Medically assisted dying in Canada and unjust social conditions: a response to Wiebe and Mullin.

In the paper, titled 'Choosing death in unjust conditions: hope, autonomy and harm reduction,' Wiebe and Mullin argue that people living in unjust social conditions are sufficiently autonomous to request medical assistance in dying (MAiD). The ethical issue is that some people may request MAiD primarily because of unjust social conditions, not their illness, disease, disability or decline in capability. It is easily agreed that people living in unjust social conditions can be autonomous. Nevertheless, Wiebe and Mullin fail to appreciate that autonomy is only a necessary condition for MAiD. In addition to autonomy, one must decide that providing assisted dying to a patient because they are living in unjust social conditions is ethical. Central to making this ethical decision is the principle of non-maleficence, famously articulated as 'do no harm.' The authors admit that performing MAiD in response to unjust social circumstances is harmful, but they justify this harmful action by appealing to the principle of harm reduction. A fundamental flaw of their approach is that it relies on the legislative definition of intolerable suffering, which is based on circular reasoning and given that 99.2% of patients that have applied for MAiD satisfied this criterion, it is essentially equivalent to no standard/criterion. Canadian society is struggling with the ethical implications of its permissive MAiD programme, and, fundamental to this debate, will be determining the proper balance between autonomy and non-maleficence for people living in unjust social conditions.

Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) in Canada: A Critical Analysis of the Exclusion of Vulnerable Populations.

Canadian medical assistance in dying (MAiD) legislation was introduced in 2016. Although Bill C-14 attempted to balance patient autonomy and the protection of the vulnerable, recent court challenges suggest that an ideal balance has not been achieved. Numerous advocacy initiatives as well as a parliamentary review currently focus on three specific populations: mature minors, patients requesting MAiD via an advance directive and patients with a mental illness as the sole underlying condition. This article approaches these issues from an ethical and legal lens. We first outline a policy review on existing MAiD legislation in 11 jurisdictions. We then use the Oakes test (a critical assessment tool in the Carter v Canada case) to determine whether the restrictions on the three above-mentioned groups are consistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Finally, we consult our literature review to propose reasonable solutions that would be more consistent with the Charter.

Exposé sur les conséquences éthiques des tests aléatoires de dépistage des drogues en milieu de travail.

Le présent article traite des répercussions scientifiques et éthiques des tests aléatoires de dépistage des drogues en milieu de travail. Ces tests sont pratique courante, particulièrement dans les secteurs constituant un risque pour la sécurité, mais s'appuient sur peu d'analyses critiques. J'en conclus que ces programmes s'associent à des défis éthiques importants. Les employeurs doivent s'assurer que chaque aspect de leurs politiques repose sur des données scientifiques, est lié rationnellement à l'objectif de la sécurité en milieu de travail et est justifié sur le plan éthique.

A discussion of the ethical implications of random drug testing in the workplace.

This article discusses the scientific and ethical implications of random drug testing in the workplace. Random drug testing, particularly in safety-sensitive sectors, is a common practice, yet it has received little critical analysis. My conclusion is that there are important ethical challenges with these programs. Employers must ensure that every aspect of their policies are rooted in scientific evidence, linked rationally to the goal of workplace safety, and are ethically justifiable.

Evaluation of a low-threshold/high-tolerance methadone maintenance treatment clinic in saint john, new brunswick, Canada: one year retention rate and illicit drug use.

Objective. To report the one-year retention rate and the prevalence of illicit opioid use and cocaine use in the Low-Threshold/High-Tolerance (LTHT) methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) clinic located in Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada. Methods. A description of the LTHT MMT clinic is provided. The one-year retention rate was determined by collecting data on patients who enrolled in the LTHT MMT clinic between August 04, 2009 and August 04, 2010. The prevalence of illicit drug use was determined using a randomly selected retrospective cohort of 84 participants. For each participant the results of six consecutive urine tests for the most recent three months were compared to the results of the first six consecutive urine tests after program entry. Results. The one-year retention rate was 95%, 67% of the cohort achieved abstinence from illicit opioids and an additional 13% abstained from cocaine use. Conclusion. The novel feature of the LTHT MMT clinic is that patients are not denied methadone because of lack of ancillary services. Traditional comprehensive MMT programs invest the majority of financial resources in ancillary services that support the biopsychosocial model, whereas the LTHT approach utilizes a medical model and directs resources at medical management.

Virtue ethics as an alternative to deontological and consequential reasoning in the harm reduction debate.

