Thanks, Mr. Chair.
I want to take us back to the charter, particularly with respect to compliance, and this is for Professor Gilbert.
I'm going to rely a little bit on Morgentaler because I think there are some lines to be drawn here. In that case, Justice Wilson stated that she believed “that the framers of the Constitution” were contemplating “the freedom of the individual...to make his own choices for good or ill”. I believe those were her words. This was implying the right to make decisions about one's end of life, including through MAID, as a fundamentally personally autonomous choice.
You mentioned that you believe MAID provisions would be saved by section 1 of the charter. Is it safe for me to presume that this is based in part on the contention that although consenting to medical treatment is different from consenting to MAID, the same basic conditions apply in both situations—that is, a capacity assessment must be completed by a medical practitioner?