Tuesday, July 7, 2020

Contact your Member of Parliament. Opposing Canada's euthanasia (MAiD) Bill C-7

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

 

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition is urging you, our supporter, to contact your Member of Parliament during the summer and explain why you oppose Bill C-7, the bill that will expand euthanasia (MAiD) in Canada.

Current Members of Parliament (Link).

Sign the online petition: Reject euthanasia Bill C-7 (Link).

What do you need to know?

In September 2019, Justice Baudouin, struck down the requirement in Canada's euthanasia law that a person's natural death be reasonably foreseeable and gave the federal government six months to amend the euthanasia law in line with the Truchon court decision. The government did not appeal the decision.

At that time, I wrote that striking down the "terminal illness" requirement in the law opened the door to euthanasia for psychiatric conditions (Link).

On February 17, Justice Minister, Hon David Lametti asked Justice Baudouin for a four month extension to amend Canada's euthanasia law. Justice Baudouin granted the extension, giving the government until July 11 to implement the Truchon decision.


On February 24, the federal government introduced Bill C-7 in response to the Quebec Truchon court decision. Bill C-7 implements the Truchon decision but it also goes much further.


Based on the COVID-19 pandemic, Justice Minister Lametti requested another extension and Justice Baudouin of the Quebec Superior Court granted the request and extended the time-frame to implement the Truchon court decision until December 18.
 
There are several areas that we can focus on to stop Bill C-7.

  1. The government claims that they must change the law based on the Truchon court decision. In fact, whether they pass Bill C-7 by December 18 or not, the Truchon decision will become law. They will suggest that Truchon only applies to Quebec, but there is not a prosecutor in Canada who will prosecute a doctor based on the Truchon decision.
  2. The government appears to believe that the online consultation that was completed in January fulfills their legislated obligation of providing a 5-year-consultation starting in June 2020. The government is required to do a full, proper and open consultation, which the online consultation did not fulfill, and it should do so before amending Canada's euthanasia law. 
  3. We need to focus on what Bill C-7 does and what it falsely claims to do.
What does Bill C-7 do? Among other changes:
  1. Bill C-7 removes the legal requirement that a person’s natural death be reasonably foreseeable in order to qualify for assisted death. Therefore, people who are not terminally ill can die by euthanasia. The Quebec court decision only required this amendment to the law, but Bill C-7 went further.
  2. Bill C-7 permits a doctor or nurse practitioner to lethally inject a person who is incapable of consenting, if that person was previously approved for assisted death. This contravenes the Supreme Court of Canada Carter decision which stated that only competent people could die by euthanasia.
  3. Bill C-7 waives the ten-day waiting period if a person's natural death is deemed to be reasonably foreseeable. Thus a person could request death by euthanasia on a "bad day" and die the same day. Studies prove that the “will to live” fluctuates.
  4. Bill C-7 creates a two track law. A person whose natural death is deemed to be reasonably foreseeable has no waiting period while a person whose natural death is not deemed to be reasonably foreseeable would have a 90 day waiting period before being killed by lethal injection. Remember, the legislation does not define the meaning of the phrase natural death is reasonably foreseeable.
  5. Bill C-7 falsely claims to prevent euthanasia for people with mental illness. The euthanasia law permits MAiD for people who are physically or psychologically suffering that is intolerable to the person and that cannot be relieved in a way that the person considers acceptable. However, mental illness, which is not defined in the law, is considered a form of psychological suffering.
When speaking to your MP we suggest that you emphasize the following:
  • Bill C-7 allows MAiD when someone is incapable of consenting, if that person was previously approved for assisted death. This takes away the right to change your mind.
  • Bill C-7 waives the ten-day waiting period if a person's natural death is deemed to be reasonably foreseeable.
  • Bill C-7 falsely claims to prevent euthanasia for people with mental illness. Because the legislation does not define the term - psychological suffering - therefore the legislation fails to prevent euthanasia for people with mental illness.
Bill C-7 is dangerous, it is poorly written and sections of the bill will be challenged in court.

No matter what you think about euthanasia (MAiD) Bill C-7 must be defeated.


Current Members of Parliament (Link).

Sign the online petition: Reject euthanasia Bill C-7 (Link). 


More Articles on Bill C-7:

3 comments:

  1. I have said before, and I repeat, that mercy killings, even with the person's consent, or for that matter, request, is murder. All the more so when it is applicable when this is someone else's decision that such a person would be better off dead or should be done away with because such a person is a burden on society.
    To kill, commit suicide or assist in suicide, even with so called humanitarian motives is both sinful and criminal.

    Martin H. Hoffman
    Toronto, Ontario.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I have said before, and I repeat, that mercy killings, even with the person's consent, or for that matter, request, is murder. All the more so when it is applicable when this is someone else's decision that such a person would be better off dead or should be done away with because such a person is a burden on society.
    To kill, commit suicide or assist in suicide, even with so called humanitarian motives is both sinful and criminal.

    Martin H. Hoffman
    Toronto, Ontario.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have said before, and I repeat, that mercy killings, even with the person's consent, or for that matter, request, is murder. All the more so when it is applicable when this is someone else's decision that such a person would be better off dead or should be done away with because such a person is a burden on society.
    To kill, commit suicide or assist in suicide, even with so called humanitarian motives is both sinful and criminal.

    Martin H. Hoffman
    Toronto, Ontario.

    ReplyDelete