Impact and Implications of Carter v. Canada: Redefining the right to die in Canadian Law

Impact and Implications of Carter v. Canada: Redefining the Right to Die in Canadian Law Student Names Affiliation Course Number and Course Name Instructor Name Due Date Impact and Implications of Carter v. Canada: Redefining the Right to Die in Canadian Law Allowing others the choice one would want for themselves is at the heart of the right-to-die debate. No nation has easily or quickly resolved this issue. Before Canada addressed physician-assisted dying through the courts, the practice remained legally and morally contentious. In 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada’s (SCC) verdict in Carter v. Canada shaped the entire legal framework of medical assistance in dying (MAiD). The SCC declared that Section 241(b) of the Criminal Code was unconstitutional, and it violated Section 7 of the same constitution regarding the rights and freedoms of its citizens (Downie, 2022). This change resulted in a significant change in legislative safeguards and later shaped public policy. The writer in this paper explores how the Carter v. Canada ruling shaped the legal and ethical frameworks of MAiD, led to patient autonomy in terms of palliative care, and also impacted legislative and healthcare conduct. The SCC decision in Carter v. Canada struck down the Criminal Code’s ban on assisted dying. One of the impacts that this verdict resulted in was patient autonomy. It became central to palliative care. The Carter v. Canada ruling shifted decision-making power from the state to individuals (Downie, 2022). However, this only applied to patients in seek of MAiD who met the established criteria. According to Verdun-Jones (2020), the gradual decline in the capacity for independent functioning during the approach of death often resulted in significant physical and emotional suffering. For instance, Gloria Taylor, the lead plai...