Abstracts
Abstract
The Canadian medical assistance in dying (MAID) program, based on an ambitious piece of legislation and detailed regulations, has failed to provide Canadians with sufficient publicly accessible evidence to show that it is operating as mandated by the requirements of the law, regulations, and expectations of all stakeholders. The federal law that was adopted in 2016 defined the eligibility criteria and put in place a number of safeguards that had to be satisfied before providing assisted dying to a person in order not to transgress the Criminal Law. The responsibility of monitoring for the purpose of investigating compliance with the eligibility criteria and procedural safeguards was assigned by the Federal Ministry of Health (responsible for all monitoring) to the provincial and territorial governments. Some of the governments have released statistical data concerning the program, but none have yet issued a comprehensive report on adherence to the eligibility criteria and its safeguards as required by the law and regulations. This paper explains the process, explores the possible reasons for this shortfall, and offers some suggestions for actions that could rectify this aspect of the MAID program. Accountability and transparency are integral to the delivery of MAID and the publications of the mandated federal as well as provincial/territorial monitoring reports are one important approach to achieving confidence and trust in the program.
Keywords:
- medically assisted dying,
- euthanasia,
- assisted suicide,
- monitoring
Résumé
Le programme canadien d’aide médicale à mourir (AMM), qui repose sur une législation ambitieuse et des règlements détaillés, n’a pas réussi à fournir aux Canadiens suffisamment de preuves accessibles au public pour montrer qu’il fonctionne comme le prévoit les exigences de la loi, les règlements et les attentes de toutes les parties prenantes. La loi fédérale qui a été adoptée en 2016 a défini les critères d’éligibilité et mis en place un certain nombre de garanties qui devaient être satisfaites avant de fournir une aide à mourir à une personne afin de ne pas transgresser le droit pénal. La responsabilité du contrôle du respect des critères d’éligibilité et des garanties procédurales a été confiée par le ministère fédéral de la santé (responsable de l’ensemble du contrôle) aux gouvernements provinciaux et territoriaux. Certains gouvernements ont publié des données statistiques concernant le programme, mais aucun n’a encore publié un rapport complet sur le respect des critères d’éligibilité et des garanties, comme l’exigent la loi et les règlements. Cet article explique le processus, explore les raisons possibles de cette lacune et propose quelques suggestions d’actions qui pourraient rectifier cet aspect du programme d’AMM. La responsabilité et la transparence font partie intégrante de la mise en oeuvre du programme d’AMM et les publications des rapports de suivi fédéraux et provinciaux/territoriaux obligatoires constituent une approche importante pour obtenir la confiance dans le programme.
Mots-clés :
- aide médicale à mourir,
- euthanasie,
- suicide assisté,
- surveillance
Appendices
Bibliography
- 1. Supreme Court of Canada. Carter v. Canada (Attorney General). 2015-02-06.
- 2. Parliament of Canada. Bill C-14. Statues of Canada 2016. Chapter 3. Assented to June 17, 2016.
- 3. Government of Canada. 4th Interim Report on Medical Assistance in Dying in Canada; 2019.
- 4. Government of Canada. Regulations for the Monitoring of Medical Assistance in Dying: SOR/2018-166.
- 5. Government of Canada. Regulations for the Monitoring of Medical Assistance in Dying: SOR/2018-166. Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement. Background.
- 6. CMA Policy. Medical assistance in dying. May 2017, s. 4.
- 7. Commission sur les soins de fin de vie. Rapport Annuel d’Activites; 2019.
- 8. Office of the Chief Coroner. Memorandum: Medical Assistance in Dying Update. October 9, 2018.
- 9. Nova Scotia Health Authority. Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) By the numbers; 2020.
- 10. Shared Health Manitoba. Medical Assistance in Dying; 2020.
- 11. Alberta Health Services. Data and Statistics. Medical Assistance in Dying; 2020.
- 12. Canadian Disability Policy Alliance. Statement of January 17, 2020.
- 13. Hutchinson C. Why are women with disabilities being given help to die, instead of help to live. Coalition for HealthCARE and Conscience; 2018.
- 14. Canadian Association for Community Living. Safeguards in Medical Assistance in Dying; 2020.
- 15. Downie J. An updated but incomplete picture: Maid in Canada. Impact Ethics. 12 October 2017.
- 16. Council of Canadians with Disabilities. Canada’s medical assistance in dying regulations fall short. 4 September 2018.
- 17. Miller DG, Ki YH. Euthanasia and physicians assisted suicide not meeting due care criteria in Netherlands: a qualitative review of review committee judgements. BMJ Journals 2017;7:e017628.
- 18. Lemmens T. Charter scrutiny of Canada’s medical assistance in dying law and the shifting landscape of Belgian and Dutch euthanasia practice. Supreme Court Law Review 2018; (Second Series):85:459-544.
- 19. Wasylenko E. Reporting and monitoring of medical assistance in dying. Vulnerable Persons Standard. 16 April 2018.
- 20. Herx L, Cottle M, Scott J. The normalization of euthanasia in Canada: the cautionary tale continues. World Medical Journal. 2020;66(2):28-37.
- 21. Lemmens T. Dangers of a lax assisted death regime. Impact Ethics. 3 March 2016.
- 22. Government of Canada. About inspections of clinical trials for human drugs. 2015-12-09.
- 23. Landry JT, Forman T, Kekewich M. Ethical considerations in the regulation of euthanasia and physician-assisted death in Canada. Health Policy. 2015;119(11)1490-8.
- 24. Government of Canada. An Act to Amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying). Technical Briefing; 2020.
- 25. Joule a CMA Company. Medical assistance in dying. Are you prepared?
- 26. Health Canada. First Annual Report on Medical Assistance in Dying. H22-1/6E-PDF. Ottawa; July 2020.