Canadian government asks court to extend the time to expand euthanasia law, due to COVID-19.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Five reasons to oppose euthanasia and assisted suicide (Link).

On June 11, Canada's federal Attorney General David Lametti filed a motion in the Quebec Superior Court asking to extend until Dec. 18, 2020, the Quebec Superior Court’s suspension of its constitutional declaration last September. 

Lametti told the Quebec court that the government did not pass euthanasia bill C-7 because of the unprecedented challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Join more than 32,000 Canadians who signed the petition: Reject euthanasia Bill C-7 (Link).

Whether or not the court extends the suspension of the Truchon court decision the Canadian government needs to reject Bill C-7 and begin the promised 5-year review of the euthanasia law with an open view to what is actually happening rather than continuing to expand euthanasia.

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

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

On February 17, Canada's Justice Minister, the Hon David Lametti asked the Quebec Superior Court for a four month extension to amend Canada's euthanasia law. Justice Baudouin agreed to give the government four more months (July 11) to extend Canada's euthanasia law.

On February 24, the federal government introduced Bill C-7 in response to the Quebec Truchon court decision.

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.

Bill C-7 goes much further than the Quebec Superior Court Truchon decision. The government needs to reject Bill C-7 and begin the promised 5-year review of the euthanasia law.

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

More Articles on Bill C-7:

• Does Bill C-7 prevent euthanasia for mental illness? (Link).
• Stop the extension of euthanasia by Bill C-7 (Link).
• More than 15,000 Canadians have died by euthanasia (Link).
• Canadians oppose euthanasia for mental illness and child euthanasia (Link).

Canadian Bar Association: Canada's euthanasia bill C-7 will be challenged in the court.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

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

A recent report from the End of Life Working Group of the Canadian Bar Association suggests several problems with Bill C-7, the bill to expand euthanasia in Canada.

Bill C-7 goes much further than the Quebec Superior Court Truchon decision but not as far as The Canadian Bar Association wants.

On February 24, the federal government introduced Bill C-7 in response to the Quebec Superior Court Truchon decision that struck down the requirement in the law that a person’s "natural death must be reasonably foreseeable" before qualifying for death by lethal injection.

Bill C-7 creates a two track law. A person whose natural death is not reasonably foreseeable has a 90 day waiting period while the bill waves the 10 day waiting period for people whose natural death is deemed to be reasonably foreseeable. Therefore a person can request and then die by lethal injection on the same day.

The Canadian Bar Association stated:

The criterion of “reasonably foreseeable death” has caused significant uncertainty and difficulty in practice and Bill C-7 does not give any guidance on how to apply it.

We recommend that guidance be given to avoid confusion on which safeguards apply and ensure appropriate access to MAiD.

I have stated that, if Bill C-7 is passed, a future court decision will strike down the 90 day waiting period for people whose natural death is not reasonably foreseeable because, it would be argued that this provision represents an inequality in the law.

Since The Canadian Bar Association supports euthanasia for mental illness they recommended that:

Mental illness should not be excluded from the definition of “serious and incurable illness, disease or disability”.

I am convinced that Bill C-7 already allows euthanasia for mental illness. 

Bill C-7 permits MAiD for people who are physically or psychologically suffering in a manner 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, can be considered a form of psychological suffering and therefore has not been excluded by Bill C-7.

If the government wants to exclude euthanasia for mental illness, Bill C-7 would need to define psychological suffering in a manner that excludes euthanasia for mental illness.

I agree with the Canadian Bar Association when it stated:

"The general exclusion of all persons suffering from mental illness is likely to be constitutionally challenged."

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

Why should I be concerned?

Euthanasia (MAiD) was legalized in June 2016. From that date until December 31, 2019, there have been more than 13,500 MAiD deaths in Canada, with more than 5,400 in 2019 alone.

Bill C-7 expands the law to permit anyone who considers their physical or psychological suffering to be intolerable to qualify for death by lethal injection, even if effective medical treatments for their condition exists. Bill C-7 allows medical homicide for people who need treatment and care. (Link to Bill C-7)

The Canadian government must reject Bill C-7 and begin the promised 5-year review of the euthanasia law with an open view to what is actually happening rather than continuing to expand euthanasia, making Canada the most permissive euthanasia regime in the world.

Articles on Bill C-7:

• Stop the extension of euthanasia by Bill C-7 (Link).
• More than 15,000 Canadians have died by euthanasia (Link).
• Canadians oppose euthanasia for mental illness and child euthanasia (Link).

No free choice: Remember four suicides.

This article was published by Toujours Vivant - Not Dead Yet on May 22, 2020.

