Death and dying are natural phenomena embedded within complex political, cultural and social systems. Nurses often practice at the forefront of this process and have a fundamental role in caring for both patients and those close to them during the process of dying and following death. While nursing has a rich tradition in advancing the palliative and end‐of‐life care movement, new modes of care for patients with serious and irremediable medical conditions arise when assisted death is legalized in a particular (...) jurisdiction. In early 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada released its landmark decision Carter v. Canada (Attorney General) (‘Carter’), which legalized physician‐assisted suicide in particular clinical situations. The new law provided the broad national framework for Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) in Canada but, once the law was passed, provincial and territorial governments and health professional regulatory bodies each had to undertake a process of developing policies, procedures and processes to guide MAiD‐related practice specific to their jurisdiction. In this paper, we begin to examine the political ramifications and professional tensions arising from MAiD for nurses and nursing, focusing specifically upon the impacts for registered nurses. We identify how variations in the provincial and territorial literature and regulatory guidelines across Canada have given rise to role confusion and uncertainty among some registered nurses and how this may potentially impact patient care. We then continue to highlight the need for greater political activism among nurses to foster greater clarity in nursing roles in MAiD and to advocate for improved supports for patients and those close to them. (shrink)

In terminally ill individuals who would otherwise end their own lives, active voluntary euthanasia (AVE) can be seen as life-extending rather than life-shortening. Accordingly, AVE supports key pro-euthanasia arguments (appeals to autonomy and beneficence) and meets certain sanctity of life objections. This paper examines the extent to which a terminally ill individual’s wish to donate organs after death contributes to those life-extension arguments. It finds that, in a terminally ill individual who wishes to avoid experiencing life he considers to be (...) not worth living, and who also wishes to donate organs after death, AVE maximizes the likelihood that such donations will occur. The paper finds that the wish to donate organs strengthens the appeals to autonomy and beneficence, and fortifies the meeting of certain sanctity of life objections, achieved by life-extension arguments, and also generates appeals to justice that form novel life-extension arguments in favour of AVE in this context. (shrink)