Justice committee  I'm going to pick up where my colleague from the Canadian Civil Liberties Association left off. We think that we are in the basement, because it's either not clear or the government isn't saying what they really mean when they use terms such as “incurable”. In the Carter decision, the court made it quite clear that “irremediable” had to be qualified by “for which there was no treatment acceptable to the person”.

Justice committee  I think the first thing I would say is when we talk about vulnerable people, there seems to be this dialogue that there are vulnerable people, and then there are people who are suffering and need help to die. They are the same group of people. People who are suffering intolerably and have enduring suffering are also very vulnerable.

Justice committee  For the concept of consent in the Carter decision, the court didn't define when consent had to be established in order for a request to be considered valid. We would say the Carter decision was neutral on advance consent. We would say that discriminating against whole groups of people based solely on their medical condition may very well be a charter discrimination, and a violation of their charter of rights.

Justice committee  Good afternoon. Thank you to the justice and human rights committee for inviting Dying With Dignity Canada to this hearing today. We have been on the assisted dying file for well over 30 years. If anyone recognizes the historic moment that our country is now in, we certainly do.