Article content continued

Grace Pastine, litigation director for the B.C. Civil Liberties Association, which successfully convinced the B.C. Supreme Court in 2012 to strike down the laws against doctor-assisted suicide — a decision the federal government is now appealing — said there has been a seismic change in social and legal thinking since Sue Rodriguez was denied by the Supreme Court the right to a doctor-assisted death in 1993.

In the Rodriguez case, the high court found that the law criminalizing assisted suicide does not infringe on the constitutional right to “life, liberty and security of the person” and that it exists to protect the most vulnerable, namely the frail elderly, the disabled, the mentally ill and the impoverished.

In 1993, the Rodriguez case was decided on a 5-4 split, with now-Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin in dissent.

Chief Justice McLachlin is also the only justice still on the Supreme Court bench since the Rodriguez case, notes University of Ottawa law professor Amir Attaran. “She was in dissent on Rodriguez. It’s not tough to decide where she’s going to land on this one,” Mr. Attaran said. “For the eight other judges it’s a toss up. [But] she’s a strong personality and she has a lot of ability to pull the other judges with her.”

The Harper government has argued Criminal Code provisions prohibiting doctors, or anyone else, from assisting in suicide are “constitutionally valid.”

The B.C. Civil Liberties Association will argue absolute prohibition creates back alleys for assisted dying, and that the best protection for all Canadians is regulation, not criminalization. “We don’t believe the government has any place at the bedside of sick and dying Canadians who have made firm decisions about the amount of suffering they’re willing to endure at the end of life and how they want to spend their last moments,” Ms. Pastine said.

Postmedia News