Euthanasia continues to be stated in the Criminal Code as the deliberate taking of a human life even though many believe it is considered “compassionate killing”. Thus, it violates Section 7 of the Charter’s right to life. In addition, the Supreme Court has also ruled in Sue Rodriguez’s trial in 1993 that, “although other sections of the Charter are infringed due to prohibiting euthanasia, the law against assisted suicide is in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice” . Finally, if assisted suicide were to be legalized, severe consequences may arise. Doctors may ab

The consequences, seen in the Netherlands, in legalizing a law such as euthanasia has caused the government, Supreme Court, and the public to view every euthanasia case closely making sure it won’t become a law in the country. If however, euthanasia were to be legal, it may send a message that some lives are not worth living. The elderly or those who are disabled may feel that they do not belong to society and may begin to think that euthanasia is their only resort for problems the end. The practice of assisted-suicide also creates a duty to die. Again, disabled patients or depressed people may feel the pressure to die instead of spending the family’s money for medical care since costs are so expensive. “When assisted suicide is available, it is perceived as a means of relieving another’s burden” . As well, legalizing euthanasia will give too much power to doctors. Doctors can decide for a patient if they are to live or to die and mistakes can occur in their diagnosis of the patient. Eventually, legalizing euthanasia “opens the door to abuse” . Doctors may kill their patients without any consent or omissions of care for the patient may occur. Lastly, legalizing euthanasia will lead to public outrage because of the many moral issues involved. The problem with euthanasia in society is that “the desire for self-destruction often arises due to an untreated medical condition; the right would also have to be extended to persons unable to form their own decisions, or who cannot independently communicate their wishes, allowing for potential abuse; and since there is the option of euthanasia patients are open to pressure and minimizes the benefits of the freedom of choice” . The professional obligations of physicians in Canada require them to “make all reasonable efforts to sustain life… unless such efforts would not restore any quality of life” . From this statement, the physician would have to power to determine what is a reasonable quality of life and thus, can stop the treatment of a patient. From all these points, one can say that many more cases of death will arise because of depressed patients, incorrect diagnosis of a patients, pressured disabled persons, or a doctors abusing the system. For those reasons, euthanasia should me kept merely an issue and not a law in Canada since the Charter guarantees all people the freedom of life, not death.

2. Bjarnason, Halldor K., “Euthanasia for Individuals with Disabilities; http://www.epc.bc.ca/bjarnaso.html”, Vancouver, B

Some topics in this essay:
Supreme Court, Criminal Code, Court Canada, Sue Rodriguez’s, Canada Charter, Sue Rodriguez, supreme court, assisted suicide, Robert Latimer, Lane Bob, Washington Post, Assisted Suicide, criminal code, supreme court canada, court canada, sue rodriguez, death human, euthanasia continues, law euthanasia, euthanasia law, legalizing euthanasia, “euthanasia assisted suicide, assisted suicide euthanasia, causes death human, provisions criminal code,