10 Things Most People (probably) Don't Know About Medical Assistance in Dying
MAiD is a complicated and nuanced topic, so it’s not surprising that many people don’t fully understand it. To help with that, we present to you 10 Things Most People (probably) Don’t Know About MAiD. Do you know all 10? Is there something you think we missed that you think most people don’t know? Let us know in the comments. And as always, if you want a more thorough explanation of any of these ideas, please let us know by asking us in our Ask Us Anything section.
The Words in Canada’s MAiD Laws Don’t Mean What You Think They Mean
One of the legal eligibility criteria for MAiD is that the person must have a “serious and incurable illness, disease, or disability.” On the surface, this seems straightforward—after all, incurable is commonly understood to mean something that cannot be cured, remedied, or corrected. But when it comes to MAiD laws, it’s not that simple.
Here’s the thing: MAiD laws are…well, laws, not medical guidelines. They are written in legal language which doesn’t always align with the precise terminology used in medicine.
Imagine someone who was diagnosed with cancer and underwent a grueling course of chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery. After years of remission—say, two decades—they are considered cured. But now they’ve been diagnosed with a new, unrelated cancer. Their doctors believe there’s a reasonable chance of a cure with another round of aggressive treatment.
Is this second cancer incurable? From a medical perspective, no. The doctors’ assessment indicates there’s hope for a cure with treatment. But what if the person refuses treatment, believing the suffering caused by aggressive therapies isn’t worth the potential outcome? Even in this case, the cancer is not technically incurable according to medical judgment.
So could this person be eligible for MAiD? This may be surprising, but yes—depending on the circumstances. That’s because “incurable” in the context of MAiD is not a medical term but a legal one. MAiD assessors use their medical expertise to interpret what “incurable” means within the broader context of the individual’s situation. If a person reasonably refuses treatment due to the anticipated suffering or diminished quality of life it would bring, their condition could legally be deemed incurable, even if it might be considered medically curable.
This distinction between legal and medical language runs throughout Canada’s MAiD laws. Many terms sound medical but are, in fact, legal constructs:
Reasonably Foreseeable Natural Death
Advanced State of Irreversible Decline in Capability
Grievous and Irremediable Medical Condition
Intolerable Suffering
None of these terms have universally accepted medical definitions—and that’s intentional. If the government had wanted to define specific diseases or conditions, it could have. For example, they could have listed qualifying conditions such as cancer, heart failure, interstitial lung disease, COPD, etc.. But with over 26,000 recognized diseases—according to The Human Disease Database—creating an exhaustive list would be impossible. Instead, the law provides a framework, allowing medical professionals to use their expertise and assess each individual’s unique circumstances when determining MAiD eligibility.
If this still seems unclear, consider this: under current Canadian MAiD laws, mental illness is not recognized as an “illness, disease, or disability.” We’ll say that again. Under MAiD laws, mental illness isn’t an illness (insert shrug emoji). This underscores the point that MAiD assessors must rely on their medical knowledge to interpret legal criteria—not to adhere strictly to medical definitions.
By understanding how legal terms in MAiD laws function, it becomes clear why flexibility in interpretation is necessary. It ensures the law can be applied compassionately and thoughtfully, respecting both medical realities and individual circumstances.
2. MAiD is a Right in Canada…sort of.
We’ve previously discussed how MAiD was legalized in Canada following successful constitutional challenges brought by several individuals. This has led to MAiD being described by some as a “right” in Canada. But that’s not entirely accurate.