The Canadian Bar Association is urging the federal government to expand its restrictive new law on assisted dying, allowing mature minors, people suffering strictly from psychological illnesses and those diagnosed with competence-eroding conditions like dementia to get medical help to end their suffering.

1. The Canadian Supreme Court ruling made a point of finding that the right to be killed to end suffering is not limited to the terminally ill. The two criteria are a medially diagnosed condition and irremediable suffering -- as defined by the patient. Hence, the "forseeeable" limitation probably is not constitutional.
   
   
2. The ruling did require competency, both medical and legal. But I have little doubt that having radically changed medical ethics and law based on their own opinions, the justices won't expand their ruling to include "mature" minors and pre-authorization for euthanasia in the event one becomes incapacitated.