Physician-Assisted Dying committee  As my colleague was mentioning, the issues around that and the approach that's taken as to how and when physicians may object is going to be a part of the provincial-territorial response, most likely. That, to my mind, would be one of the lower-order issues that arises for this c

Physician-Assisted Dying committee  I think the first thing to note is that because that wasn't what they were dealing with, we don't really have a clear answer that was part of the ratio of the decision or part of what they had to decide. There are some comments—and my colleague might have more at top of mind than

Physician-Assisted Dying committee  I think the response really falls along the lines of what I've said already. As I think one of the members has already noted, it would not be unreasonable to conclude that whatever Parliament comes up with will be subject to challenge, whether for being too broad or too narrow, a

Physician-Assisted Dying committee  There are maybe three things to keep in mind. The first is, as my colleague pointed out, the indeterminacy within the judgment itself. It's subject to competing interpretations, including the statement where they say this is about the facts of this case. It's hard to know exact

Physician-Assisted Dying committee  I think the starting point is just to note the litigation that's already under way in Quebec in the D'Amico and Saba case, where a constitutional challenge has been brought, mainly on division of powers grounds but also on charter grounds, to the legislation that's recently come