Carter, Medical Aid In Dying, and Mature Minors

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    Abstract

    The Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Carter v Canada (AG) decriminalized medical aid in dying in certain defined circumstances. One of those circumstances is that the person seeking assistance be an “adult.” This article argues that the regulatory response to this decision must approach the idea of “adult” in terms of the actual medical-decisional capacity of any given individual, and not rely upon age as a substitute for capacity. This article surveys jurisdictions where minors are included in physician-assisted dying regimes, and identifies what little empirical evidence exists regarding requests from minors. The heart of the article considers the jurisprudence on mature minors and when they are deemed to have the right to require the withdrawal of, or refuse to receive, life-sustaining treatment, and compares the reasoning in these cases with that in Carter. A particular focus of this article is on how the jurisprudence approaches decisional capacity when the individual in question may be particularly vulnerable. It finds that a blanket exclusion of mature minors from a physician-assisted dying regime likely violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and calls out for considered debate on these issues in- stead of forcing a minor and their family to bring the issues forward through litigation.

    Original languageCanadian English
    JournalArticles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press
    Volume10
    Issue number1
    Publication statusPublished - Jan. 1 2016

    Keywords

    • physician-assisted dying
    • end of life
    • regulated assisted-dying
    • Supreme Court of Canada
    • Carter v Canada
    • Medical Assistance in Dying
    • Adults
    • Minors
    • Decisional Capacity

    Disciplines

    • Health Law and Policy
    • Human Rights Law
    • Law

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Carter, Medical Aid In Dying, and Mature Minors'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this