{"id":1963,"date":"2017-06-23T18:50:24","date_gmt":"2017-06-23T18:50:24","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/tvndy.ca\/?p=1963\/"},"modified":"2018-10-26T15:11:33","modified_gmt":"2018-10-26T15:11:33","slug":"webcast-archive-ontario-superior-court-ruling","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/2017\/06\/webcast-archive-ontario-superior-court-ruling\/","title":{"rendered":"Webcast archive: Ontario Superior Court ruling"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><iframe loading=\"lazy\" width=\"1180\" height=\"664\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/kEzDNVfOpbc?start=4&#038;feature=oembed\" frameborder=\"0\" allow=\"autoplay; encrypted-media\" allowfullscreen><\/iframe><\/p>\n<p>In this episode of <em>Euthanasia &amp; Disability<\/em>, Amy Hasbrouck and Christian Debray discuss:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Ontario Superior Court rules disabled woman\u2019s death is reasonably foreseeable<\/li>\n<li>FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS: Aren\u2019t we taking away people\u2019s autonomy and dignity by not allowing assisted suicide?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Please note that this text is only a script and that our webcast contains additional commentary.<\/p>\n<p><strong>ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT RULES DISABLED WOMAN\u2019S DEATH IS \u201cREASONABLY FORESEEABLE.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>A Superior Court judge in Ontario has ruled that a woman with Osteoarthritis is on \u201ca trajectory toward death\u201d and therefore fits the fourth eligibility criteria under Canada\u2019s assisted dying law.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul>\n<li>Judge Paul Perell ruled in the case of \u201cA.B.\u201d a 77-year-old woman who applied to the court earlier this spring after her doctor feared prosecution if he performed euthanasia and A.B.\u2019s natural death was not found to be \u201creasonably foreseeable.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>The court said that, to be \u201creasonably foreseeable,\u201d the person\u2019s death does not have to be imminent, within a specific time frame, or be the result of a terminal condition.<\/li>\n<li>Judge Perell said the legislation is intended to apply to a person who is \u201con a trajectory toward death because he or she a) has a serious and incurable illness, disease or disability; b) is in an advanced state of irreversible decline in capability; and c) is enduring physical or psychological suffering that is intolerable and that cannot be relieved under conditions that they consider acceptable.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>The judge said it was clear from the evidence that A.B. doesn\u2019t have long to live, \u201cgiven her age and health.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>However the judge did not rule on whether A.B. meets all the criteria of the law.\u00a0 In so doing, he sought to avoid a situation where courts would pre-approve euthanasia by granting immunity to doctors from prosecution.<\/li>\n<li>He said the problem was not in the law, but in doctors\u2019 misunderstanding the law and being overcautious.<\/li>\n<li>Though the decision applies only in Ontario, it will probably have an effect on two cases currently challenging the constitutionality of the eligibility criterion in bill C-14 that death must be \u201creasonably foreseeable\u201d.\u00a0 The British Columbia and Qu\u00e9bec courts hearing those cases will probably examine the Ontario decision closely for guidance in interpreting that section of the law.\u00a0 They may view the broad reading of the law, which considers a disabled but not \u201cterminally ill\u201d person\u2019s death to be \u201creasonably foreseeable,\u201d as meaning the law does not violate the person\u2019s constitutional rights.\u00a0 On the other hand, the BC and Qu\u00e9bec courts could decide that the doctor\u2019s unwillingness to perform euthanasia for fear of prosecution shows that the federal law is too unclear to be constitutional.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS<\/strong><br \/>\n<strong>Q:\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Aren\u2019t we taking away people\u2019s autonomy and dignity by not allowing assisted suicide?<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>For assisted suicide to happen, another person (a doctor, a pharmacist) must step in and take action on the person\u2019s behalf.\u00a0 Where health services are paid by the government, this could be seen as a state action.\u00a0 (True autonomy would mean committing suicide on your own).<\/li>\n<li>Eligibility for assisted suicide is determined according to government standards, based on the judgment of doctors and nurses.\u00a0 That\u2019s even more interference.<\/li>\n<li>The diagnosis and treatment for the underlying condition is also not an independent process.\u00a0 It will be influenced by the doctor\u2019s knowledge, opinions and choices, as well as wait times, access to medications or services adapted to the person\u2019s needs, and the limits of what your insurance will pay.<\/li>\n<li>A person\u2019s quality of life is also influenced by many factors beyond the person\u2019s control, including whether home-based support services and access adaptations are available, relations with family members, and the presence of an emotional support network.<\/li>\n<li>In an interdependent society \u201cautonomy\u201d is an illusion.\u00a0 We are all dependent on the infrastructure (utilities, transportation, agriculture, manufacturing and shipping) and on health care and social services for our health and well-being.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n   ","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<div class=\"entry-summary\">\n<div class=\"entry-summary\">\nThis week, we look at an Ontario Superior Court ruling that may change the definition of the &#8220;reasonably foreseeable&#8221; eligibility requirement.\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"link-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/2017\/06\/webcast-archive-ontario-superior-court-ruling\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &ldquo;Webcast archive: Ontario Superior Court ruling&rdquo;<\/span>&hellip;<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"link-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/2017\/06\/webcast-archive-ontario-superior-court-ruling\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &ldquo;Webcast archive: Ontario Superior Court ruling&rdquo;<\/span>&hellip;<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[92],"tags":[42,95,258,121,101,118],"class_list":["post-1963","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-webcast-archive","tag-assisted-suicide-en","tag-dignity","tag-eligibility","tag-euthanasia-disability","tag-suicide","tag-webcast","entry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1963","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1963"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1963\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3548,"href":"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1963\/revisions\/3548"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1963"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1963"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1963"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}