Canada's government has established a committee to examine Euthanasia for Mental Illness.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Canada's federal government has established another Special Joint parliamentary Committee to examine the implementation of (MAiD) euthanasia for mental illness alone. The committee is composed of 10 Members of Parliament and 5 Senators. 

The Members of Parliament on the committee are:

Conservatives: Michael Cooper, Todd Doherty, Tamara Jansen and Andrew Lawton.

Liberals: Hon Helena Jaczek, Annie Koutrakis, James Maloney, Marcus Powlowski and Kristina Tesser Derksen. 

Bloc Québécois: Luc Thériault (BQ).

The Senators on the Committee are:

Hon. Pierre J. Dalphond, Hon. Yonah Martin, Hon. Rosemary Moodie, Hon. Pamela Wallin, Hon Kristopher David Wells.

The committee should not derail Private Members Bill C-218, which like it's predecessor in the last parliament (Bill C-314) would prevent euthanasia (MAiD) for mental illness alone. Bill C-218 has gained significant traction within the governing Liberal Party. This committee may move the debate into the committee rather than parliament.

Article: Preventing euthanasia for mental illness in Canada. Guide to supporting Bill C-218 (Read).

We are clear. No MAiD for Mental Illness.

Join the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition rally on parliament hill on Monday, April 13 at 12 noon.

For more information, contact us at: info@epcc.ca

When discussing issues related to euthanasia for mental illness alone, a member of parliament will listen to the concern of constituents. There are many people who have lived with mental health issues and suicidal ideation and are happy to be alive. These people may have been killed if euthanasia for mental illness alone were available at their dark time.

My comments about Canada's Senate. 

Senators are appointed until the age of 75 and are only responsible to their personal conscience. Justin Trudeau did not appoint Senators based on their political affiliation or as a reward for the work within the Liberal party, but rather he appointed people based on their philosophical beliefs. This is bad news for Canada and bad news for euthanasia in Canada.

Nonetheless, silence is our enemy. We will continue to stand up and speak the truth about euthanasia in general and euthanasia for mental illness alone.

Canada's Senate only has one week in parliament to pass Bill C-39 and delay euthanasia for mental illness.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Toronto Sun reporter Catherine Lévesque stated that on February 15, the House of Commons unanimously passed Bill C-39, the bill that would delay the implementation of euthanasia for mental illness until March 17, 2024. But Canada's Senate only has one week to also pass C-39.

Lévesque explained:

Time is of the essence, as both houses will not be sitting for the next two weeks and will come back on the week of March 6 before another break week. That means the Senate will only have one sitting week to study and vote on C-39 before the deadline of March 17 2023.

Lévesque reported that Justice Minister David Lametti is confident that the Senate will vote on the bill quickly but it was the Senate that originally amended Bill C-7 to include euthanasia for mental illness.

Lévesque reported that Marc Gold, the government's representative in the Senate stated:

“We are confident that the Senate will complete a final vote on Bill C-39 before March 17.”

Lévesque reported that during the parliamentary debate on Bill C-39:

Lametti said the main objective of C-39 is to give more time to nurses and practitioners to get more training on the issue and to give the government more time to consider a new report from the parliamentary committee looking at extending eligibility of assisted dying.

NDP MP Alistair MacGregor told Lametti at a committee meeting this week that elected officials studying the issue “always felt under the gun” because of the sunset clause expiring and welcomed the one-year extension provided by the new bill.

Conservatives, on the other hand, are clear that they oppose the extension of MAID to people suffering from mental disorders and have another year to try to make this clause disappear.

Speaking in the Commons on Wednesday evening, things got emotional as Liberal MP John McKay spoke about the hurdles of navigating through the health system for 25 years ever since his stepson was diagnosed with schizophrenia.

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition welcomed Bill C-39 but it is not a victory since it only delays and stops the implementation of euthanasia for mental illness. For the sake of John McKay's stepson, euthanasia for mental illness should not even be considered.

I do not trust this government. I still fear that Bill C-39 may be held up in the Senate and not meet the March 17 deadline.

Previous article:

• Canada to delay euthanasia for mental illness until March 2024 (Link). 
• Bill C-314 would prohibit euthanasia for mental illness in Canada (Link).
  

