I fundamentally disagree, and I'm not the only one who disagrees with that. I think many legal scholars and many people in the legal profession disagree. I think it reflects a distorted view of MAID as a quasi inherently beneficial practice, as if not having facilitated access within the medical system to it is a greater harm than death.
I think that discriminatory analysis, on the contrary, would focus on existing structural discriminations of persons with disability, particularly what persons with mental illness already face, and the second component is the high risk to women, indigenous persons and persons living in poverty. I would argue, on the contrary, that adding easier access to death to existing inequality while we continue to protect others against premature death...because we have to emphasize that it's still in the Criminal Code. It still protects others, but we will now exclude that.