Pereira’s Attack on Legalizing Euthanasia or Assisted Suicide: Smoke and Mirrors

Downie, Jocelyn; Chambaere, Kenneth; Bernheim, Jan L.

doi:10.3747/co.19.1063

Cited by 11 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…See e.g. Downie et al (2012), which is a response to claims made by Jose Pereira that were not supported by the research cited in his footnotes (Pereira, 2011). Jose Pereira was a witness for the Crown in Carter v Canada and the weaknesses in his testimony were exposed through cross-examination on his paper.…”

Section: For Litigatorsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Social science and humanities evidence in Charter litigation

Downie

2018

The International Journal of Evidence & Proof

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Carter v Canada (Attorney General) is a Canadian case that famously struck down the Canadian Criminal Code prohibitions on euthanasia and assisted suicide (now known collectively as medical assistance in dying or MAiD). The most significant issue in the Carter case was that of the status of MAiD. However, this case is also interesting to explore in relation to the issue of the use of expert evidence from social science and humanities researchers. In this paper, I offer reflections as an academic trained in philosophy and law but not expert in the use of social science and humanities evidence in litigation. As someone who was inside the litigation but outside the generation of the evidence, I seek to bring a perspective that may be useful to practitioners who might be thinking about working with academics and academics who might be thinking about getting involved in constitutional litigation that relates to their field of study.

show abstract

Section: For Litigatorsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Social science and humanities evidence in Charter litigation

Downie

2018

The International Journal of Evidence & Proof

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…28 However, Downie et al cautioned against some of Pereira's statements. 39 With regard to patient autonomy among older adults, three articles examined the integration of MAiD into advance directives (ADs). [36][37][38] These authors discussed whether MAiD requests can be legally (and ethically) instructed after patient capacity for communication has ceased.…”

Section: Legal Challengesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Medical assistance in dying: implications for health systems from a scoping review of the literature

Fujioka

Mirza

Klinger

et al. 2019

J Health Serv Res Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective Medical assistance in dying (MAiD) is the medical provision of substances to end a patient’s life at their voluntary request. While legal in several countries, the implementation of MAiD is met with ethical, legislative and clinical challenges, which are often overshadowed by moral discourse. Our aim was to conduct a scoping review to explore key barriers for the integration of MAiD into existing health systems. Methods We searched electronic databases (CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO) and grey literature sources from 1990 to 2017. Studies discussing barriers and/or challenges to implementing MAiD from a health system’s perspective were included. Full-text papers were screened against inclusion/exclusion criteria for article selection. A thematic content analysis was conducted to summarize data into themes to highlight key implementation barriers. Results The final review included 35 articles (see online Appendix 1). Six categories of implementation challenges emerged: regulatory (n = 26), legal (n = 15), social (n = 9), logistical (n = 9), financial (n = 3) and compatibility with palliative care (n = 3). Within four of the six identified implementation barriers (regulatory, legal, social and logistical) were subthemes, which described barriers related to legalizing MAiD in more detail. Conclusion Despite multiple challenges related to its implementation, MAiD remains a requested end-of-life option, requiring careful examination to ensure adequate integration into existing health services. Comprehensive models of care incorporating multidisciplinary teams and regulatory oversight alongside improved clinician education may be effective to streamline MAiD services.

show abstract

“…Assisted suicide usually refers to cases where the person who is going to die needs help to kill themselves and asks for it. 7 Sometimes, this may be scarcely distinguishable from voluntary euthanasia; other times people wanting to die may be physically incapable of killing themselves. If the physician provides the drug which could be used for the same purpose with the patient without actively or passively involved directly by himself, this type of euthanasia is termed as “ physician-assisted euthanasia .”…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Attitude of the Orthodox Parishioners Toward Euthanasia: Evidence From Georgia

ვერულავა

Kachkachishvili

Jorbenadze³

2018

Int Q Community Health Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The right of euthanasia is the subject of worldwide discussion today, as it is one of the most controversial medical, religious, political, or ethical issues. This study aims to survey the attitudes of Orthodox parishioners toward the euthanasia. Methods: Within the quantitative study, the survey was conducted through a semistructured questionnaire. Respondents were the parishioners of the Orthodox Church. Within the qualitative study, the survey of the experts of the Orthodox Church, in particular the clergy, was conducted. During the survey of the experts, we used the snowball method. Results The majority of respondents (81%) were aware of euthanasia. The dominant opinion is that euthanasia is “ the consent to life termination during the illness, when there is no way out and recovery is impossible” or “ a terminally ill person voluntarily decides to end life painlessly.” Those who disagree with euthanasia rely on the religious factors (why the church prohibits it). Those who agree with euthanasia action argue the legitimate human rights and free will of person. Most of the respondents (86%) have not heard about euthanasia practices in Georgia. Most of the respondents (71%) knew that the Orthodox Church prohibits euthanasia; 39% of the respondents believe that euthanasia is justified in medical terms. Conclusion It is advisable to raise public awareness on euthanasia in religious, medical, cultural, social, and legal aspects.

show abstract

Pereira’s Attack on Legalizing Euthanasia or Assisted Suicide: Smoke and Mirrors

Cited by 11 publications

References 12 publications

Social science and humanities evidence in Charter litigation

Social science and humanities evidence in Charter litigation

Medical assistance in dying: implications for health systems from a scoping review of the literature

The Attitude of the Orthodox Parishioners Toward Euthanasia: Evidence From Georgia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About