“Medically assisted dying laws are changing, and it’s about time” Andre Picard September 11, 2019, The Globe and Mail
--
This article is about the laws of medically assisted dying in Canada. The author uses evidence from two cases that were seen by Justice Christine Baudouin of the Quebec Superior Court, the Justices views on the law, his own views. By writing this article, Picard is trying to show that the “reasonably foreseeable” clause is unconstitutional and should be reformed. What does “reasonably foreseeable” mean? Well, there is the literal rule which means, “the statute should be applied literally, regardless of weather the judge approves or disapproves of its result.” (pg. 123) That still doesn’t answer the question, because what is deemed reasonable to some people if going to be different to what others deem to be reasonable. The article shows that the reason for the clause is to make sure people are not coerced into making the decision to die prematurely, but also argues that if a person is in a healthy state of mind, they should be able to make their own decision as to if and when they are going to die. “The perception of the intent of the law, however, is selective and varies with socioeconomic, cultural, and democratic variables.” (pg. 243) This quote from the textbook makes me believe that maybe this law is to promote more people from using the health care system for longer. This way the health care professionals make more money if they are doing more to treat a patient. This could show the hierarchy and who this law is really meant for, instead of being for the patient, could this law really be for the doctors? That I am not sure about. The article continues on with a future case will be tried in November in British Columbia, right now, it has been said that her death is not reasonably foreseeable, what will this judge do? Will this judge see that her death is too far away or will the judge grant the medically assisted suicide to prevent further suffering with the patient.