By Amy Hasbrouck

In the year before euthanasia came into effect in Québec, between April, 2014 and March of 2015, four Québecers with disabilities ended their lives because they didn’t have the supports they needed to remain independent. Despite efforts by advocates, conditions in the province have worsened since then.

• In April of 2014, Mario Beaudoin and his wife were found dead in their home following what was believed to be a suicide pact. Mr. Beaudoin had been injured in a car accident 16 months earlier, and had been unable to get home modifications, medical equipment and personal assistance services they needed. 
• In September, three months after Québec’s National Assembly adopted the province’s euthanasia law, Yvan Tremblay killed himself because he was being forced to move out of his apartment due to new security regulations imposed by the government. Management claimed that it would be impossible to evacuate Mr. Tremblay in case of fire, so he would have to move to a smaller apartment without a kitchen. 
• Two days later, on September 16, Pierre Mayence died of starvation at the nursing home where he lived, after a court ruled that the staff could not force-feed him. 
• Finally, in March of 2015, Gabriel Bouchard died, also of starvation, because he could not get the supports he needed to remain in his own apartment. (You can watch our Interview with him on our website.)
  

What has changed since 2015?

In Québec, from December of 2015 to April of 2019, 2,909 people were euthanized, and 2,947 people received continuous palliative sedation, for a total death toll of 5,856.

Neither Québec nor the Federal government has released reports from the monitoring system for medical aid in dying (MAiD). However in introducing bill C-7, the Department of Justice mentioned that more than 13,000 euthanasia had been performed since June of 2016.

As of May 20, 3,718 people had died of COVID-19 in Québec, most of whom were residents of long-term care institutions. Deaths by COVID-19 in Canada totalled 6,030.

What hasn’t changed in the last five years?

• Public policy still favours warehousing disabled people in institutions, rather than giving them the choice to control their lives by employing their own personal support workers. 
• The public, including progressives, continue to believe in the myth that assisted suicide and euthanasia (AS & E) is a free choice. 
• Disability groups remain timid about opposing AS & E.

While we’ve focused on events in Québec, the same problems apply in the rest of Canada. People talk about the health care workers who are the “front-line heroes” of the COVID-19 pandemic, and that’s absolutely true; many are going above and beyond the call of duty. But most of these workers get to leave the heartache behind when they go home at the end of the day. Disabled activists don’t stop being disabled when their shift is over, just as single parents, women, people of colour and poor people can’t leave behind the discrimination that affects their lives.  

For more information on the subjects we discuss:

• Facebook.com/toujoursvivantnotdeadyet
• Website – https://tvndy.ca 
• Email – info@tv-ndy.ca Twitter – @tvndy.

Jacques Campeau did not get the care that he needed.

This article was published by Toujours Vivant - Not Dead Yet on May 15, 2020, with an article on pandemic policies. (Link)

No Free Choice: Jacques Campeau

By Amy Hasbrouck

In July of 2019 several Québec media outlets reported on the suicide death of Jacques Campeau, who had Multiple Sclerosis. The stories focused on his family’s anger over the fact that he was denied euthanasia several times because he was not at the “end of life;” the family brought his death to the attention of the media in order to put pressure on politicians and the courts to loosen this eligibility criteria. But details from the articles show that Mr. Campeau really needed help to live, not to die.

According to his daughters, Mr. Campeau was “increasingly despondent and withdrawn” and his wife said he had talked about suicide for a year. “I would come home every evening afraid he had done it.” Depression is a well-known problem associated with MS, both as a reaction to flare-ups, and as part of the disease itself. It can be made worse by pain and fatigue that often come with MS. If Mr. Campeau was not being treated for depression, he was not getting the care he needed.

The articles not only showed that Mr. Campeau had low self-esteem, but also reinforced those beliefs about people living with MS and other chronic diseases. According to the Journal de Montréal, he told his family that he was nothing more than a digestive tract. The reporter described his «suffering» by saying he used a wheelchair and incontinence products, and “hadn’t seen the light of day since November.” His daughter said he had “no quality of life,” and that he was a “prisoner of his body.” Rather than asking if Mr. Campeau had received peer support or “dignity therapy” to deal with his existential distress, the journalists repeated negative stereotypes of life with a disability as a fate worse than death.

Media reports suggested Mr. Campeau was losing autonomy, but there was no mention of in-home assistance. His daughter told of receiving a call at work “telling her [Mr. Campeau] had fallen at home and had been lying on the floor for two hours, waiting to call when he knew she was on break.”

Mr. Campeau’s family expressed disappointment over not getting a chance to say good-bye. “We would have preferred to have a last moment with him ... to have a dinner with him, tell him that we love him. We would have liked to talk to him before he did this." They believe a planned death would have met their need for closure.

