{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,9,20]],"date-time":"2025-09-20T22:16:43Z","timestamp":1758406603472},"reference-count":3,"publisher":"Cambridge University Press (CUP)","issue":"3","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2020,6,2]],"date-time":"2020-06-02T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1591056000000},"content-version":"unspecified","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/terms"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Camb Q Healthc Ethics"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2020,7]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:p>In 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada struck down the criminal law prohibiting physician assisted death in Canada. In 2016, Parliament passed legislation to allow what it called \u2018medical assistance in dying (MAID).\u2019 The authors first describe the arguments the Court used to strike down the law, and then argue that MAID as legalized in Bill C-14 is based on principles that are incompatible with a free and democratic society, prohibits assistance in dying that should be permitted, and makes access to medically-assisted death unnecessarily difficult. They then propose a version of MAID legislation (\u2018Ideal MAID\u2019) that gives proponents and opponents of MAID everything they can legitimately want, contend that it is the only way to legalize MAID that is compatible with a free and democratic society, and conclude that it is the way to legalize MAID in Canada and other similarly free and democratic societies.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1017\/s0963180120000080","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2020,6,2]],"date-time":"2020-06-02T10:08:31Z","timestamp":1591092511000},"page":"361-368","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":2,"title":["How to Legalize Medically Assisted Death in a Free and Democratic Society"],"prefix":"10.1017","volume":"29","author":[{"given":"ALISTER","family":"BROWNE","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"J.S.","family":"RUSSELL","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"56","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2020,6,2]]},"reference":[{"key":"S0963180120000080_ref3","first-page":"182","volume-title":"The End of Life","author":"Rachels","year":"1986"},{"key":"S0963180120000080_ref2","first-page":"339","volume-title":"The Sanctity of Life and the Criminal Law","author":"Williams","year":"1957"},{"key":"S0963180120000080_ref1","volume-title":"Report of the Canadian Committee on Corrections. Toward Unity: Criminal Justice and Corrections","year":"1969"}],"container-title":["Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/services\/aop-cambridge-core\/content\/view\/S0963180120000080","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2020,6,2]],"date-time":"2020-06-02T10:09:09Z","timestamp":1591092549000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/product\/identifier\/S0963180120000080\/type\/journal_article"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2020,6,2]]},"references-count":3,"journal-issue":{"issue":"3","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2020,7]]}},"alternative-id":["S0963180120000080"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1017\/s0963180120000080","relation":{},"ISSN":["0963-1801","1469-2147"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0963-1801","type":"print"},{"value":"1469-2147","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2020,6,2]]}}}