An Interesting Tidbit Look at Physician-Assisted Suicide

In Canada, suicide is not a crime. However, assisting someone to commit suicide is.

Or, at least, it was.

In a June, 2012 decision out of British Columbia, the British Columbia Supreme Court (BCSC) found that these Criminal Code prohibitions violated the Charter rights of the plaintiffs (a woman with a fatal neurodegenerative disease and the relatives of another woman who had terminated her life in Switzerland with their assistance).

Some of you might recall the issue of physician-assisted suicide being dealt with many years ago; in 1993, to be exact. In that case, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) found that although the prohibition on doctor-assisted death engaged the s. 7 rights of liberty and security of the person, the law should be upheld based on the importance of the objective behind it; namely, the protection of the vulnerable. This policy is part of our fundamental concept of the sanctity of life and it was noted that blanket prohibitions on assisted suicide is the norm among Western democracies.

The government's repeal of the offence of attempted suicide was not a recognition that suicide was to be accepted within Canadian society but merely reflected the recognition that the criminal law is an ineffectual and inappropriate tool for dealing with suicide attempts. Given the concerns about abuse and the great difficulty in creating appropriate safeguards, the SCC found that the blanket prohibition on assisted suicide was neither arbitrary nor unfair.

But the law has developed since then, particularly as to what exactly is encompassed in the term "principles of fundamental justice" (as found in s. 7).  Further, the Rodriguez case had not dealt with the issue of s. 15 equality rights.

About Time

The title of this post reflects my first thought when reading about this.

Elections Canada must make its polling sites accessible to people with disabilities, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal says.

The tribunal issued its ruling Friday, in response to a complaint from a physically disabled Toronto man who argued that voting sites should be accessible to everybody.

This after Peter Hughes arrived at a Toronto polling station in March, 2008, to vote in a by election. Hughes, who uses a walker to get around, was shocked to discover that the polling station was at the bottom of a long flight of stairs. He actually sat down on the edge of the stairs and went down on the seat of his pants down to the bottom of the stairs while somebody carried his walker.

Now that's dedication.

As is following through the process on a complaint to the Human Rights Commission.

And winning.

1. $10,000 in damages for Mr. Hughes


2. Elections Canada must formulate a plan for greater consultation with voters with disabilities and disability groups


3. Elections Canada must stop situating polling stations in locations that do not provide barrier-free access in any electoral district in Canada


4. Elections Canada must implement a procedure for verification of the accessibility of facilities on the day of an electoral event


5. Elections Canada must review the Accessible Facilities Guide, Accessibility Checklist, and accessibility sections of the Manuals for the Returning Officers and the other categories of election workers


6. Elections Canada must revise its standard lease for polling locations to include the requirement that the leased premises provide level access and are barrier-free.


7. Elections Canada must provide sufficient and appropriate signage at elections, including the universal accessibility symbol so that voters with disabilities can easily find the shortest and most appropriate route to all accessible entrances at polling stations.


8. Elections Canada must review, revise and update its training materials and programs concerning accessibility issues for their officials and give training to every officer or employee who deals with disability and accessibility issues


9. Elections Canada must implement a procedure for receiving, recording and processing verbal and written complaints about lack of accessibility.

Well done, Mr. Hughes. Well done.

Talk About Short Notice

Update: Thanks to Vicki at the Nova Scotia Partnership on Respite for passing on that the talk tonight (and the upcoming ones) are open to anyone interested.

Families whose children have special needs other than indicated on the poster are very welcome, and the talk will be generic (for the most part). Feel free to attend.

If you are attending, please call or email Kim Clarke at kim.clarke@iwk.nshealth.ca or 902-470-7039. Knowing numbers helps with having enough seats!

~ ~ ~ ~

Short notice, indeed!
But. It does LOOK interesting.

Although it does beg the question ... what about those of us whose children have intellectual disabilities?