{"id":3691,"date":"2026-04-14T00:42:20","date_gmt":"2026-04-14T00:42:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/3691\/"},"modified":"2026-04-14T00:42:20","modified_gmt":"2026-04-14T00:42:20","slug":"advocates-government-make-final-arguments-in-b-c-maid-trial","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/3691\/","title":{"rendered":"Advocates, government make final arguments in B.C. MAID trial"},"content":{"rendered":"

Closing arguments started Monday in a trial that will determine whether faith-based health-care facilities can continue to prohibit medical assistance in dying (MAID) in B.C.<\/p>\n

The trial, being heard by B.C. Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald Skolrood, could have national implications, as a verdict either way is likely to be appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada.<\/p>\n

Here are the closing arguments.<\/p>\n

The plaintiffs<\/p>\n

The story at the centre of the case is that of Samantha O\u2019Neill, who suffered from Stage 4 cervical cancer and had to be transferred out of Vancouver\u2019s St. Paul\u2019s Hospital in her final hours to receive MAID in April 2023.<\/p>\n

\"Samantha<\/p>\n

Samantha O’Neill pictured in Whistler in August 2019. She chose a medically assisted death in April 2023, at the age of 34, after suffering from Stage 4 cervical cancer. (Submitted by Jim O’Neill)<\/p>\n

St. Paul\u2019s is run by the Providence Health Care Society, a Catholic organization that does not allow MAID on its premises.<\/p>\n

O\u2019Neill\u2019s mother Gaye, a plaintiff in the case, and father Jim said the need for O\u2019Neill to be transferred denied them the chance to say a meaningful and dignified goodbye to their daughter. The last time they saw her conscious, she was seated on a commode.<\/p>\n

In a press conference outside B.C. Supreme Court on Monday, Gaye O\u2019Neill called the transfer process “traumatic and unbearably cruel to witness.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cIt stripped Sam of her dignity and caused unnecessary pain and suffering,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n

The three plaintiffs \u2013 Gaye O\u2019Neill, Dying With Dignity Canada and Dr. Jyothi Jayaraman, a Vancouver palliative care physician \u2013 are asking the court to strike down the provision of the B.C. Ministry of Health\u2019s MAID policy that allows publicly funded faith-based organizations to opt out of allowing the procedure in their facilities.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhile patients in most hospitals can choose to have MAID provided at their bedside without the attendant risk and disruption of a transfer, those at St. Paul\u2019s and other PHC facilities are denied that choice on the basis of someone else\u2019s religious beliefs,\u201d the plaintiffs\u2019 lawyers wrote in their closing arguments.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt is the plaintiffs\u2019 position that the Ministry\u2019s MAID policy breaches the Charter insofar as it gives [Providence Health Care] the authority to determine whether to prohibit MAID in publicly-funded facilities that it operates.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"Excerpt<\/p>\n

(Affidavit of Alexandra Rivera entered into evidence at BC Supreme Court.)<\/p>\n

During the evidentiary portion of the trial, held earlier this year, the court heard from several other families who also allege their loved ones suffered in their final hours as a result of the Ministry\u2019s MAID policy.<\/p>\n

The plaintiffs also argue the policy creates moral distress for physicians such as Dr. Jayaraman, who chose to resign from her palliative care position at a Vancouver hospice rather than authorize such transfers when its administration was transferred to Providence.<\/p>\n

\"Dr.<\/p>\n

(Ben Nelms\/CBC)<\/p>\n

\u201cAuthorizing the move was something I could not be involved with as a matter of principle. No patient under my care would be forced to move based solely on the organization\u2019s religious mission.\u201d<\/p>\n

Should the plaintiffs\u2019 challenge succeed, it would not force employees of faith-based providers such as Providence to participate in medical assistance in dying. It would mean outside providers would be allowed to perform the procedure within those facilities.<\/p>\n

The defence<\/p>\n

There are three defendants in the case: the provincial government, Providence Health Care Society and Vancouver Coastal Health.<\/p>\n

In its closing submissions, the B.C. government argues medical transfers are a routine and necessary part of health-care delivery in the province, because no facility offers every service a patient may need.<\/p>\n

The plaintiffs are seeking to insert the court into the minutiae of health-care delivery, which\u00a0 would set a dangerous precedent, the province\u2019s lawyers argue.<\/p>\n

\u201cThey ask the Court to dictate that patients cannot be transferred to receive a healthcare service, not even if they remain in the same hospital bed,\u201d the submissions say.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe Charter does not require, and our healthcare system cannot guarantee, that patients receive medical care at a specific location.\u201d<\/p>\n

The province and Vancouver Coastal Health both argue the government has sought to minimize the disruptions associated with such transfers by constructing spaces in close proximity to faith-based facilities where MAID can take place.<\/p>\n

In November 2023, the Ministry of Health ordered Providence to transfer a portion of the lands adjacent to St. Paul\u2019s Hospital to Vancouver Coastal Health to facilitate construction of a purpose-built space for MAID provisions. That space, known as Shoreline, opened in 2025.<\/p>\n

Since then, Shoreline has accommodated all St. Paul\u2019s patients who have requested MAID, Vancouver Coastal Health said in its submissions. This means patients no longer have to be transferred by vehicle to another facility.<\/p>\n

A similar space is under construction at the new St. Paul\u2019s Hospital on the False Creek Flats.<\/p>\n

The health authority has arranged for similar adjacent spaces at the two Vancouver hospices operated by Providence. There is no such space at Vancouver\u2019s Mount St. Joseph\u2019s Hospital, another Providence-run facility, nor at multiple other faith-based care homes throughout Metro Vancouver that do not allow MAID.<\/p>\n

Both the government and Providence say faith-based providers make significant contributions to health-care provision in B.C., especially through St. Paul\u2019s Hospital, and argue forcing such institutions to act against their values could put this at risk.<\/p>\n

\"St.<\/p>\n

(Richard Lam\/The Canadian Press)<\/p>\n

The government also argues that while family members may have suffered as a result of transfers to access MAID, the evidence presented at trial does not prove the patients themselves suffered.<\/p>\n

In O\u2019Neill\u2019s case, the government argues O\u2019Neill herself directed when and how friends and family were allowed to visit her. The transfer process, which the family said made their final goodbyes feel rushed, had to happen the way it did in order to fulfill O\u2019Neill\u2019s request to receive MAID that day, the government argues.<\/p>\n

Closing arguments are expected to end later this week. A verdict is not expected for several months.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Closing arguments started Monday in a trial that will determine whether faith-based health-care facilities can continue to prohibit…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":3692,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[17,2260,2268,2264,2262,2270,2267,2261,2263,2266,2269,95,2265],"class_list":["post-3691","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-canada","tag-canada","tag-closing-arguments","tag-gaye-oneill","tag-jim-o39neill","tag-maid","tag-palliative-care","tag-plaintiffs","tag-providence-health-care","tag-samantha-oneill","tag-st-pauls-hospital","tag-supreme-court-of-canada","tag-vancouver","tag-vancouver-coastal-health"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3691","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3691"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3691\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3692"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3691"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3691"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3691"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}