best option. There are also legitimate concerns from people in the disabled community, who feel Canadians with disabilities might be pressured towards choosing an assisted death.

The federal Conservatives had argued against the legislation, raising concerns about the protection of vulnerable Canadians, including isolated seniors and people with disabilities.

The public policy debate is the result of a Superior Court of Quebec verdict in the fall of 2019 that said the existing medically assisted death legislation was unconstitutional, because individuals seeking their own deaths had to be facing a “reasonably foreseeable” death. The courts gave the federal government a deadline to fix the legislation — a deadline for which the government has already sought, and received, two extensions.

The legislation passed in Parliament on Thursday would remove the “reasonably foreseeable” requirement for obtaining a physician-assisted death, but would require a 90-day waiting period for patients not facing such a “foreseeable” fate. The legislation also does not allow for medically assisted deaths in situations where the only medical condition is mental illness. The bill now goes to the Senate, which has already expressed concerns about the legislation.

The whole process has, of course, been delayed and derailed by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Debate on the bill has been hampered by the shutdown of the House of Commons, and also by the need, when the House has been open, to address urgent legislation to help Canadians through the COVID crisis.

But lost in the shuffle — and in the politics — is the very real situation for Canadians who are suffering and who cannot currently avail themselves of a doctor’s help in ending their lives.

This revised legislation may not be perfect, but as federal Justice Minister David Lametti argues, “We’ve built in protections for the vulnerable in order to balance the freedom to choose, the autonomy to choose, with protection.”

Holding up the legislation still further as the Senate breaks for Christmas?

That seems almost untenable.