A British Columbia judge took the extraordinary step of stopping a woman’s medically assisted death, issuing an eleventh-hour court order to halt the proceedings, according to documents filed over the weekend. end.

The injunction, signed by Judge Simon R. Coval, is the first of its kind issued in the province and was issued Saturday, the day before the woman’s expected death.

It prevents Dr. Ellen Wiebe or any other doctor from “causing the death” of the 53-year-old woman “by MAID or any other means.” This followed a notice of civil suit alleging that Wiebe negligently approved the procedure for a patient who was not legally eligible.

“If Defendants seek MAID, the death will constitute battery (of the patient), wrongful death, and potentially a criminal offense,” the notice of claim states.

“It is within the inherent jurisdiction of this honorable court to prohibit allegedly criminal conduct, in this case the termination of a patient’s life where it appears that the legislative criteria have not been met, and/ or protection of a patient from injury.”

None of the allegations have been tested in court and Wiebe has not yet filed a response. Wiebe also declined to comment when contacted by CTV News on Tuesday.

The woman, who was granted anonymity by the court, is from another large western province and traveled to British Columbia to obtain medical assistance in dying, according to the injunction application – which was filed by the woman’s common-law partner, who is also not named.

“She was unable to get approval from her own doctors (in her home province) and so started looking online for other doctors who might be open to her request. She finally found Dr. Ellen Wiebe,” the application states, adding that the woman had several Zoom meetings with the BC doctor and staunch MAID advocate.

“At the end of the first meeting, Dr. Wiebe approved (the woman) for MAID. »

Is the woman eligible for MAID?

The claim argues that this woman is ineligible because her underlying health condition does not qualify her for medical assistance in dying under what is known as MAID Track 2 – which sets out the criteria in cases where death is “not reasonably foreseeable”.

Legally, people whose “only condition” is a mental illness or disorder are not eligible for MAID, an exclusion that will remain in effect until at least March 2027.

According to the notice of civil suit, the woman was diagnosed with “rapid cycling bipolar 2 disorder.” However, she requested medical assistance in dying due to “akathisia,” a condition associated with changes in the dose of psychotropic or antipsychotic medications. According to the American Psychiatric Association, this manifests as “extreme agitation characterized by an inability to sit or stand and by restless movements or nervousness, as well as a subjective report of inner agitation.”

In October 2023, the woman was prescribed a high dose of quetiapine, but quickly sought to reduce the dose.

“As she reduced her medication, (she) began to describe distressing side effects. She described having “horrors” or an inner feeling of dread all day, inability to sleep at night, nightmares, inability to lie down during the day due to a feeling of falling, inability to sit or stay still, suicidal tendencies. thoughts,” the injunction request states.

“At the same time, (she) continued to express her desire to die. She did not want to do it herself and regularly begged (her partner) to end her life.

According to court documents, the woman and her partner – during an emergency consultation with a doctor in their home province 11 days before the planned date of medical assistance in dying – were informed that the illness was treatable and that the symptoms could disappear within a few months.

“In this case, (the woman) is actively seeking death, despite the objections of the doctors who are actively treating her. She came to BC because she was able to find someone in BC who would approve,” the nomination notice states.

“This case raises serious questions about whether (the woman) is in fact eligible for Track 2 MAID. What is particularly concerning is that akathisia appears to be a cluster of symptoms related to changes in use of medications used to treat a psychiatric problem. It’s treatable but (the woman) hasn’t followed treatment recommendations.

In addition to arguing that the woman was requesting medical assistance in dying because of a condition that prevented her from receiving it, the lawsuit raises a number of concerns about the process by which medical assistance in dying was approved in this case.

“Potentially serious failures”?

The law relating to MAID is set out in the Criminal Code of Canada, which describes the circumstances in which a doctor can cause the death of another person without committing an offence.

Regarding eligible patients, the law states that they must “suffer from a serious and irremediable health problem”. This includes people suffering from incurable illnesses and patients who are in an irreversible and advanced state of decline.

But it also includes patients whose condition “causes them lasting physical or psychological suffering which is intolerable to them and which cannot be relieved under conditions they consider acceptable”.

According to court documents, the woman’s partner reportedly questioned whether the akathisia was “irremediable” and questioned Wiebe’s willingness to sign the procedure over a Zoom call.

“(The partner) asked Dr. Wiebe if she had ever performed MAID on someone with akathisia. Dr. Wiebe said no. During the same Zoom session, (the partner) also attempted to describe (the woman) as someone with unresolved mental health issues that were likely not considered during the woman’s assessment. AMM,” states the notice of application.

“Dr. Wiebe responded by stating that the diagnosis did not matter, that only quality of life mattered and that was (the woman’s) right.

The lawsuit also alleges that Wiebe did not speak directly to any of the woman’s doctors, did not request her medical records and only reviewed partial records provided by the patient via email.

In Type 2 cases, where death is not reasonably foreseeable, there are also specific requirements intended to serve as “safeguards against misuse,” the lawsuit explains.

Among these is the requirement that more than one doctor approve the procedure and that the second doctor must be independent of the first.

The notice of motion also alleges that this did not occur in this case.

“(The woman) did not have a doctor who would provide the second evaluation. Dr. Wiebe arranged for (another BC doctor) to be the second reviewer. (The woman) met with (this doctor) over Zoom,” court documents state.

Additionally, the suit claims that when the woman failed to find someone to witness the signing of the MAID documents, Wiebe found and provided someone to fill that role.

“The litigation aims to remedy potentially serious failings in the application of the medical assistance in dying regime,” state the court documents, summarizing the arguments.

The reasons given by the judge for granting the injunction have not yet been made public.