43rd Parliament223Government response tabledMay 7, 2021432-00726432-00726 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABMarch 24, 2021May 7, 2021March 8, 2021Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and; Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and; Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation; Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to: 1) Restore the 10-day reflection period for people whose deaths have been determined to be "reasonably foreseeable"; 2) Restore the original requirement that a person must give consent to the life-ending procedure immediately before it is performed; 3) Restore the original requirements for the signatures of two witnesses, who cannot provide personal care to the person seeking to end their life; 4) Require medical professionals to do everything possible to enable the person to access life-affirming services to relieve their suffering other than physician-assisted death; and, 5) Accommodate persons with communication disabilities by clarifying "refusal or resistance to administration" of physician-assisted death.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn March 17, 2021, Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying), received Royal Assent. Bill C-7 responds to the Superior Court of Québec’s September 2019 Truchon decision, which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.  Our Government believes that those who are experiencing enduring and intolerable suffering from their medical condition – including those who are not approaching the end of life – should be allowed to decide for themselves when they wish to end their life, and that medical and nurse practitioners who are willing to help them have a peaceful and painless death should not be criminally culpable for doing so.As the Truchon decision applies only in Québec, Bill C-7 amended the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the MAID law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion no longer applies as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining MAID, but is instead used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards applies to a particular MAID request.The first set of safeguards applies to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period responds to the concerns raised by patients and their families, healthcare professionals and other stakeholders that these safeguards pose an access barrier to MAID, do not provide protection to vulnerable persons, and unnecessarily prolong patient suffering.For this group of persons, a waiver of the requirement for consent to be given immediately before MAID is provided is also possible following the Bill C-7 amendments. This change ensures that persons do not choose to have MAID earlier than they would like out of fear of losing their capacity to consent on their preferred day. If a person retains decision-making capacity on their preferred day, they must give consent in whatever manner of communication they are able. If they do not have decision-making capacity, the legislation clarifies that the procedure must not go forward if the person demonstrates refusal or resistance to the administration of MAID by words, gestures or sounds.The second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request MAID and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request MAID. The new safeguards for this group include all of the safeguards that apply to the first group, along with new and enhanced safeguards, to ensure that a request by a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable is fully informed and considered, and that patients have been informed about and have seriously considered all reasonable and available treatment options and social services.The amendments in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations held at the beginning of 2020 with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill protects vulnerable individuals and the equality rights of all Canadians, while supporting the autonomy of eligible persons to seek MAID.
Application processCapacity of consent for careHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanismPersons with disabilities
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledMay 5, 2021432-00686432-00686 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABMarch 22, 2021May 5, 2021March 10, 2021Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and; Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and; Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation; Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to: 1) Restore the 10-day reflection period for people whose deaths have been determined to be "reasonably foreseeable"; 2) Restore the original requirement that a person must give consent to the life-ending procedure immediately before it is performed; 3) Restore the original requirements for the signatures of two witnesses, who cannot provide personal care to the person seeking to end their life; 4) Require medical professionals to do everything possible to enable the person to access life-affirming services to relieve their suffering other than physician-assisted death; and, 5) Accommodate persons with communication disabilities by clarifying "refusal or resistance to administration" of physician-assisted death.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn March 17, 2021, Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying), received Royal Assent. Bill C-7 responds to the Superior Court of Québec’s September 2019 Truchon decision, which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.  Our Government believes that those who are experiencing enduring and intolerable suffering from their medical condition – including those who are not approaching the end of life – should be allowed to decide for themselves when they wish to end their life, and that medical and nurse practitioners who are willing to help them have a peaceful and painless death should not be criminally culpable for doing so.As the Truchon decision applies only in Québec, Bill C-7 amended the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the MAID law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion no longer applies as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining MAID, but is instead used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards applies to a particular MAID request.The first set of safeguards applies to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period responds to the concerns raised by patients and their families, healthcare professionals and other stakeholders that these safeguards pose an access barrier to MAID, do not provide protection to vulnerable persons, and unnecessarily prolong patient suffering.For this group of persons, a waiver of the requirement for consent to be given immediately before MAID is provided is also possible following the Bill C-7 amendments. This change ensures that persons do not choose to have MAID earlier than they would like out of fear of losing their capacity to consent on their preferred day. If a person retains decision-making capacity on their preferred day, they must give consent in whatever manner of communication they are able. If they do not have decision-making capacity, the legislation clarifies that the procedure must not go forward if the person demonstrates refusal or resistance to the administration of MAID by words, gestures or sounds.The second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request MAID and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request MAID. The new safeguards for this group include all of the safeguards that apply to the first group, along with new and enhanced safeguards, to ensure that a request by a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable is fully informed and considered, and that patients have been informed about and have seriously considered all reasonable and available treatment options and social services.The amendments in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations held at the beginning of 2020 with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill protects vulnerable individuals and the equality rights of all Canadians, while supporting the autonomy of eligible persons to seek MAID.
