A Canadian man has called on a judge to block his 27-year-old daughter’s medically assisted death, arguing she lacks the ability to fully consent to the procedure in a case that highlights the limits on family members’ ability to intervene when a person has decided to die.
The Alberta woman – known as MV due to a publication ban – was set to die on 1 February after receiving approval from two doctors. But her father, WV, successfully applied for an injunction, arguing that she has an undiagnosed mental illness that prevents her from fully consenting to the procedure.
Canada’s medical assistance in dying (Maid) laws, drawn up after a 2015 supreme court decision, initially only permitted those who are terminally ill to be eligible for the procedure.
But in 2019, a Quebec judge ruled that restricting access to those who had a “reasonably foreseeable death” was unconstitutional, forcing federal lawmakers to amend and expand the existing laws. Now, adults may receive an assisted death if two doctors confirm they have an irremediable physical condition causing immense suffering that cannot be relieved. Currently, people suffering solely from chronic mental illness are excluded from accessing Maid.
If patients do not want their family involved in the decision, family members can be excluded from Maid assessments. In 2020, an 83-year-old Nova Scotia man died using Maid after his wife failed to convince a court to block his death.
In the Alberta case, the woman, who lives with her parents, says her family does not have legal standing to challenge her right to access assisted death.
Her lawyer told the court the case was about a protected right to medical autonomy in decisions about death – an issue the supreme court addressed in 2015.
“[WV is] at risk of losing his daughter and while this is sad, it does not give him the right to keep her alive against her wishes,” lawyer Austin Paladeau told the court, according to CBC News.
Paladeau pointed out that when crafting the current rules, parliament chose not to include a supervisory role for judges. The only people who can determine if a person qualifies for Maid are doctors designated as approved assessors.
MV initially applied for Maid in 2021. It has not been made public on what grounds she made the application, but she was approved by one doctor and then rejected by another.
Her second attempt in 2023, also saw one doctor approve her application and another reject it. A third doctor – the same one who had approved MV’s 2021 application – was then asked to review the application and approved it, according to WV’s court submissions.
“I believe M.V. suffers from mental health issues, which to date, have been undiagnosed, untreated and which underpin her wish to access Maid. I believe her mental health issues impact her ability to make decisions in relation to Maid,” WV said in an affidavit submitted to the court, adding he believed his daughter’s decision “may be unduly influenced by other people”.
Court documents submitted by WV allege that she “doctor shop[s]” in order to get diagnoses to help her access Maid and said she was “not a reliable witness”.
WV also submitted a 2021 report from a doctor at a neurology clinic who said MV was “normal” and referred her back to a family doctor.
MV has not submitted any medical documentation to the court to explain how she was approved for Maid, although the court of king’s bench justice Colin Feasby interpreted this as a desire to keep her medical records private.
Sarah Miller, a lawyer who represents WV, said the case highlighted the absence of a legislated appeal or review process in Alberta.
“As a court, I can’t go second-guessing these Maid assessors … but I’m stuck with this: the only comprehensive assessment of this person done says she’s normal,” said Justice Feasby, calling the decision “really hard”.
Feasby is expected to rule on both the injunction, preventing MV from accessing Maid, and whether there should be a judicial review to determine why two physicians approved the Maid request.