Canadian Bill to Allow Euthanasia of Dementia Patients

This article was published by National Review online on June 6, 2022

Wesley Smith

By Wesley J Smith

The Netherlands and Belgium already permit people diagnosed with dementia to sign an advance directive ordering themselves killed when they become incapacitated. This has even resulted in one case in which such a patient was euthanized despite resisting — and the government responded by changing the law to enable death-doctors to drug and euthanize such patients without permission.

Now Canada — which last year greatly loosened the criteria for euthanasia — may be on the verge of taking the same path. A bill has been filed in the Senate that would permit patients to order themselves killed without final consent if they become mentally incapacitated. From S-248:

For the purposes of subparagraph (3.‍2)‍(a)‍(ii), a person may waive the need for final consent [to receiving lethal jab] if

(a) they made a declaration in writing that a medical practitioner or nurse practitioner may administer a substance to cause that person’s death should the person lose the capacity to consent to receiving medical assistance in dying and be suffering conditions related to their serious and incurable illness, disease or disability that are identified clearly in the declaration and can be observed by the medical practitioner or nurse practitioner;

(b) the declaration was made after a diagnosis of a serious and incurable illness, disease or disability by a medical practitioner, but no more than five years have elapsed since the declaration was made;

(c) in the declaration, the person consented to the administration by a medical practitioner or nurse practitioner of a substance to cause their death if they are suffering from the conditions listed in the declaration and have lost their capacity to consent to receiving medical assistance in dying prior to that point;

(d) the declaration was witnessed by two independent witnesses to confirm that it was made voluntarily and not as a result of external pressure and each witness signed and dated it . . .

If the patient resists, the killing is not supposed to take place. Right. As though the person would know what was happening.

Canada's New Law Will Provide, Not Prevent, Suicide for Some Psychiatric Patients

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Dr Mark Komrad

The renowned psychiatrist and ethicist, Dr Mark Komrad, his latest article was published by the Psychiatric Times on June 1: Oh, Canada! Your New Law Will Provide, Not Prevent, Suicide for Some Psychiatric Patients. 

Komrad, who is well known for his opposition to psychiatric euthanasia, analyses how euthanasia for people with mental illness affects psychiatry.

Komrad comments on the laws in Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg (Benelux countries) that permit euthanasia and assisted suicide for people with physical and psychological suffering. The term psychological suffering has led to approximately 200 people per year dying by euthanasia based on a psychological condition.

He then compares the Benelux countries acceptance of euthanasia for psychiatric reasons to the American Psychiatric Association position statement from 2016 which states:

“A psychiatrist should not prescribe or administer any intervention to a non-terminally ill person for the purpose of causing death.”

Psychiatrists traditionally have done all they could to prevent suicide. Should they really facilitate it instead?

Komrad then comments on the Canadian developments which began with the passing of Bill C-14 in June 2016 and now to the passing of Bill C-7 on March 17, 2021. He states:

Initially, Bill C-7 clearly excluded psychiatric disorders, as it did in the original C-14 law. However, there was ambiguity in this proscription, because psychological suffering (which is not defined in either legislation) continued to be a criterion for eligibility. In addition, many protested that such an exclusion discriminated against those with mental illnesses. The Canadian Psychiatric Association (CPA) was one such voice, declaring broadly that, in the interest of parity: “Patients with a psychiatric illness should not be discriminated against solely on the basis of their disability, and should have available the same options regarding MAID as available to all patients.”

This led to a dramatic turn of events in the (unelected) Canadian Senate when it considered Bill C-7 in February 2021. In an unprecedented move, Senator Stan Kutcher, MD, who is also a psychiatrist, declared that the exclusion of individuals with psychiatric disabilities would be discriminatory. He introduced an amendment that would allow MAID for mental illness 18 months following the passing of the bill. When the modified legislation was returned to the House of Commons, discussions were shut down after 3 hours by a liberal coalition and the bloc party from Quebec (a province that has promoted euthanasia and aimed to restrict conscientious objection to euthanasia by health care professionals). As a result, the vote was forced and, on March 17, 2021, the C-7 expansion of euthanasia in Canada became the law of the land complete with a last-minute amendment to sunset the mental illness exclusion after 2 years.

