Assisted dying in Canada has lessons for psychiatrists in Australia and New Zealand—just not the ones you might think

Canada offers important lessons for other countries concerning access to medical assistance in dying for persons with mental disorders, but these lessons are not obvious because the legal context is often misunderstood, and the best available analyses of medical assistance in dying data are underreported or unreported in media narratives. Canada’s legal framework stems from the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Carter v. Canada , which held that prohibiting medical assistance in dying for capable adults with a grievous and irremediable medical condition violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms . Although the Parliament subsequently narrowed eligibility by requiring that “natural death has become reasonably foreseeable,” this addition was later ruled unconstitutional in the Quebec Superior Court decision in Truchon v. Canada , prompting legislative reform. Among the amendments following Truchon , the government introduced a temporary 2-year exclusion of individuals with “mental illness” as their sole underlying medical condition—extended twice until March 2027. In this commentary, we explain the evolution of the medical assistance in dying law in Canada and describe the current state of affairs. Evidence from Canada does not support claims of either legal or empirical slippery slopes, systemic abuse or non-compliance, or permissiveness beyond that of comparable international jurisdictions. We then draw some lessons for psychiatrists in Australia and New Zealand: psychiatrists should be accurate in their public statements, combat misinformation, and strive to prevent divisive professional discourse.