In a ruling that could possibly wind up going to the Supreme Court, a Calgary judge on Monday granted leave for a 27-year-old woman with autism to receive government provided Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD).It comes after a Calgary man, who can only be identified as ‘WV’ as per publication ban — the daughter is referred to as ‘MV’ — obtained an injuction temporarily halting her de facto self-immolation by medical authorities that would have taken place on February 1.In it, he argued his daughter didn’t have the mental capacity to make such a decision and accused the appropriate authorities — a panel of two favourably disposed medical doctors (who also can’t be named) — and the AHS that would perform the ‘procedure’, of failing to perform up to their legally required duty of care..“(Her) dignity and right to self-determination outweighs the important matters raised by (the father) and the harm that he will suffer in losing (his daughter).”Justice Colin Feasby.But Justice Colin Feasby wrote “MV's dignity and right to self-determination outweighs the important matters raised by WV and the harm that he will suffer in losing MV," in his 34-page written decision issued Monday.Although he acknowledged the “profound grief” his daughter’s suicide would have on the man, “I conclude that MV's autonomy and dignity interests outweigh competing considerations."That said, he agreed “important matters” were raised in previous arguments and stayed the ruling for 30 days to allow the parties to file appeals. That means the original injunction will remain in place for at least another month, pending the outcome of final arguments.This, despite the fact MV did not provide any legal, medical justification for how she came to qualify for MAiD when she received it last December. And despite the fact one of the three doctors in question opposed it on medical grounds..”The inability to review the clinical judgment of the professionals making MAiD assessments precludes the court from going behind the medical assessments to question whether MV's sole condition is mental illness or disability."MAiD ruling.Under the law as it stands, two doctors or qualified nurse practitioners have to approve the application. The father alleges his daughter shopped around for a ‘tie-breaker’ physician who would grant leave for suicide until she found two who could satisfy the legal requirements of the law.MV presently lives with her father and is described as at least partially dependent for the necessities of life. In addition to autism, she suffers from ADHD, court heard at a prior hearing on March 11 where he requested a judicial review of the reasons for approval.But Feasby wrote “the court cannot review a MAiD applicant's decision-making or the clinical judgment of the doctors and nurse practitioners involved in assessing an applicant's suitability for MAiD." Therefore, "the inability to review the clinical judgment of the professionals making MAiD assessments precludes the court from going behind the medical assessments to question whether MV's sole condition is mental illness or disability."At the original hearing on March 11, Feasby said the case is “by far” the most difficult and complex he’s heard with a broad public interest and was virtually certain it would be appealed, quite possibly to the highest court in the land.
In a ruling that could possibly wind up going to the Supreme Court, a Calgary judge on Monday granted leave for a 27-year-old woman with autism to receive government provided Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD).It comes after a Calgary man, who can only be identified as ‘WV’ as per publication ban — the daughter is referred to as ‘MV’ — obtained an injuction temporarily halting her de facto self-immolation by medical authorities that would have taken place on February 1.In it, he argued his daughter didn’t have the mental capacity to make such a decision and accused the appropriate authorities — a panel of two favourably disposed medical doctors (who also can’t be named) — and the AHS that would perform the ‘procedure’, of failing to perform up to their legally required duty of care..“(Her) dignity and right to self-determination outweighs the important matters raised by (the father) and the harm that he will suffer in losing (his daughter).”Justice Colin Feasby.But Justice Colin Feasby wrote “MV's dignity and right to self-determination outweighs the important matters raised by WV and the harm that he will suffer in losing MV," in his 34-page written decision issued Monday.Although he acknowledged the “profound grief” his daughter’s suicide would have on the man, “I conclude that MV's autonomy and dignity interests outweigh competing considerations."That said, he agreed “important matters” were raised in previous arguments and stayed the ruling for 30 days to allow the parties to file appeals. That means the original injunction will remain in place for at least another month, pending the outcome of final arguments.This, despite the fact MV did not provide any legal, medical justification for how she came to qualify for MAiD when she received it last December. And despite the fact one of the three doctors in question opposed it on medical grounds..”The inability to review the clinical judgment of the professionals making MAiD assessments precludes the court from going behind the medical assessments to question whether MV's sole condition is mental illness or disability."MAiD ruling.Under the law as it stands, two doctors or qualified nurse practitioners have to approve the application. The father alleges his daughter shopped around for a ‘tie-breaker’ physician who would grant leave for suicide until she found two who could satisfy the legal requirements of the law.MV presently lives with her father and is described as at least partially dependent for the necessities of life. In addition to autism, she suffers from ADHD, court heard at a prior hearing on March 11 where he requested a judicial review of the reasons for approval.But Feasby wrote “the court cannot review a MAiD applicant's decision-making or the clinical judgment of the doctors and nurse practitioners involved in assessing an applicant's suitability for MAiD." Therefore, "the inability to review the clinical judgment of the professionals making MAiD assessments precludes the court from going behind the medical assessments to question whether MV's sole condition is mental illness or disability."At the original hearing on March 11, Feasby said the case is “by far” the most difficult and complex he’s heard with a broad public interest and was virtually certain it would be appealed, quite possibly to the highest court in the land.
