Paragraph 127 in Carter v. Canada expressly provides that a patient not be required to undertake treatments that are not acceptable to that individual. In the bill, an irremediable medical condition includes the term “incurable” as one of the ways of defining it, but it doesn't go on to say that the patient not be required to undertake treatment not acceptable to the individual. I'm wondering why that's not in the bill, and if thought was given to that.
On May 2nd, 2016. See this statement in context.