A 27-year-old woman named MV from Calgary has been granted the right to access medical assistance in dying (MAID) despite her father’s attempts to block her request. The woman, who lives with her father, informed him in December that she had been approved for MAID with a scheduled date of Feb. 1. However, her father, identified only as WV in court documents, sought an interim injunction to prevent her from going through with the procedure. WV argued that his daughter was vulnerable and not competent to make the decision to end her life, believing that her physical symptoms were due to undiagnosed psychological conditions like autism and ADHD.
In a written decision issued by Justice Colin Feasby, he stated that it is MV’s choice whether she chooses to live or die, emphasizing her dignity and right to self-determination. Feasby pointed out that MV could not be approved for MAID solely based on mental illness or disability. While acknowledging the grief WV would experience if MV were to proceed with MAID, Feasby emphasized that an injunction would deny MV the right to choose between living or dying with dignity. The judge recognized the difficult position WV was in, but emphasized the importance of respecting MV’s autonomy in making decisions about her own life.
Feasby’s decision has been stayed for 30 days to allow WV’s lawyers to decide whether to file an appeal. Jocelyn Downie, a retired professor from Dalhousie University’s faculties of law and medicine, highlighted the need for understanding that individuals with autism can have decision-making capacity. She emphasized the importance of protecting the woman’s autonomy while acknowledging the father’s grief and concern for his daughter. This case is not the first of its kind in Canada, as similar situations have arisen in the past, such as a bid by a Nova Scotia woman to stop her husband from receiving medically assisted death being rejected in 2020.
The case raises important ethical and legal questions surrounding medical assistance in dying, autonomy, and mental capacity. Feasby’s decision to prioritize MV’s right to self-determination and dignity over her father’s concerns for her well-being reflects the balance that must be struck in such cases. The ruling underscores the need to respect individuals’ autonomy in making decisions about their own lives, even in difficult and emotional situations. It also highlights the complexities and challenges that can arise when navigating issues related to medical assistance in dying, especially when family members have differing opinions and concerns.
Overall, the case involving MV and her father highlights the importance of balancing individual autonomy with concerns for well-being and the grieving process of family members. Feasby’s decision to allow MV to proceed with MAID underscores the principle of respecting individuals’ right to make choices about their own lives, even when those choices are difficult and controversial. The case serves as a reminder of the complex ethical and legal considerations that must be taken into account when dealing with end-of-life decisions and medical assistance in dying. It also sheds light on the need for ongoing discussion and debate surrounding these issues to ensure that the rights and dignity of individuals are upheld while also addressing the concerns of their loved ones.
