POLICY MATTERS
“The goal of ensuring access to healthcare, in particular equitable
access to healthcare, is pressing and substantial,”
wrote Justice Herman J. Wilton-Siegel.
access to health services in Ontario,” said
Dr. Steven Bodley, College President. “We
are pleased that the Court affirmed our
concern that the alternatives proposed by the
applicants could, in some cases, compromise
access to care, including care for vulnerable
patients.”
The decision also affirmed that the
emergency provision in the College’s
Professional Obligations and Human
Rights policy represents reasonable limits
on religious freedom, demonstrably justified
in a free and democratic society. The
applications were dismissed in their entirety.
“The goal of ensuring access to healthcare,
in particular equitable access to healthcare,
is pressing and substantial. The effective
referral requirements of the policies are
rationally connected to the goal. The
requirements impair the Individual
Applicant’s right of religious freedom as little
as reasonably possible in order to achieve the
goal,” wrote Justice Herman J. Wilton-Siegel
on behalf of a three-member panel.
The Professional Obligations and
Human Rights policy articulates physicians’
professional and legal obligations to provide
health services without discrimination and
sets expectations of physicians who limit
the health services they provide because of
their personal values and beliefs. The policy
establishes the duty to provide an effective
referral if a physician has a conscientious or
religious objection to providing a service;
and the duty to provide the service in an
emergency despite any objection.
The College’s Medical Assistance in
Dying policy advises of the legal framework
and professional expectations of physicians
with respect to medical assistance in dying,
as shaped by federal legislation, provincial
legislation, and relevant College policies.
The MAID policy also provides that where
a physician declines to provide medical
assistance in dying for reasons of conscience
or religion, the physician must not abandon
the patient, and an effective referral must be
provided. The MAID policy does not require
physicians, in any circumstance, to provide
MAID or conduct assessments for MAID
contrary to their conscientious or religious
beliefs.
The goal of these provisions is to protect
the public, prevent harm to patients
and facilitate access to care for patients
in multicultural, multi-faith society, by
guiding all physicians on how to uphold
their professional and ethical obligations
of non-abandonment and patient-centred
care within the context of Ontario's public
health-care system. They aim to protect
all Ontario patients, with an emphasis
on ensuring that the most vulnerable
are not exposed to harm when their
physician objects to providing an otherwise
appropriate and available medical service.
The College defence of patient access to
health services was backed by a number of
interveners, including the Attorney General of
Ontario and Dying with Dignity Canada.
• The Christian Medical and Dental Society of Canada v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario,
2018 ONSC 579
• For more facts about MAID, please see our Fact Sheet at www.cpso.on.ca under policies.
28
DIALOGUE ISSUE 1, 2018
MD