Komrad comments on the expert panel that over next two years will establish standards for evaluating patients and procedures to distinguish between those patients with psychiatric disorders whose suicide should be prevented and those for whom it should be provided. Komrad quotes me as stating:

“there isn’t a prosecutor in the land who would prosecute someone for doing euthanasia for mental illness before the 24-month time frame has passed because it is technically legal.”

Komrad emphasizes that legalizing euthanasia for mental illness is a serious change. He points out that many psychiatrists in Canada are deeply concerned by the recent developments. In the face of Bill C-7, the psychiatrist editor of the Journal of Ethics in Mental Health reported:

A few days ago, a 30-year-old patient with very treatable mental illness asked me to end her life. Her distraught parents came to the appointment with her because they were afraid that I might support her request and that they would be helpless to do anything about it. It’s horrific they have to worry that by going to a psychiatrist, their daughter might be killed by that very psychiatrist.

Komrad also shows how the Canadian law may become far more permissive than the euthanasia laws in Belgium and the Netherlands he states:

Moreover, as with C-14, there is no requirement that additional, evidenced-based treatments be implemented, although patients are urged to give all treatments serious consideration Yet, despite its liberal approach, Belgium recently established a requirement that individuals applying for euthanasia due to a mental disorder must not have refused any evidenced-based treatments.

Komrad ends his article by stating:

The American Medical Association has repeatedly concluded that MAID practices are “fundamentally incompatible with the physician’s role as a healer,” and the World Medical Association “is firmly opposed to euthanasia and assisted suicide.” Nevertheless, these laws have been adopted around the world, most recently in Victoria Australia, New Zealand, Spain, and Portugal. In US states, there have been attempts to expand initially strict criteria and practices. The justifications for euthanasia and assisted suicide (eg, autonomy, self-determination, intolerable suffering, and irremediability) are now being applied to psychiatric disorders, despite lack of any widespread agreement that treatments for psychiatric disorders are ever futile.

Concluding Thoughts

Bill C-7 and similar laws would represent a terrible shift in the deep ethos of psychiatry. Psychiatrists would have to decide which suicides should be prevented and which should be abetted.

More articles on this topic:

• Canada passes Bill C-7 permitting euthanasia for mental illness alone (Link).
• Lack of evidence surrounding euthanasia for mental illness (Link). 
• Euthanasia for mental illness ignores safeguards for vulnerable people (Link).
• Trudeau government will permit euthanasia for mental illness alone (Link).

Lack of evidence surrounding euthanasia for mental illness debate.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Petition: No to euthanasia for mental illness (Link)

CBC News published an opinion column by Dr Mark Sinyor, a psychiatrist at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre and associate professor of psychiatry at the University of Toronto concerning the Trudeau government's intent to expand (MAiD) euthanasia to people with psychiatric conditions alone.

Dr Mark Sinyor

Dr Sinyor argues that medicine is evidence based, but the decision by the Senate and the Trudeau government to support the expansion of euthanasia to people with psychiatric conditions alone is politically based. He stated:

I recently had the privilege of testifying before the Senate of Canada in their deliberations about medical assistance in dying (MAID) legislation. The specific question before them was whether to allow the practice as a treatment for mental illness, which the Senate voted to recommend following an 18-month "sunset clause," and the House of Commons says it would support with a two-year phase-in.

I have no personal objection to MAID in principle. But as a doctor and a psychiatrist who believes in evidence-based medicine, I found both the hearing and the result horrifying.

Dr Sinyor states that in medical ethics, many policies will have a negative effect on one group of people while having a positive effect on others. But there is no evidence that euthanasia for mental illness will have a positive effect. He stated:

As a scientist, I have to be open to the possibility that all of the claims advanced by MAID advocates are accurate. But enacting law, one which literally governs life or death decisions, based on a possibility isn't good enough.

In other areas of medicine, thoughtful scientists typically devote whole careers to meticulously studying benefits and harms of treatments before rolling them out. Here, that proven approach has inexplicably been replaced with hand-waving and moralizing.

