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

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

It has been cited by those opposed to changing the law as an example of how it could become a ‘slippery slope’ if the new eligibility criteria are added at a later date.

Canada decriminalized assisted death in 2016 following a Supreme Court ruling.

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

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

Provisions to re-extend the law to people suffering from mental illness are expected to be considered in March 2027.

Monitoring data on the number of people choosing to use assisted dying legislation has shown a steady increase in the four years since it has been published.

In 2022, there were 13,241 assisted deaths in Canada, accounting for 4.1 percent of all deaths. This figure represented an increase of 31.2 percent compared to 2021.

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

The MPs said: ‘Individuals from both groups often pointed to jurisdictions where AD/AS (Assisted Dying/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’: the eligibility criteria would change over the course of the time would be extended and the intended safeguards would not protect vulnerable groups.

“Canada was the most frequently mentioned jurisdiction 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 Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, told the committee, “Once (AD/AS) is legalized, it will expand. The language shifts; it goes from ‘guardrails’ to ‘lack of access’. That is very harmful. Guardrails are there to protect society more broadly and to prevent us from becoming a deadly state.”

Canada decriminalized assisted death in 2016 following a Supreme Court ruling (Image)

Professor James Downar, head of the Department of Palliative Care at the University of Ottawa, argued the opposite: expanding eligibility did not necessarily mean a liberalization.

He told the committee: ‘We have a system that started 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 approaching its natural death. .’

Canada was previously at the center of a controversial episode after one of its Paralympians claimed she was offered euthanasia after inquiring about a disabled wheelchair ramp.

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

The comment came after the government employee called Ms Gauthier to “clarify 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 keep living like this. For example, this needs to happen. This needs to be resolved.’

‘And the person said, “You know, Ms. 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 ?”