BACKGROUND: There is strong evidence that harm reduction interventions such as Supervised Injection Sites and Needle Exchange Programs prevent many of the negative consequences of problematic substance use. Yet many governments, including the United States and Canada, still do not endorse these interventions, claiming that they do not get people off of drugs and send a mixed message. METHODS: This paper will analyze objections to harm reduction in light of the ethical theories of John Stuart Mill, Immanuel Kant and Aristotle. RESULTS: The most important ethical issue in the abstinence vs. harm reduction debate is whether harm reduction - because it does not require individuals to either reduce their consumption of illicit substances or to abstain from illicit substance use - can be ethically justified. CONCLUSION: Harm reduction interventions are clearly justified on Utilitarian grounds because, based on the evidence, such policies would produce the greatest good for the greatest number. However, Kant would not think that the values guiding harm reduction are ethical because the justification of harm reduction interventions focuses exclusively on examining consequences. Virtue Ethics seeks to find the proper balance between harm reduction and abstinence. We claim that the virtue of compassion would provide a defense of harm reduction.

Exploring disparities between global HIV/AIDS funding and recent tsunami relief efforts: an ethical analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To contrast relief efforts for the 26 December 2004 tsunami with current global HIV/AIDS relief efforts and analyse possible reasons for the disparity. METHODS: Literature review and ethical analysis. RESULTS: Just over 273,000 people died in the tsunami, resulting in relief efforts of more than US$10 bn, which is sufficient to achieve the United Nation's long-term recovery plan for South East Asia. In contrast, 14 times more people died from HIV/AIDS in 2004, with UNAIDS predicting a US$8 bn funding gap for HIV/AIDS in developing nations between now and 2007. This disparity raises two important ethical questions. First, what is it that motivates a more empathic response to the victims of the tsunami than to those affected by HIV/AIDS? Second, is there a morally relevant difference between the two tragedies that justifies the difference in the international response? The principle of justice requires that two cases similarly situated be treated similarly. For the difference in the international response to the tsunami and HIV/AIDS to be justified, the tragedies have to be shown to be dissimilar in some relevant respect. Are the tragedies of the tsunami disaster and the HIV/AIDS pandemic sufficiently different, in relevant respects, to justify the difference in scope of the response by the international community? CONCLUSION: We detected no morally relevant distinction between the tsunami and the HIV/AIDS pandemic that justifies the disparity. Therefore, we must conclude that the international response to HIV/AIDS violates the fundamental principles of justice and fairness.

Ethical and scientific issues surrounding solid organ transplantation in HIV-positive patients: Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

End-stage liver disease is emerging as a leading cause of death among HIV-positive patients. Historically, an HIV diagnosis was a contraindication for a liver transplant; however, because of the efficacy of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART), HIV-positive patients have one-year, two-year, and three-year post-transplantation survival rates similar to that of HIV-negative patients. Based on this evidence, HIV-positive patients are now considered eligible for transplantation. However, newly emerging guidelines include the stipulation that HIV-positive patients must be on HAART to be placed on a waiting list for transplantation. The purpose of the present paper is to evaluate the scientific and ethical probity of requiring HIV-positive patients to be on HAART as a condition for being on a liver transplant waiting list. It is argued that the emphasis should be placed on the probability of post-transplantation HAART tolerance, and that concerns about pretransplantation HAART tolerance are of secondary importance.

Special Access Denied: A Case Study of Health Canada's Special Access Program.

This paper examines the ethical probity of Health Canada's Special Access Program (SAP). The SAP is designed for patients with life-threatening conditions who require "emergency" access to drugs that are not authorized for use in Canada when conventional therapies have failed. We argue that the SAP inappropriately uses the tenets of evidence-based decision-making in situations where evidence-based decision-making is unfeasible. The SAP should abandon its pretence of evidence-based decision-making and adopt a transparent process in which the values guiding decisions are explicit and corrigible. We recommend the ethical principles of autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence and justice.

Drug treatment courts are popular but do they work and are they ethical and appropriate for Canada?

Currently Canada is experimenting with the implementation of drug treatment courts. Pilot projects are underway in both Toronto and Vancouver. In the U.S., drug courts emerged as a response to the overcrowding of the prison system, the end product of the revolving door of substance dependent people moving through the court system. However, this expansion was not accompanied by any rigorous evaluation or critical reflection as to whether drug treatment courts can achieve their desired outcomes or if they are appropriate for dealing with substance dependent offenders. The purpose of this article is to take a critical look at this phenomenon and to discuss whether the drug court model is suitable for Canada.