Medical history has shown that when well-meaning people bypass careful science to rush a treatment out before harms are properly understood, it can have disastrous consequences. The opioid epidemic is a tragic, recent example.

More articles on this topic:

• MAiD for people with mental illness ignores safeguards for vulnerable people (Link).
• Article: Is euthanasia psychiatric treatment? (Link).
• Article: Why legalizing medical assistance in dying for people with mental illness is misguided (Link).

Toronto Star Editorial: Trudeau government should rethink its flawed changes to assisted dying

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

When the Toronto Star, which is usually a Liberal newspaper, says in its editorial that the Trudeau government changes to the (MAiD) euthanasia law are flawed, then you know that the message is getting out.

Sign the petition: No to euthanasia for mental illness and incompetent people! (Link)

Contact your member of parliament to reject the Senate amendments and Bill C-7. Members of Parliament contact list:   https://www.ourcommons.ca/Members/en/search

The February 26 Toronto Star editorial stated:

Twelve months ago, before the COVID-19 pandemic overwhelmed our lives and pushed almost every other issue to the margins of public attention, we sounded a warning that Canada seemed to be sliding toward what amounts to a system of death on demand.

We worried that the right to medical assistance in dying, or MAID, was at risk of being stretched far beyond its original conception: to ease the pain of suffering people in the final stage of life, of allowing them a so-called “death with dignity.”

Today, that possibility is no longer a risk but a reality...

As it stands now, Bill C-7 would greatly expand the right to MAID in ways that many doctors, ethicists and even experts from the United Nations find deeply problematic. By eliminating the requirement that a patient’s death be “reasonably foreseeable,” they say the bill will undermine the rights of disabled people and make it more likely they will accept assisted suicide rather than be provided with proper treatment and supports.

The bill even opens the door to extending the right to assisted suicide to people whose only underlying medical condition, their sole reason for seeking death, is suffering due to a mental illness. The potential for abuse is both obvious and frightening.

These comments are from the Toronto Star editorial, not the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition. The editorial continued:

Nor is any of this necessary. The federal government is bringing in these changes as a response to a Quebec Superior Court ruling in 2019, in which the judge decided that the law’s provision that death must be “reasonably foreseeable” is unconstitutional.

The government could have, indeed should have, appealed that flawed decision. Instead, it promised to bring the law into line with this one lower-court ruling, launched lengthy consultations on the whole issue of MAID, and eventually came up with a series of proposed changes laid out in Bill C-7. The Commons adopted them, then the Senate weighed in with amendments, and this week the government said it would accept some of those proposals.

One is that the right to MAID would be extended to people who are suffering solely from an underlying mental illness, though that wouldn’t take effect for two years. This is a complete about-face for the government, since its first version of C-7 explicitly excluded mental illness as grounds for demanding the right to an assisted death.

You don’t have to ponder this too long to see the potential for tragic outcomes. No doubt some people suffer in a “grievous” (the law’s language) way from mental illness, but surely those very conditions put an enormous question mark over their capacity to make final, irreversible decisions.

The Toronto Star editorial also disagrees with the euthanasia lobby but agree with the disability groups:

Advocates for the change say it’s discriminatory not to include mental illness, and argue that the law must respect the autonomy of the individual, the right of everyone to decide their own fate regardless of the type of medical condition they are suffering from.

That sounds lofty, but as many psychiatrists and advocates point out, how much true autonomy does a person have if society doesn’t offer them proper support to live their lives as fully as possible, if they are marginalized, unable to earn a living or access treatment, and feel they are a burden to others? Won’t they feel pressure to take advantage of an expanded MAID system just to escape all that? Is that really what we want — to set up a system where more and more people feel disposable, and in fact become disposable?

All that may apply to people with chronic conditions or disabilities as well, which is why hundreds of organizations advocating for them have come out against C-7. Added to that is a team of UN experts who concluded that the bill violates the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which Canada has ratified. “Disability should never be a ground or justification to end someone’s life directly or indirectly,” they wrote. “Such legislative provisions would institutionalize and legally authorize ableism.”

The Toronto Star editorial challenges other parts of the bill and then finishes by urging the government to get it right.

