157:" and was at least "mildly to moderately developmentally delayed" with learning skills at a limited level. She spent the week at a school for adults with mental disabilities, and went back to her mother's home on the weekends. Administrators at Eve's care facility noticed that she was developing a close relationship with a male resident, also disabled, and became concerned. Mrs. E, also, was concerned that Eve might innocently become pregnant. Her disability prevented her from understanding the concept of marriage or the "consequential relationship between intercourse, pregnancy and birth," and she would be unable to carry out the necessary duties of motherhood.
29:
224:
constitutes battery, it will be obvious that the onus of proving the need for the procedure is on those who seek to have it performed...In conducting these procedures, it is obvious that a court must proceed with extreme caution; otherwise...it would open the way for abuse of the mentally incompetent, ... would allow the appeal and restore the decision" of the original court, which had rejected the petition.
223:
The
Supreme Court of Canada, however, ruled in favour of Eve, and unanimously rejected Mrs. E.'s request for authorization to perform a sterilization procedure. The opinion of the Supreme Court of Canada was that "barring emergency situations, a surgical procedure without consent ordinarily
202:, Mrs. E.'s requests were denied. Although the judge had no issue with the first two petitions (i.e. the appointment of Mrs. E. as Eve's formal guardian), he rejected the third, on the basis that substitute decision makers cannot consent to non-therapeutic surgical procedures.
182:
A major concern of the court was the fact that tubal ligation, in this instance, was non-therapeutic (i.e. not necessary for medical reasons) and that a hysterectomy, which was "authorized by the Appeal
Division", was major surgery.
215:
powers of the court were to be used for the benefit of the incompetent individual, and that sufficient evidence had been presented to convince them that sterilization was in Eve's best interest.
140:. This was a landmark case which is influential in Canadian legal decisions involving proxy-consented, non-therapeutic medical procedures performed on people of diminished mental capacity.
190:
was that a court-ordered sterilization of this person of diminished capacity was depriving that person of her right to procreate, infringing on Eve's right to liberty and security.
233:
205:
On appeal, the original ruling was overturned. The majority of the three judge panel stated that there was sufficient evidence to warrant the sterilization of Eve, and that the
211:
powers of the court allowed it to consent, on behalf of the incompetent individual, to therapeutic surgical procedures. That court stated that the
137:
187:
348:
338:
199:
82:
343:
353:
284:
296:
315:
133:
103:
A proxy decision-maker cannot consent to the non-therapeutic sterilization of a mentally incompetent person.
34:
323:
256:
28:
319:
161:
238:
172:
Eve be declared a mentally incompetent pursuant to the provisions of the Mental Health Act
136:
regarding a mother's request for the consent of the court to have her disabled daughter
207:
165:
178:
Mrs. E. be authorized to consent to a tubal ligation operation being performed on Eve.
332:
60:
54:
Eve, by her
Guardian ad litem, Milton B. Fitzpatrick, Official Trustee v. Mrs. E.
154:
153:
Eve was a 24-year-old woman suffering from "extreme expressive
175:
She (Mrs. E.) be appointed the committee of the person of Eve
285:
Eve v. Mrs. E. [1987], 3D.L.R. (4th) S.C.C. 388 (S.C.C.)
186:
One of the arguments made against Mrs. E. was that the
234:
List of
Supreme Court of Canada cases (Dickson Court)
117:
112:
107:
97:
89:
77:
69:
59:
49:
42:
21:
160:In order to ensure she had the right, as Eve's
8:
297:After 'Eve': Whither proxy decision making?
83:Court of Appeal for Prince Edward Island
279:
277:
275:
273:
271:
269:
267:
265:
249:
188:Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
18:
200:Supreme Court of Prince Edward Island
132:, 2 S.C.R. 388 is a judgment by the
7:
257:SCC Case Information - Docket 16654
14:
27:
198:In the Family Division of the
1:
339:Supreme Court of Canada cases
81:Judgment for Mrs. E. in the
16:Supreme Court of Canada case
370:
349:Children's rights case law
45:Judgment: October 23, 1986
344:1986 in Canadian case law
168:, Mrs. E requested that:
162:substitute decision-maker
102:
26:
354:Disability law in Canada
43:Hearing: June 4–5, 1985
316:Supreme Court of Canada
259:Supreme Court of Canada
166:sterilization procedure
134:Supreme Court of Canada
35:Supreme Court of Canada
302:1987; 137(8):715b-720.
164:, to consent to the
118:Unanimous reasons by
283:[E. (Mrs.) v. Eve,
125:
124:
361:
303:
293:
287:
281:
260:
254:
194:Previous rulings
108:Court membership
31:
19:
369:
368:
364:
363:
362:
360:
359:
358:
329:
328:
311:
306:
300:Can Med Assoc J
294:
290:
282:
263:
255:
251:
247:
230:
221:
196:
151:
146:
44:
38:
17:
12:
11:
5:
367:
365:
357:
356:
351:
346:
341:
331:
330:
327:
326:
310:
309:External links
307:
305:
304:
288:
261:
248:
246:
243:
242:
241:
236:
229:
226:
220:
217:
213:parens patriae
208:parens patriae
195:
192:
180:
179:
176:
173:
150:
147:
145:
142:
123:
122:
119:
115:
114:
110:
109:
105:
104:
100:
99:
95:
94:
93:appeal allowed
91:
87:
86:
79:
75:
74:
71:
67:
66:
63:
57:
56:
51:
50:Full case name
47:
46:
40:
39:
32:
24:
23:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
366:
355:
352:
350:
347:
345:
342:
340:
337:
336:
334:
325:
321:
317:
314:Full text of
313:
312:
308:
301:
298:
292:
289:
286:
280:
278:
276:
274:
272:
270:
268:
266:
262:
258:
253:
250:
244:
240:
239:Marion's case
237:
235:
232:
231:
227:
225:
218:
216:
214:
210:
209:
203:
201:
193:
191:
189:
184:
177:
174:
171:
170:
169:
167:
163:
158:
156:
148:
143:
141:
139:
135:
131:
130:
129:E (Mrs) v Eve
120:
116:
113:Reasons given
111:
106:
101:
96:
92:
88:
84:
80:
78:Prior history
76:
72:
68:
64:
62:
58:
55:
52:
48:
41:
37:
36:
30:
25:
22:E (Mrs) v Eve
20:
318:decision at
299:
291:
252:
222:
212:
206:
204:
197:
185:
181:
159:
152:
128:
127:
126:
121:La Forest J.
65:2 S.C.R. 388
53:
33:
295:Kluge EHW.
333:Categories
322: and
245:References
144:Background
138:sterilized
70:Docket No.
61:Citations
228:See also
155:aphasia
98:Holding
324:CanLII
219:Ruling
90:Ruling
73:16654
320:LexUM
149:Case
335::
264:^
85:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
