In March 2021, the law was further amended by Bill C-7 to include those suffering from a grievous and irremediable condition whose death was not reasonably foreseeable.
[9][10] The prohibition was overturned in a February 2015 decision by the Supreme Court of Canada in Carter v. Canada (Attorney General), which ruled that the Criminal Code provisions that make it a crime to help a person end their life violate the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and that eligible adults with grievous and irremediable medical conditions are entitled to an assisted death.
The Court delayed its suspension of invalidity for a period of 12 months, to allow Parliament the opportunity to amend its laws if it so chose.
As an interim measure, it ruled that provincial courts can now begin approving applications for euthanasia pursuant to the criteria in the Carter decision.
On 2 February 2023, the Canadian government introduced legislation to extend the temporary exclusion of eligibility in circumstances where a person's sole underlying medical condition is a mental illness for a period of one-year, until 17 March 2024.
[18] After this date, persons with a mental illness can be eligible for medical assistance in dying, subject to any further amendments to the law or any new regulations.
[19] Canada's euthanasia law includes some legal safeguards aimed at preventing abuse and ensuring informed consent.
To receive euthanasia, patients experiencing disease, disability or terminal illness must sign a written request expressing their wish to end their life in front of one independent witness who can confirm it was done willingly free of coercion.
[21] Canada's law no longer requires the presence of a terminal illness, unlike many other countries where euthanasia is only legal in those circumstances.
[4] On 15 June 2012, in a case filed by Gloria Taylor, the Supreme Court of British Columbia ruled that provisions in the Criminal Code prohibiting euthanasia were unconstitutional as they apply to severely disabled patients capable of giving consent.
The lower court ruled that the Criminal Code provisions "infringe s. 7 [and s. 15 ] of the Charter, and are of no force and effect to the extent that they prohibit physician-assisted suicide by a medical practitioner in the context of a physician-patient relationship".
The court ruled that the law banning euthanasia of terminally-ill patients (based on the Rodriguez v British Columbia (Attorney General) decision) was unconstitutional, and violated Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
[28] As required by the 2015 Supreme Court decision, Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould tabled a bill in parliament in April 2016 to amend the Criminal Code to allow euthanasia.
[29] Bill C-14 "create[s] exemptions from the offences of culpable homicide, of aiding suicide and of administering a noxious thing, in order to permit medical practitioners and nurse practitioners to provide medical assistance in dying and to permit pharmacists and other persons to assist in the process".
[30] The bill restricted euthanasia only to mentally competent adults with "enduring and intolerable suffering" and in cases where death is reasonably foreseeable.
The House of Commons did accept a few Senate amendments, such as requiring that patients be counseled about alternatives including palliative care and barring beneficiaries from acting in the euthanasia.
Senators such as Serge Joyal who disagree with the restrictive wording believe that the provinces should refer the issue to the Supreme Court of Canada for an opinion in order to preclude the need for individuals to proceed with such an Appeal and incur the significant expense of doing so.
Ouellette believes that large-scale changes to social norms like euthanasia should move very slowly because the impacts will be felt differently across Canada and societies.
The panel concluded that despite these uncertainties, people could still voluntarily wish to request medical assistance in dying and thus its mandate could be fulfilled.
[46] In 2024, a lawsuit about the legality of delaying expansion of euthanasia to those with a mental disorder was filed due to the belief that denying it on these grounds is discriminatory and violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
45% supported expanding eligibility for euthanasia to include individuals with serious mental health illnesses, with 23% opposed and 32% being unsure of their position.
[65] After the repeal of the reasonably foreseeable requirement in Bill C-7, there have been claims from writers for The Spectator, Jacobin, and Global News that many might opt into euthanasia because of poverty, with accusations of Canada "euthanizing its poor".
[66][67][68] Critics believe that a lack of social spending structurally places these people in poverty, and then introduces MAID as a way out, citing issues like insufficient welfare for disabled people and unconstitutionally long waiting times for healthcare as evidence that those who are disabled and impoverished do not have enough support to survive.
[68][69] An analysis piece from The Spectator, their most popular article in 2022, stated that the Canadian government sees MAID as a more economical alternative to investments in social programs and welfare.
[72] In a paper from August 2023 authored by a member of the law faculty at the University of British Columbia, Legislated Ableism: Bill C-7 and the Rapid Expansion of MAiD in Canada, the author argues that the expansion of MAID through Bill C-7 conflicts with the Canadian constitution, violating s.7 and s.15, which pertain to equal protection under law and anti-discrimination.