The government’s proposed bill includes other questionable changes as well. For one, it would eliminate a 10-day waiting period between the request for MAID by a person whose death is foreseeable and its carrying-out, a pause designed to make sure there aren’t second thoughts. Only one witness, not two, would be required.

It’s important that we get this right. Better to put up with more delay than to rush through a flawed bill that hasn’t had the full public debate it deserves. The government should think again.

Sign the petition: No to euthanasia for mental illness and incompetent people! (Link)

Contact your member of parliament to reject the Senate amendments and Bill C-7. Members of Parliament contact list:   https://www.ourcommons.ca/Members/en/search

Conservatives slow down euthanasia expansion bill in parliament. Contact your MP today.

Sign the petition: No to euthanasia for mental illness and incompetent people! (Link)

Contact your member of parliament to reject the Senate amendments and Bill C-7. Members of Parliament contact list:  https://www.ourcommons.ca/Members/en/search

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, 

Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

An article by Joan Bryden with the Canadian Press reported that the Quebec Superior court has extended the stay of the Truchon decision until March 26, 2021 to give the Liberal government time to pass Bill C-7, the bill to expand Canada's (MAiD) euthanasia law. The Truchon decision struck down the requirement in law that a persons death must be foreseeable.

The court imposed deadline is an arbitrary date. Even if Bill C-7 is not passed before March 26, it really doesn't matter since Bill C-7 is worse than the Truchon decision.

Last week I reported that Canada's Senate passed Bill C-7, the bill to expand Canada's (MAiD) euthanasia law, with dangerous amendments that further expands the law.

A few days ago, I reported that the Trudeau government  accepted the most dangerous Senate amendment, that being expanding euthanasia to people with mental illness alone, but with a 24 month reprieve to enable the government time to develop guidelines. The government did reject the amendment permitting euthanasia for incompetent people who asked for death in their advanced directive.

Bryden reports that the Conservatives are filibustering Bill C-7.

...the bill is stalled in the Commons, where the Conservatives refused for the third straight day today to facilitate debate on a motion laying out the government's response to amendments passed last week by the Senate.

Bryden also reported that the Bloc Québecois have agreed with the Trudeau government decision to extend euthanasia to people with mental illness alone. Therefore, unless back bench Liberal MP's reject euthanasia for mental illness, it will pass.

Contact your member of parliament to reject the Senate amendments and Bill C-7. Members of Parliament contact list:   https://www.ourcommons.ca/Members/en/search

Whatever the House of Commons approves, Bill C-7 will once again go back to the Senate for approval or amendment.

Trudeau government agrees to permit euthanasia for mental illness alone.

Sign the petition: No to euthanasia for mental illness and incompetent people! (Link)

Contact your member of parliament to reject the Senate amendments and Bill C-7. Members of Parliament contact list:  https://www.ourcommons.ca/Members/en/search

Alex Schadenberg

Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Last week I reported that Canada's Senate passed Bill C-7, the bill to expand Canada's (MAiD) euthanasia law, with dangerous amendments that further expands the law.

As bad as Bill C-7 was, the Senate passed five amendments to Bill C-7. The primary amendments were expanding euthanasia to people with mental illness alone (with an 18 month reprieve for the federal government to develop rules) and incompetent people who had requested death in their advanced directive.

By passing Bill C-7 with amendments, the bill went back to parliament for debate on the amendments.

Joan Bryden, reported for the Canadian Press that the government accepted the most dangerous Senate amendment, that being, expanding euthanasia to people with mental illness alone, but with a 24 month reprieve to enable the federal government to develop guidelines. Bryden reported:

The Trudeau government has agreed with the Senate that Canadians suffering solely from grievous and incurable mental illnesses should be entitled to medical assistance in dying — but not for another two years.

The two-year interlude is six months longer than what was proposed by senators.

Since this is a minority government, it is possible that members of parliament will reject this amendment.

The mental illness alone amendment felt like a "set-up" after Justice Minister, David Lametti, announced on November 24 that, once Bill C-7 passed, he wanted to expand euthanasia to people with mental illness alone.

 

With a minority government, parliament is able to reject the Senate amendments.

