Friday, September 11, 2020

Nova Scotia court case about the husband who was approved for euthanasia, but is not terminal and may be delusional, continues.

Alex Schadenberg
Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The Nova Scotia court case concerning a woman who is trying to prevent her husband of 48-years from dying by euthanasia will continue on September 24.

Katherine's husband was approved for (MAiD) euthanasia even after receiving conflicting assessments for MAiD (euthanasia). Katherine says he is not dying and is delusional about his medical condition. Justice Elizabeth Van den Eynden recently lifted a temporary injunction to allow the man to die by euthanasia, even though the judge set the court date for September 24.

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition found the decision by Justice Van den Eynden to be untenable.

To schedule a hearing on the merits of the injunction for September 24 and then lift the temporary injunction on September 4, allowing him to die by lethal injection, makes a mockery of justice. 
If the case continues, and if it is decided that the husband lacked effective capacity to decide or did not qualify under the law, but at the same time he had already died by euthanasia is farcical.
Katherine lawyers were denied a formal review of the decision even though her husband can die by euthanasia before September 24. The case questions whether her husband qualifies for MAiD and how to respond to conflicting or false MAiD assessments.

In response to media inquiries Katherine stated:
I have learned so much about the potential for abuse of vulnerable people in Canada through MAID. The MAID programs don’t even follow their own procedures. Doctor shopping is rampant and there is no oversight by court or Tribunal. This must change for the safety of all vulnerable Canadians.
Her Lawyer Hugh Scher noted:
There must be a significant overhaul to MAID in Canada. The limited safeguards put in place by parliament have proven ineffective to prevent against doctor shopping and arbitrary application of the law. If MAID is health care as many argue then it must be subject to the same oversight requirements as other end of life treatments in terms of resolving disputes about capacity, consent and reasonable foreseeability of death.

Absent that we have unleashed a dangerous program of euthanasia on demand that puts the lives of vulnerable people at risk.
Hugh Scher
In an interview by CTV News Avis Favario, Scher suggested that this case may be appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada.

"What I think this court case speaks to fundamentally is the need to have a dispute resolution process through the courts in those rare cases where there is a fundamental disagreement or conflict between multiple experts that needs to be resolved, because they're coming to completely alternate positions about the question of whether the person meets the criteria or not,"
The decision as to whether Katherine will seek to appeal this case to the Supreme Court of Canada cannot be determined at this time.

The question that the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition seeks to clarify that when there are conflicting or a false MAiD assessment, is there an avenue to challenge the assessment, especially since this is a life and death decision.

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition needs your help.

EPC agreed to pay for the legal bills, but in turn, we need your financial support.

Donate to the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition (Link) by:
Paypal (Link),
Donate by credit card by calling the EPC office at: 1-877-439-3348, or
Send cheques to the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, Box 25033, London ON., N6C 6A8.
More information on this case.


dougsned said...

I'm on the husband's side. May he be granted the right to do with dignity.

dougsned said...

May the husband succeed.

Colleen said...

Praying for you Katherine that despite all the opposition you’re facing you’re doing all you can save the life of your husband. I take my hat off to you

Unknown said...

I will also be praying for you and also your husband. Keep up the good fight. Every time MAID wins, we are all at greater risk in the future. We cannot let that happen. Your husband should be in palliative care where he will receive compassion and very special care until his natural death. I for one appreciate all you're doing for your husband and also us. Harriet Machuk