O Canada! → Canadian → Canadian Chat > Dying in a 'free and informed manner'

245. Every one who administers or causes to be administered to any person or causes any person to take poison or any other destructive or noxious thing is guilty of an indictable offence and liable

(a) to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years, if he intends thereby to endanger the life of or to cause bodily harm to that person; or

(b) to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, if he intends thereby to aggrieve or annoy that person.

Consent to death

14. No person is entitled to consent to have death inflicted on him, and such consent does not affect the criminal responsibility of any person by whom death may be inflicted on the person by whom consent is given.

Yes. And the very reason YOU don't hear about it is because it's murder. That doesn't change the reality where is DOES happen. I know of at least two instances myself. And the families involved were very thankful for it.

^corster

Good analysis of the CCC sections that apply and that may require to be amended or repealed through Parliament. Those in favour of the "right to die" must articulate precisely how our legal framework should be amended to allow for this. "IF" we decide as a nation that this would be a good thing.

I can certainly end my own life if I choose, but the minute a I require assistance in doing so I involve other people and our laws come into play. Protection of the vulnerable is one of the major responsibilities of the State and it is our legal framework that attempts to accomplish this. Getting the balance on this issue is fraught with problems.

Yeah that's what you said the 3 other times too. As if only Qc does this and the rest of Canada doesn't. Very myopic of you. Makes me question you and all these deaths you take part in as you claim here. 4 times for me alone. So that makes it, "One case in how many"? You do the math.

How about "taking off life support"? How does this differ from execution of a DNR? Particularly since it's been shown that absence of brain activity does not necessarily mean absence of the possibility of future brain activity, much like looking at a computer that isn't plugged in and saying "this computer is dead" doesn't mean it wouldn't work if plugged in.

You're playing with semantics here. The definition of Suicide is "the act of killing oneself intentionally". If someone decides that they want to die, but needs assistance from an outside party to do so, Section 241(b) of the Criminal Code then comes into play.

Rodriguez v. BC was about having Section 241(b) of the Criminal Code struck down, so that her doctor could legally provide her with the lethal medication to commit suicide herself.

Even if I accept the argument that it's not Assisted Suicide when the Physician administers the lethal medication rather than the patient themsleves (rendering Section 241(b) null), section 245 of the Criminal Code would apply:

Furthermore, Section 14 of the Criminal Code prevents an individual from consenting to death, and ensures that criminal responsibility remains even if there is consent:

Until such time that Section 241(b) and/or Section 245 is amended or repealed, it remains illegal for a physician to provide and/or administer lethal medication or other assistance the process. Until such time that Section 14 is repealed, it remains illegal for an individual to consent to death. The proposed bill in Quebec cannot override this.

And we haven't even gotten into the possibility of a murder conviction, as in the Latimer case.

And we haven't even gotten into the possibility of a murder conviction, as in the Latimer case.

I've also been close to a few situations where "the decision" is made to hasten an inevitable death rather than to prolong it. It is a decision that is made amongst the physician/patient/family.

It happens every day, it works well in most circumstances and we rarely hear about it.

My personal view is that the current laws and medical practices work perfectly well 99.99% of the time and we should just leave it alone.

Creating law based on the 0.01% is an inherently bad idea. Also, when the 0.01% goes wrong we have the Criminal Code of Canada to deal with it.

DKS,

" administering a dose of medication such as morphine to relieve pain, which has a side effect of depressing respiration" is precisely the situation I was speaking of. I called it "hastening death" but perhaps we only disagree on the definition. It was certainly the right thing to do under the circumstances and this is also the sort of situation that I said was common. Again, I don't think we disagree on that either.

Coming to an agreement on definitions is important before a reasoned discussion can begin. This seems to be a missed point on many who want to skip this step and move directly to their arguments.

This is why I liked corster's post that dealt with the actual legislation. This is a highly charged and emotional issue and although it may seem counterintuitive, I think we need to take the emotion out of the discussion.

unfortunately in canada it is illegal, and it might be a long time before we mature to the simple concept of dying with dignity.

26. Only a patient who meets the following criteria may obtain medical aid in dying:

(1) be of full age, be capable of giving consent to care and be an insured person within the meaning of the Health Insurance Act (chapter A-29);

(2) suffer from an incurable serious illness;

(3) suffer from an advanced state of irreversible decline in capability; and

(4) suffer from constant and unbearable physical or psychological pain which cannot be relieved in a manner the person deems tolerable.

The patient must request medical aid in dying themselves, in a free and informed manner, by means of the form prescribed by the Minister. The form must be dated and signed by the patient or, if the patient is physically incapable of doing so, by a third person. The third person may not be a minor or an incapable person of full age or a member of the team responsible for caring for the patient.

The form must be signed in the presence of a health or social services professional who countersigns it; if the professional countersigning is not the attending physician, the signed form is given to the attending physician.

that's quebec, do you think they will allow anglophones to come and die with dignity in their province..(sarcasm on)

All Criminal Law in Canada is under Federal Jurisdiction. This doesn't change anything. It's still illegal under the Criminal Code, even in Quebec, and this proposed PQ law cannot change that.

i thought this video was courageous and thought-provoking...unfortunately in canada it is illegal, and it might be a long time before we mature to the simple concept of dying with dignity.