 

Sign the petition: No to euthanasia for mental illness and incompetent people! (Link)

Bryden also reported that the government has rejected the Senate amendment permitting euthanasia for incompetent people who have requested death in their advanced directive. Bryden reported:

The government has rejected another Senate amendment that would have allowed people who fear being diagnosed with dementia or other competence-eroding conditions to make advance requests for an assisted death.

It has also rejected one other amendment and modified two others in a motion that is to be debated today in the House of Commons.

If the House of Commons approves the government's response, the bill will go back to the Senate, where senators will have to decide whether to accept the verdict of the elected chamber or dig in their heels.

The Senate had no right to consider expanding euthanasia to people who request death in their advanced directive since the issue was not even studied by the House of Commons or Senate hearings on Bill C-7. The Senate simply reacted to an emotionally compelling speech by Senator Wallin.

What did Bill C-7 do before it was amended?

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.

Bill C-7 went much further than the Quebec Superior Court Truchon  decision and now the Senate has made it worse. 

Join more than 52,000 people who have signed the petition: Reject euthanasia Bill C-7 (Link).

Contact your member of parliament to reject the Senate amendments and Bill C-7. Members of Parliament contact list:  https://www.ourcommons.ca/Members/en/search

No to euthanasia for mental illness and incompetent people!

Petition to the Political Party Leaders.

Sign the petition: No to euthanasia for mental illness and incompetent people! (Link)

Canada legalized euthanasia (MAiD) in June 2016. At that time the legislation was sold to Canadians as a compromise by permitting euthanasia for physical or psychological suffering but requiring that a person’s “natural death be reasonably foreseeable” before they qualified to be killed by lethal injection.

In September 2019, a Quebec Superior court judge, in Truchon, struck down the requirement in the law that a person’s natural death be reasonably foreseeable. The government did not appeal the decision.

In December, parliament passed Bill C-7, which claimed to be the government’s response to the Quebec Truchon court decision, and yet Bill C-7 goes much further. The government also decided, through Bill C-7, to eliminate the 10-day reflection period in the law, create a 90-day reflection period for people who are approved for euthanasia but not dying and reduce the number of witnesses for the request from two to one and allowing the one witness to be a care giver and more.

As bad as Bill C-7 was, the Canadian Senate voted last week to pass Bill C-7 with 5 amendments. Essentially the Senate approved euthanasia for mental illness alone, but provided the government 18 months to establish rules for euthanasia for mental illness and they approved euthanasia for incompetent people who wrote in their advanced directive that they would want to die by euthanasia.

Legalizing euthanasia gives medical professionals the right in law to lethally inject their patients, but permitting euthanasia for mental illness and through advanced directives directly contradicts the need for effective consent.

We the signed oppose Bill C-7 and demand that parliament reject euthanasia for mental illness and incompetent people.

Links to more articles on this topic:

• Senate passed Bill C-7 with amendments to permit euthanasia for mental illness and incompetent people (Link). 
• Canadians oppose euthanasia for mental illness and child euthanasia (Link).
•  Is euthanasia psychiatric treatment? (Link).

Canada's Parliament to debate euthanasia for mental illness and incompetent people.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Last week I reported that Canada's Senate passed Bill C-7, the bill to expand Canada's euthanasia law, with dangerous amendments that would further expand the law. 

The Senate passed five amendments to Bill C-7. The primary amendments were expanding euthanasia to people with mental illness (with an 18 month reprieve for the federal government to develop rules) and incompetent people who had requested death in their advanced directive.

By passing Bill C-7, on February 17, with amendments, the bill now goes back to parliament for debate on the amendments.

Article: Senate passes Bill C-7 to allow euthanasia for mental illness and incompetent people (Link).

Join more than 52,000 people who have signed the petition: Reject euthanasia Bill C-7 (Link).

You need to contact your member of parliament to reject the Senate amendments and Bill C-7. The link to the list of Members of Parliament:

https://www.ourcommons.ca/Members/en/search

In September 2019, Québec Superior court Justice Christine Baudouin, in Truchon, struck down the requirement that a person's natural death be reasonably foreseeable in Canada's euthanasia law and gave the federal government until March 11, 2020 to amend the law. At that time, Canada was in the middle of a federal election. The government decided not to appeal the decision.

