For most of us, the Supreme Court’s decision last week to overturn a government ban on assisted death has sparked a heated debate that is bound to continue for years. Many will no doubt be forced to endure endless lectures about the role of the courts, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, majority governments, provinces, religious groups and medical colleges who will all tell us what is best, pro or con, in this debate.
But perhaps it is most important to focus on the one person the court’s decision will actually affect the most. For that person, “condemned to a life of severe and intolerable suffering,” the court’s decision states the “right to life,” is not a “duty to live.”
One can only imagine what a difficult situation that must be, for patients, families and caregivers, when suffering overpowers the desire to live. For some patients, who must make the decision as a competent adult, the court’s ruling can only be seen as humane.
The court also appears to have got it right when it comes to caregivers. It will be up to individual doctors to make up their minds to assist death or not, based on their own consciences and the circumstances of individual cases. If a doctor decides against participating, that decision must be respected.
Doctors who deal with terminal cancer patients, will tell you such decisions will not be easily made. It is not what they signed up for and, as in most of the big moral dilemmas we face in life, there is no black or white answer in most cases. Just as in life, death comes in a spectrum of greys and the emotional weight to assist may be carried for years. Not everyone is prepared for that.
The Council of Canadians with Disabilities and the Canadian Association for Community Living see great dangers in the ruling because it does not only refer to the terminally ill but to a broader group of people including those with serious disabilities. If the ruling proves to allow the assisted deaths of anyone despondent over a serious disability, then few would likely argue against the notion that the court has gone too far.
It is now up to Ottawa to deal with assisted suicide and to come up with a compromise that alleviates the fears and expectations of both sides of the debate. Justice Minister Peter MacKay has promised that the sensitive issue will be studied before any legislative changes are made. The Supreme Court has suspended its decision for 12 months to give Ottawa and the provinces time to respond.
Edmonton-St. Albert MP Brent Rathgeber says Ottawa has three choices. It can ignore the ruling, come up with new laws to deal with it or “do nothing and let the provincial regulators and medical colleges figure it all out.” He hopes the government comes up with legislation.
We agree and hope the process does not take too long, nor hamper anyone’s right to decide what is best for his or her case. Remember the patient. Whether suffering from terminal cancer, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis or any number of other intolerable, incurable conditions, every human deserves to be treated with respect and dignity.
