the person meets all of the criteria”. Rather, the application arises
because Physician 1 is uncertain about the meaning of “natural
death has become reasonably foreseeable” in s. 241.2(2)(d).
 There is and there ought not to be any uncertainty or
misunderstanding about the meaning of those words.
 In this regard, those words are modified by the phrase
“taking into account all of their medical circumstances, without
a prognosis necessarily having been made as to the specific
length of time that they have remaining”. This language reveals
that natural death need not be imminent and that what is a reasonably foreseeable death is a person-specific medical question
to be made without necessarily making, but not necessarily precluding, a prognosis of the remaining lifespan.
 Although it is impossible to imagine that the exercise of
professional knowledge and judgment will ever be easy, in those
cases where a prognosis can be made that death is imminent,
then it may be easier to say that the natural death is reasonably
foreseeable. Physicians, of course, have considerable experience
in making a prognosis, but the legislation makes it clear that in
formulating an opinion, the physician need not opine about the
specific length of time that the person requesting medical assistance in dying has remaining in his or her lifetime.
[ 81] In referring to a “natural death”, the language denotes that
the death is one arising from causes associated with natural causes; i.e., the language reveals that the foreseeabilty of the death
must be connected to natural causes, which is to say about causes
associated with the functioning or malfunctioning of the human
body. These are matters at the core if not the whole corpus of medical knowledge and better known to doctors than to judges. The
language reveals that the natural death need not be connected to
a particular terminal disease or condition and rather is connected
to all of a particular person’s medical circumstances.
[ 82] The Attorney General, in introducing Bill C-14, described
the meaning of the words in s. 241.2(2)(d) and, in my opinion,
she correctly said that the language does not require that people
be dying from a terminal illness, disease or disability.
[ 83] As the Attorney General said, the language of s. 241.2(2)(d)
encompasses, on a case-by-case basis, a person who is on a trajectory toward death because he or she (a) has a serious and
incurable illness, disease or disability; (b) is in an advanced state
of irreversible decline in capability; and (c) is enduring physical
or psychological suffering that is intolerable and that cannot be
relieved under conditions that they consider acceptable.
[ 84] These criteria or factors are all matters with which Physician 1 and all physicians are, on an everyday basis, capable of