On February 17, Canada's Justice Minister, David Lametti asked the Quebec Superior court for a four month extension to incorporate the court decision into the law. The Quebec court agreed to the four month extension, giving the federal government until July 11, 2020 to extend the euthanasia law.

On February 24, the federal government introduced Bill C-7 in response to the Quebec Superior Court decision Truchon decision. Bill C-7 goes far beyond Truchon. Due to the COVID-19 crisis Bill C-7 was re-introduced on October 5, 2020. Canada's Justice Minister, once again, requested an extension from the Quebec Superior court and it was granted for December 18, 2020. 

In early December, parliament passed Bill C-7, without amendments and sent it to the Senate, but due to time restriction, the Justice Minister asked the Quebec Superior court for a third extension, that was granted, giving the federal government until February 26 to pass Bill C-7.

Justice Minister David Lametti has now asked the Quebec Superior court to for a fourth extension to stay the Truchon decision until March 26.

What is exasperating is the fact that the court imposed deadline should not be a primary concern. Even if the Quebec Superior court does not extend the stay of the Truchon decision, all it means is that the decision comes into effect without the actual law changing. Normally this would be a concern but since Bill C-7 goes far beyond Truchon, it is not an important deadline.

All this has happened without the government first completing its required parliamentary review of the law, a review that was legislated by the original euthanasia law that was passed in 2016. The government has no right expand MAiD without first reviewing the law.

For instance, as bad as Bill C-7 was, the Senate expanded the bill to include people with mental illness (with an 18 month "moratorium" to develop rules) and for incompetent people who request death in their advanced directive.

The mental illness alone amendment seemed like a "set-up" after Justice Minister Lametti, announced on November 24 that, once Bill C-7 passed, he wanted to expand euthanasia to people for mental illness alone.

The Senate had no right to even consider expanding euthanasia to people who request death in their advanced directive since the issue was not even studied by the House of Commons or Senate hearings on Bill C-7. The Senate simply reacted to an emotionally compelling speech by Senator Wallin.

What did  Bill C-7 do before it was amended?

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.

Bill C-7 went much further than the Quebec Superior Court Truchon  decision and now the Senate has made it worse. 

Join more than 52,000 people who have signed the petition: Reject euthanasia Bill C-7 (Link).

You need to contact your member of parliament to reject the Senate amendments and Bill C-7. The link to the list of Members of Parliament:

https://www.ourcommons.ca/Members/en/search

Senate passes Bill C-7 with amendments to allow euthanasia for mental illness and incompetent people.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition.

Canada's Senate passed Bill C-7, the bill to expand Canada's euthanasia law, with amendments to further expand the law.

Joan Bryden with the Canadian Press reporting on the Senate vote explains the Bill C-7 amendments:

One amendment would allow people who fear losing mental capacity to make advance requests for an assisted death.

Another would impose an 18-month time limit on the bill's proposed blanket ban on assisted dying for people suffering solely from mental illnesses.

Until that exclusion on mental illness is lifted, senators also approved another amendment to clarify that it would not apply to people suffering from neurocognitive disorders such as Alzheimer's disease.

They further amended the bill to require the government to collect race-based data on who requests and receives assisted dying and to establish a joint parliamentary committee within 30 days of the bill receiving royal assent to review the assisted dying regime in Canada.

The revised bill will now be sent back to the House of Commons for MPs to determine whether to accept or reject some or all of the amendments.

Canada's Senate amends Bill C-7 to include euthanasia for mental illness and incompetent people (Link).

As bad as Bill C-7 was, the Senate expanded the bill to include people with mental illness (with an 18 month time-frame to develop rules around the issue) and euthanasia for incompetent people who request death in their advanced directive.

The mental illness alone amendment seemed like a "set-up" after Canada's Justice Minister, David Lametti, announced on November 24 that, once Bill C-7 is passed, he wanted to expand euthanasia to people with mental illness alone.

As stated by Bryden, Bill C-7 will now go back to parliament for a debate and vote on the Senate amendments.

Join more than 52,000 people who have signed the petition: Reject euthanasia Bill C-7 (Link).

You need to contact your member of parliament to reject the Senate amendments and Bill C-7.

