Mr. Andrew Copson:

I agree with the comments made just now about the misrepresentation of some views. I specifically echo what has just been heard from the witness from Dignity in Dying. I have never heard anyone who advocates for assisted dying make the claim that some other person's life was objectively of less value; it is quite the opposite. Instead, we are valuing people's own personal choices as to how they feel and their quality of life. To me, that is the height of human dignity and in no way dilutes it. On the so-called slippery slope as regards Canada, a sleight of hand is often involved when people talk about Canada. Some try to give the impression that what was an assisted dying law for terminally ill people in limited circumstances suddenly slid down this slope and that it is now a free-for-all for everyone. There is lots that could be said about that but the first thing that should be said is that, at the very beginning, the assisted dying law in Canada was not designed only to cover the terminally ill but followed on from a 2015 court case taken by Kay Carter, who was suffering from degenerative spinal stenosis and who was not terminally ill herself. We should argue these points on the principles rather than invoking this slippery-slope or closed door-open door argument.