How Canada’s assisted dying laws became a ‘slippery slope’ for critics of the law change

Among all the states that have legalized assisted dying, Canada has taken the most radical approach.

Opponents of changing the law have cited it as an example of how it could become a “slippery slope” with new eligibility criteria added at a later date.

Canada decriminalized assisted dying in 2016 following a ruling by its Supreme Court.

It now allows assisted dying for those suffering from a terminal illness or those experiencing “intolerable suffering”; The Canadian government describes it as “suffering that cannot be relieved under conditions that the person considers acceptable.”

The law was expanded in 2021 on constitutional grounds because it only applied to those whose deaths were “reasonably foreseeable,” making those with “serious and irremediable” conditions eligible.

Provisions to expand the law again to include those suffering from mental illness must be considered before March 2027.

Tracking data on the number of people who choose to use assisted dying laws shows a steady increase over the four years it has been published.

In 2022, there were 13,241 assisted deaths in Canada, representing 4.1 per cent of all deaths. The figure represented an increase of 31.2 percent compared to 2021.

The Health and Social Care Committee report highlighted that Canada was often cited by those concerned that a change in the law could involve a series of gradual adjustments.

The MPs said: ‘People from both groups frequently pointed to jurisdictions where AD/AS (Assisted Death/Assisted Suicide) is permitted to support their views.

‘Many respondents who agree with the current law were concerned that if the law were changed to allow AD/AS, it would be a ‘slippery slope’: eligibility criteria would expand over time and the safeguards provided would not would protect vulnerable groups.

“Canada was the jurisdiction most frequently cited by this group.”

The report also heard testimony from ethics experts who expressed concerns about the model in practice in Canada.

Dr. Lydia Dugdale, director of the Center for Clinical Medical Ethics at Columbia University’s Columbia Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, told the committee: ‘As soon as (AD/AS) is legalized, it expands. The language changes; we go from ‘railings’ to ‘lack of access’. That is very pernicious. “The barriers are there to protect society more broadly and prevent us from becoming a state that causes death.”

Professor James Downar, head of the Division of Palliative Care at the University of Ottawa, argued the opposite: that expanding eligibility does not necessarily represent liberalization.

He told the committee: “We have a system that began in response to the typical more exceptional cases of suffering, where there was a perceived need to allow euthanasia and assisted suicide in the case of a person with a degenerative disease who was approaching their death. natural death”. .’

Canada was previously at the center of a controversial episode after one of its Paralympic athletes claimed he was offered euthanasia after asking about a wheelchair ramp for the disabled.

Christine Gauthier, who served 10 years in the Canadian Armed Forces and represented her country at the 2016 Paralympic Games, was told by a Veterans Affairs Canada caseworker that she had the “right to die.”

The comment came after the government employee called Ms. Gauthier to “make it clear where we are (with the elevator).”

Ms. Gauthier said of the conversation: “I said, I just can’t go on like this.” I can’t continue living like this. This has to be done. This has to be resolved.”

“And the person said, ‘You know, Mrs. Gauthier, if you really feel like you can’t go on like this, if you feel like you can’t do it anymore, you know, you have the right to die?’