Latimer & Lavallee

Ethical questions about the court case R v. Latimer Ask each member in your group: Question Agree Disagree % agree/disagree What Latimer did was ethically right: no In his position you would do the same: Yes He should have served the mandatory minimum sentence for 2 nd degree murder: no Does the mandatory minimum go against s. 12 of the Charter? In this case my ethics match the legal decision. Make sure you understand how do answer the previous questions from the court’s perspective. (ie: Does the mandatory minimum go against s. 12 of the Charter legally . Question: Why and How would Kant and Mill find Latimer Case ethical or unethical? Ethical Theorist and position Why they might feel this was Related part (key-word) of their theory Kant Unethical Killing Tracy so the Latimer family wouldn’t have to deal with the financial and emotional cost is wrong Using people as a means to an end. Kant Ethical Create a formalist statement supporting what Latimer did. It was Latimer’s Duty was to take good care of Tracy Latimer’s belief that he was doing what’s best for Tracy can be tied to the categorical imperative. Kant Unethical Killing Tracy so Latimer and the family wouldn’t have to stop living their lives because of Tracy Mill Ethical Latimer killed Tracy to put an end to the misery in his life and in Tracy’s Latimer wanted to do the right thing by Tracy and because of situational circumstances. In this specific circumstance, it produced the greatest good for for Latimer and Tracy. Mill Unethical What is defence of necessity? Does it legally apply?: ________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ If this case happened today, would the result be different? Why or why not? (Hint: Consent)

____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ Stage of court case Location/Name of court Ruling 1 2 3 X What does the ‘ X ’ above mean? Disputed Points Crown argued/did not argue: Defence argued/did not argue: 1. 2. 3. 4. Argued: Did not argue: Argued: Did not argue: Important Legal Terms: Murder, Defence of necessity, s.12, mandatory minimum, euthanasia.

Stage of court case Location/Name Appealed by which side 1 2 3 X What does the ‘ X ’ above mean? Disputed Points Crown argued/did not argue: Defence argued/did not argue: 1. 2. 3. 4. Argued: Did not argue: Argued: Did not argue: Important Legal Terms: Murder, Imminence, subjective, admissibility, expert opinion, objective, hearsay, BWS.