The link to the list of Members of Parliament: https://www.ourcommons.ca/Members/en/search

Canada legalized (MAiD) euthanasia in June 2016 by passing Bill C-14. At that time I pointed out that since the legislation lacked effective definitions that the practice of euthanasia would quickly expand. A caveat within Bill C-14 was the legislated requirement that a five-year review of the law would begin in June 2020.

I didn't expect the government would first expand Canada's euthanasia law by Bill C-7 before completing the required five-year review of the law.

In September 2019, Québec Justice Baudouin, in Truchon, struck down the requirement that a person's natural death be reasonably foreseeable in Canada's euthanasia law. 

On February 24, the federal government introduced Bill C-7 in response to the Quebec Superior Court decision in response to the Truchon decision, but Bill C-7 goes far beyond Truchon. Due to the COVID-19 crisis and then the prorogation of parliament, Bill C-7 was re-introduced on October 5, 2020.

In December, parliament passed Bill C-7, without amendments and sent it to the Senate. The shock that our government would expand the euthanasia law before completing its required parliamentary review of the law was exasperated by the appointed Senate.

What did  Bill C-7 do before it was amended?

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.

Bill C-7 went much further than the Quebec Superior Court Truchon  decision and now the Senate has made it worse. 

Join more than 52,000 people who have signed the petition: Reject euthanasia Bill C-7 (Link).

You need to contact your member of parliament to reject the Senate amendments and Bill C-7.

The link to the list of Members of Parliament:  https://www.ourcommons.ca/Members/en/search

Canada's Senate amends Bill C-7 to include euthanasia for mental illness and incompetent people.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Canada legalized (MAiD) euthanasia in June 2016 by passing Bill C-14. At that time I pointed out that because the legislation lacked effective definition that the practice of euthanasia would quickly expand. A caveat within Bill C-14 was the legislated requirement that a five-year review of the law would begin in June 2020.

I didn't expect the government would first expand Canada's euthanasia law by Bill C-7 before completing the required five-year review of the law.

In December, parliament passed Bill C-7, without amendments, and sent it to the Senate. The shock that our government would expand the euthanasia law before completing its required parliamentary review of the law was exasperated by the appointed Senate.

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

As bad as Bill C-7 is, yesterday Canada's Senate passed two dangerous amendments to Bill C-7. They passed an amendment permitting euthanasia for incompetent people who had requested death in an advanced directive and they passed an amendment to approve euthanasia for mental illness (with a 18 month sunset clause).

The Canadian Press reported that Senator Pamela Wallin sponsored the amendment because she has a history of dementia in her family. The Senators supported Wallin's amendment even though the issue has not been debated in the Senate or Parliamentary Committee hearings.

Joan Bryden reporting for the Canadian Press stated that euthanasia for mental illness amendment was sponsored by Senator Stan Kutcher, a psychiatrist. According to Bryden:

The amendment puts an 18-month time limit on the mental illness exclusion, intended to give the federal government, along with provinces, territories and medical associations, time to come up with appropriate guidelines and safeguards.

Senator Kutcher was wrong when he argued in the Senate Committee hearings that in jurisdictions that have legalized euthanasia or assisted suicide, that other suicides have gone down.

The Senate will be voting on further amendments today. Bill C-7 is scheduled for a final vote in the Senate on February 17.

It appears that the Senate will pass Bill C-7 with amendments. Bill C-7 will then go back to the House of Commons where they will vote to either accept or reject the amendments. It is possible that the amendments will be rejected by the House of Commons and Bill C-7 will be sent back to the Senate.

Join 50,000 people who have signed the petition: Reject euthanasia Bill C-7 (Link).

Bill C-7 already:

1. Removed the requirement in the law that a person’s natural death be reasonably foreseeable. 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 goes further.
2. Permitted 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. Waived 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. Created 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. Falsely claimed 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, obviously the Senate has taken him up on this.

Contact your Member of Parliament today and urge them to vote against Bill C-7 when it returns from the Senate. (Link to Members of Parliament).

Senate expected to vote on Bill C-7 (bill to expand euthanasia law) on February 17.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Joan Bryden is reported for the Canadian Press that Bill C-7, the bill to expand euthanasia in Canada, is scheduled to be voted on in the Senate on February 17.

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.