The only other sources cited by the journalists were spokespeople for “Dying with Dignity” and a pro-euthanasia doctor. The reporters included a link to the family’s petition to change the “end-of-life” eligibility criterion. The articles did not quote people living with MS or experts in palliative care or suicide prevention. The Journal de Montréal included information on how to obtain MAiD and the suicide prevention telephone number.

The tragedy here is not that Mr. Campeau didn’t die by euthanasia, or even that he committed suicide. The tragedy is that those who surrounded him seemed to think that MS, a chronic illness that includes flare-up and remission, was a terminal illness, and that his life was not worth living because of his disability. The tragedy lies in the fact that he did not have the services and supports he needed to adapt to his changing condition, feel good about himself, maintain his independence, and get peer counseling and suicide prevention services that could have improved the quality of his life, and ultimately saved it.

Amy Hasbrouck is the President of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition and the founder of Toujours Vivant - Not Dead Yet (TVNDY) a non-religious organization by and for disabled people.

Stop the extension of euthanasia by Bill C-7 in Canada.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Please share this article with your friends (Link).

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

On February 24, the federal government introduced Bill C-7 in response to the Quebec Superior Court decision that struck down the requirement in the law that a person’s "natural death must be reasonably foreseeable" before qualifying for death by lethal injection.
 
What does Bill C-7 do?

1. Bill C-7 removes the requirement in the law that a person’s natural death must 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 when a person is deemed to be “terminally ill.” 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 who is deemed to be terminally ill would have no waiting period while a person who is not terminally ill will have a 90 day waiting period before being killed by lethal injection.

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.

Why should I be concerned?

Euthanasia (MAiD) was legalized in June 2016. From that date until December 31, 2019, there have been more than 13,500 MAiD deaths in Canada, with more than 5400 in 2019 alone.

Bill C-7 expands the law to permit anyone who considers their physical or psychological suffering to be intolerable to qualify for death by lethal injection, even if effective medical treatments for their condition exists. Bill C-7 allows medical homicide for people who need treatment and care. (Link to Bill C-7)

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

Please contact your member of parliament and state your opposition to Bill C-7 and any expansion to the already dangerous euthanasia regime in Canada. 

List of Members of Parliament: https://www.ourcommons.ca/Members/en/search

Press Release: A growing number of Canadian physicians are being bullied to participate in MAiD.

PRESS RELEASE 

Alert from a growing number of Canadian physicians 

“We are being bullied to participate in Medical Assistance in Dying”

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

Montréal, March 9, 2020 - The Physicians’ Alliance against Euthanasia has received reports that unwilling physicians are being pressured and bullied to participate in Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD): euphemism for euthanasia and assisted suicide. Fearing reprisals, physicians have asked that no information that could identify them be disclosed.

The pressure has been intense for many physicians, especially amongst palliative specialists, some leaving their profession even before this latest development. Descriptions were made of toxic practice environments and fear of discipline by medical regulators.

“The anxiety, fear, and sadness surrounding my work bled into my family life, and I ultimately felt that I could not manage practicing palliative care at this stage of my life.”
(Former palliative care physician, March 2020)

In different locations across Canada over the last months there has been a change in certain hospital MAiD policies. The change seems intended to provoke crisis or confrontation: to force objecting physicians to facilitate MAiD, or to have to refuse — and face contrived allegations of “obstructing access.” Reports consistently focus on the MAiD providers refusing to accept full responsibility for the death of the patient and forcing other physicians to share responsibility for the death. If the physician asks to withdraw from care and allow the MAiD provider to take over as before, the MAiD provider resists assuming the natural pattern of care.

The reports we are hearing from distressed physicians describe deliberate disruption of arrangements that were previously working satisfactorily and that had permitted patients to have access to MAiD while still allowing for conscience objectors to not be involved in facilitating the patient’s death. This bullying and betrayal of collegial relationships can poison practice environments and compromise patient care. Such behavior should not be tolerated by health care administrators in Canada.

Canadian physicians having similar stories of bullying are encouraged to contact the Physicians’ Alliance by email: info@collectifmedecins.org.

Contact:
Charmine Francis
Coordinator
438-938-9410
info@collectifmedecins.org

Québec Superior Court gives federal government four more months to extend euthanasia law.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

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

On Febuary 17, Canada's Justice Minister, the Hon. David Lametti and the Attorney General of Canada the Hon. Patty Hajdu asked a Quebec Superior Court for a four month extension to amend Canada's euthanasia law.

Yesterday, a Québec Superior court granted the federal government four more months (July 11) to extend Canada's euthanasia law. In doing so Justice Baudouin also granted those who have asked to die, but whose death is not "reasonably foreseeable" an exemption for assisted death. The Canadian Press reported:

In her ruling Monday, Baudouin creates a provision for those who had been hoping to access medically assisted death as of March 11. The judge said people who meet the other criteria for the procedure but whose natural death is not “reasonably foreseeable” can apply to a court for an exemption to receive an assisted death before the July 11 deadline.

