Survey Reveals Majority of British Columbians Support Religious Hospitals’ Right to Reject Euthanasia

Majority of British Columbians Back Religious Hospitals’ Right to Reject Euthanasia

In a recent survey conducted by the Angus Reid Institute in collaboration with Cardus, the results have shown that the majority of British Columbians support the right of religiously affiliated healthcare facilities to decline euthanasia on their premises.

The survey found that 58% of respondents believe that if a patient requests euthanasia in a religious hospital, they should be transferred to another facility.

In contrast, only 24% of those surveyed think that the hospital should be compelled to provide euthanasia against its religious beliefs.

Context and Recent Case

This survey follows a recent case in British Columbia where a terminally ill woman was transferred to another healthcare facility to receive Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) after her initial hospital, St. Paul’s Hospital, refused to provide it due to its opposition to euthanasia.

This case has sparked discussions and debates regarding the rights of religious healthcare organizations to opt out of offering MAiD, even if there is an agreement in place with the provincial government.

Support for Religious Rights

The survey results highlight a significant level of support among the public for religious hospitals’ rights to adhere to their religious beliefs, even if it means transferring patients seeking euthanasia to other institutions.

While the majority of British Columbians expressed support for these religious rights, it’s noteworthy that the 24% who believe that hospitals should be obligated to provide MAiD represents one of the highest percentages in the country.

Potential Legal Challenges

Given the ongoing debate and discussions around this issue, there are indications that MAiD advocates are considering legal challenges to the agreement between the British Columbia provincial government and religious health organizations that allows these institutions to opt out of providing MAiD.

This could further intensify the debate around the balance between religious rights and access to medical procedures like euthanasia.

The survey results shed light on the complex and sensitive nature of these debates, where the rights of religious healthcare organizations and the rights of patients seeking MAiD intersect.

This issue continues to be a subject of legal, ethical, and moral discussions in Canada.