Tina Carter Case

The case of Carter vs. Canada is one of triumph for Canadians to question their civil liberties and constitutional privileges to an extent that had not been experienced in the courts history. The decision to abandon the previous law restricting the practice of doctor assisted suicide was justified by the court in the context of those with severe illness as well as a mental disability, in which prohibits their overall wellness. In regards to Life, liberty and security, it comes to a progressive conclusion that both the Supreme Court of Canada and Tina Carter both unilaterally agree that Canadians who are suffering unbearably at the end of life should have the right to choose a dignified and peaceful death. To explicitly regard the constitutional legitimacy of physician-assisted suicide within the charter of rights general limitations, the law currently contradicts the charter.

The Criminal Code forbids helping a person commit suicide. The case of Carter v Canada is important in this aspect because it considers whether the Charter of Rights and Freedoms allows a right to physician-assisted death. The court was required to balance the autonomy and dignity of terminally-ill adults with the need to protect the vulnerable from being induced to commit suicide in a moment of weakness. The British Columbia Supreme Court decided that prohibiting physician-assisted death for adults who are competent, informed and seriously ill violates their section 7 Charter right to “life, liberty, and security of the person” if they have no possibility of