On February 24, Canada's federal government introduced Bill C-7, an act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying). Bill C-7 is the federal government's response to the Quebec Court decision that struck down the section of Canada's euthanasia law requiring that "natural death be reasonably foreseeable" before qualifying for death by euthanasia (lethal injection).

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

Bill C-7 pretends to prevent euthanasia for "mental illness". Section (2.‍1) states: 

For the purposes of paragraph (2)‍(a), a mental illness is not considered to be an illness, disease or disability.

This paragraph does not prevent euthanasia for mental illness or psychological reasons since the law specifically allows it. To prevent euthanasia for "mental illness" they would have had to define "mental illness" and they would have had to amend the requirements of the current law.

Bill C-7 creates a two track law where a person who is not terminally ill has a 90 day waiting period while Bill C-7 waves the 10 day waiting period for people who are terminally ill. Therefore a person can request and then die by lethal injection on the same day.

The government is wrong to create a two tier euthanasia law. A future court decision will likely strike down the 90 day waiting period for people who are not terminally ill because this provision represents an inequality within the law.

Bill C-7 allows a person's healthcare provider or care provider to be one of the witnesses. This is a conflict of interest.

Finally, Bill C-7 allows doctors and nurse practitioners to lethally inject an incompetent person, (advanced request) so long as that person consented to death by lethal injection before becoming incompetent.

This amendment to the law contravenes the Carter decision which required that a person be capable of consenting to die.

Bill C-7 eliminates the 10 day waiting period, a terminally ill person can request euthanasia and die by euthanasia on the same day. Studies show that the "Will to Live" fluctuates over time.

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

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

In June 2020, the government will begin a consultation on 5 years of euthanasia in Canada. The government should not amend the law until after the 5-year consultation is completed.

Stop Bill C-7 that permits euthanasia for psychiatric conditions and incompetent people.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

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

Bill C-7, a bill to amend Canada's euthanasia (MAiD) law, if passed without amendments, will make Canada's euthanasia law the most permissive in the world.

On February 24, Canada's federal government introduced Bill C-7, an act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying). Bill C-7 is the federal government's response to the Quebec Court decision that struck down the section of Canada's euthanasia law that requiring that "natural death be reasonably foreseeable" before qualifying for death by euthanasia (lethal injection).

I reported that the Quebec court expanded Canada's euthanasia law by eliminating the requirement that only terminally ill people could be killed by lethal injection.

The court decision expanded euthanasia to people with psychological conditions. Canada's euthanasia law states that a person qualifies for euthanasia if:

the illness, disease or disability or that state of decline causes them enduring physical or psychological suffering that is intolerable to them and that cannot be relieved under conditions that they consider acceptable.

Before the Quebec court decision, a person didn't qualify for euthanasia based on psychological reasons alone since the law required that a person's "natural death be reasonably foreseeable." Since the Quebec court struck down this requirement, the law now permits euthanasia for psychological reasons.

Bill C-7 pretends to prevent euthanasia for "mental illness". Section (2.‍1) states: 

For the purposes of paragraph (2)‍(a), a mental illness is not considered to be an illness, disease or disability.

This paragraph does not prevent euthanasia for mental illness or psychological reasons since the law specifically allows it. To prevent euthanasia for "mental illness" they would have had to define "mental illness" and they would have had to amend the requirements of the current law.

Bill C-7 creates a two track law where a person who is not terminally ill has a 90 day waiting period while Bill C-7 waves the 10 day waiting period for people who are terminally ill. Therefore a person can request and then die by lethal injection on the same day.

The government is wrong to create a two tier euthanasia law. A future court decision will likely strike down the 90 day waiting period for people who are not terminally ill because this provision represents an inequality within the law.

Bill C-7 allows a person's healthcare provider or care provider to be one of the witnesses. This is a conflict of interest.

Finally, Bill C-7 allows doctors and nurse practitioners to lethally inject an incompetent person, (advanced request) so long as that person consented to death by lethal injection before becoming incompetent.

This amendment to the law contravenes the Carter decision which required that a person be capable of consenting to die.

The goal of the euthanasia lobby was to amend the law to allow "advanced consent" for euthanasia. Canada's Liberal government appears to be working closely with the euthanasia lobby.

By eliminating the 10 day waiting period, a terminally ill person can request euthanasia and die by euthanasia on the same day. Studies show that the "Will to Live" fluctuates over time.

The government should wait before amending the law. In June 2020, the government will begin its consultation on 5 years of euthanasia in Canada.