Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition
The Feb 17 date is based on giving the House of Commons at least one week to debate possible Senate amendments to Bill C-7 before the February 26 Quebec Superior Court imposed deadline.
Bryden points out that this is a tight time-frame considering that some Senators are proposing amendments to Bill C-7. Bryden explains:
An amended version of the bill would have to go back to the House of Commons for MPs to decide whether to accept or reject the amendments before shipping it back to the Senate, where senators would have to decide whether to approve the bill even if some or all of their amendments were rejected.
In theory, the bill could bounce repeatedly back and forth between chambers.
The Ontario Medical Association has asked the Senate to amend Bill C-7 by including conscience rights for medical professionals (Link).
Article: Parliament passed Bill C-7 without amendments. Contact the Senators (Link).
Join 50,000 people who have signed the petition: Reject euthanasia Bill C-7 (Link).
What does Bill C-7 do?
1. Bill C-7 removes the requirement in the law 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.
5. As stated earlier, 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.
Canada's Justice Minister, David Lametti, announced on November 24 that, once Bill C-7 is passed, he wants to expand euthanasia to people with mental illness alone.
Contact two or more Senators today. Tell them why you oppose euthanasia. Link to the Senate contact information.
Bryden explains that there are divergent views on amending Bill C-7. She wrote:
Sen. Pierre Dalphond, a former judge who sits in the Progressive Senate Group, argued that the exclusion of those suffering solely from mental illnesses is unconstitutional, violating their right to equal treatment under the law regardless of physical or mental disability.
Dalphond said he believes it's reasonable to propose a sunset clause to put a time limit on that exclusion, giving the government time to come up with guidelines for providing assisted dying to people with mental illnesses.
And he said he'll introduce another amendment to specify that the ill-defined concept of mental illness does not include neuro-congnitive disorders such as Alzheimer's disease, dementia, Parkinson's disease and Huntington's disease.
There is support among senators for referring the bill to the Supreme Court for advice on its constitutionality, both from those who think it's too restrictive and those who think it's too permissive.
Sen. Don Plett, leader of the Conservatives in the Senate, questioned why senators are rushing to expand access to what he termed "physician-induced death," based on "a lower court decision made by one judge in one province" that the government chose not to appeal.
He implored his colleagues to listen to disability rights advocates who have denounced the bill for sending the "harmful and tragic message" that the lives of people with disabilities are not worth living.
Plett argued that extending access before improving palliative care and support services for people with disabilities will make it "easier to die than to live" and doesn't give vulnerable people a real choice.
Conservative Sen. Denise Batters said it's "disgraceful" that the government is pushing a bill to expand access to assisted dying in the midst of a pandemic, when vulnerable people are even more "alone, isolated and economically disadvantaged" and with even less access to support services.
She argued that Black, racialized, Indigenous and poor Canadians with disabilities, "people who have been routinely pushed to the margins of our society," are "crying out to us for help but they don't want help to die, they want help to live."
Contact two or more Senators today. Tell them why you oppose euthanasia. Link to the Senate contact information.
Senators are appointed to represent a Province or Territory but they are more independent than Members of Parliament. I would start contacting them and continue until you have contacted all of them. https://sencanada.ca/en/contact-information/
ReplyDelete