What Counts As Evidence in the Polarized Euthanasia/Assisted Dying Debate: Lessons from a Belgian Criminal Case

In the context of the rapidly expanding, largely unbridled, #euthanasia #MAID practice in Canada, some MAID expansionists continue to deny that there are problems, notwithstanding accumulating reports of euthanasia for lack of social support and adequate health care. They often employ the rhetoric of 'anecdotes are not evidence', with some even naively pointing to a lack of successful prosecution. A critical analysis of a unique Belgian criminal case involving euthanasia by colleagues Marc De Hert, Sien Loos, Sigrid Sterckx,  Eric Thys, and Kristof Van Assche of the Universities of Leuven, Antwerpen, and Gent, is in that context uniquely valuable. See hereafter my JOTWELL review discussing why it should be read, particularly also in the context of the Canadian debate:

Parliament is not forced by the courts to legalize MAID for mental illness : Law Professors' Letter to Cabinet

Justice Minister David Lametti announced today the introduction of a bill which would delay by one year, until March 2024, the scheduled implementation of MAID for sole reasons of mental illness. Until today, the federal government had repeatedly suggested it was bound by 'the courts' to expand MAID and to make MAID also available for persons whose sole underlying medical condition is mental illness. Minister Lametti even stated in an interview for a recent investigative documentary of CBC's The Fifth Estate, which revealed troubling components of the current MAID practice, that the Supreme Court had recognized 'a right to suicide' and that MAID was a 'species of suicide'. He made similar statements in an interview for a podcast with Althia Raj of the Toronto Star. With some colleagues of other law faculties, we drafted a letter to Prime Minister Trudeau, Ministers Lametti, Duclos, Qualtrough and Bennett, to challenge this problematic and in our view unfounded rhetoric of 'our hands are tied by the courts'.

Kate Mitchell

SJD Candidate
Thesis title:
Comparing the Levers of Prison Law Reform in Canada and the United States
Office in Falconer Hall
84 Queen's Park
Toronto, M5S 2C5
Tel:
236-334-6034
Education
Master of Laws - University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) (2021-2022)
Juris Doctor - Queen's University (2014-2017)
Master of Public Administration - Queen's University (2014-2015)
Bachelor of Arts - Dalhousie University (2011-2014)
Awards and Distinctions
Canada Graduate Scholarship - Doctoral (CGS-D) (2022-2025)
C. David Naylor University Fellowship (2022-2023)
University of Toronto Centre for Ethics Doctoral Fellow in Ethics (2022-2023)
UCLA Dean's Tuition Fellowship (2021-2022)
Torkin Manes LLP Academic Excellence & Community Service Award (2017)
Fred S. Fountain Scholarship (2011-2014)
Lockward Scholarship (2011-2014)
H.C. (Kip) Roberts Scholarship (2014)
Margaret Nicholl Pond Memorial Award (2014)
Professional Affiliations
Member, Law Society of Ontario
Member, Canadian Prison Law Association
Research Interests
Administrative Law
Canadian Constitutional Law
Charter of Rights
Comparative Law
Criminal Law 
Criminal Procedure and Evidence
Judicial Decision-Making
Supervisor
Committee Members

Judicial Discretion, Systemic Racism and the Morris Decision

The Black Law Students Association, Correctional Law Association, Criminal Law Students' Association, and International Commission of Jurists UofT Chapter present "Judicial Discretion, Systemic Racism and the Morris Decision".

This panel will occur by Zoom and will focus on judicial discretion and systemic racism in criminal law. Particular attention will be given to the R v Morris decision.

We have great panelists lined up for you, including Professor Kent Roach, Faisal Mirza and Jonathan Rudin!

The Implications of Facial Recognition Technology

The Implications of Facial Recognition Technology
An Investigation through the lens of Constitutional, Privacy, and Human Rights Law

Tuesday, February 15th from 12:30pm-2:00pm

 

Pages