Application processCapacity of consent for careHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanismPersons with disabilities
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledApril 26, 2021432-00672432-00672 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABMarch 12, 2021April 26, 2021December 18, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and; Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and; Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation; Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to: 1) Restore the 10-day reflection period for people whose deaths have been determined to be "reasonably foreseeable"; 2) Restore the original requirement that a person must give consent to the life-ending procedure immediately before it is performed; 3) Restore the original requirements for the signatures of two witnesses, who cannot provide personal care to the person seeking to end their life; 4) Require medical professionals to do everything possible to enable the person to access life-affirming services to relieve their suffering other than physician-assisted death; and, 5) Accommodate persons with communication disabilities by clarifying "refusal or resistance to administration" of physician-assisted death.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn March 17, 2021, Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying), received Royal Assent. Bill C-7 responds to the Superior Court of Québec’s September 2019 Truchon decision, which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.  Our Government believes that those who are experiencing enduring and intolerable suffering from their medical condition – including those who are not approaching the end of life – should be allowed to decide for themselves when they wish to end their life, and that medical and nurse practitioners who are willing to help them have a peaceful and painless death should not be criminally culpable for doing so.As the Truchon decision applies only in Québec, Bill C-7 amended the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the MAID law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion no longer applies as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining MAID, but is instead used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards applies to a particular MAID request.The first set of safeguards applies to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period responds to the concerns raised by patients and their families, healthcare professionals and other stakeholders that these safeguards pose an access barrier to MAID, do not provide protection to vulnerable persons, and unnecessarily prolong patient suffering.For this group of persons, a waiver of the requirement for consent to be given immediately before MAID is provided is also possible following the Bill C-7 amendments. This change ensures that persons do not choose to have MAID earlier than they would like out of fear of losing their capacity to consent on their preferred day. If a person retains decision-making capacity on their preferred day, they must give consent in whatever manner of communication they are able. If they do not have decision-making capacity, the legislation clarifies that the procedure must not go forward if the person demonstrates refusal or resistance to the administration of MAID by words, gestures or sounds.The second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request MAID and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request MAID. The new safeguards for this group include all of the safeguards that apply to the first group, along with new and enhanced safeguards, to ensure that a request by a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable is fully informed and considered, and that patients have been informed about and have seriously considered all reasonable and available treatment options and social services.The amendments in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations held at the beginning of 2020 with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill protects vulnerable individuals and the equality rights of all Canadians, while supporting the autonomy of eligible persons to seek MAID.
Application processCapacity of consent for careHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanismPersons with disabilities
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledApril 23, 2021432-00647432-00647 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABMarch 10, 2021April 23, 2021March 4, 2021Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn March 17, 2021, Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying), received Royal Assent. Bill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.Bill C-7 amended the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion no longer applies as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, but is instead used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards applies to a particular medical assistance in dying request.The first set of safeguards applies to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period responds to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying do so after careful consideration.The second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that an expert be consulted if neither of the two practitioners assessing eligibility has the required expertise, and clarifications related to informed consent.The Bill C-7 amendments were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. They support greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledApril 21, 2021432-00608432-00608 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABMarch 8, 2021April 21, 2021December 15, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and; Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and; Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation; Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to: 1) Restore the 10-day reflection period for people whose deaths have been determined to be "reasonably foreseeable"; 2) Restore the original requirement that a person must give consent to the life-ending procedure immediately before it is performed; 3) Restore the original requirements for the signatures of two witnesses, who cannot provide personal care to the person seeking to end their life; 4) Require medical professionals to do everything possible to enable the person to access life-affirming services to relieve their suffering other than physician-assisted death; and, 5) Accommodate persons with communication disabilities by clarifying "refusal or resistance to administration" of physician-assisted death.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn March 17, 2021, Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying), received Royal Assent. Bill C-7 responds to the Superior Court of Québec’s September 2019 Truchon decision, which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.  Our Government believes that those who are experiencing enduring and intolerable suffering from their medical condition – including those who are not approaching the end of life – should be allowed to decide for themselves when they wish to end their life, and that medical and nurse practitioners who are willing to help them have a peaceful and painless death should not be criminally culpable for doing so.As the Truchon decision applies only in Québec, Bill C-7 amended the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the MAID law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion no longer applies as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining MAID, but is instead used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards applies to a particular MAID request.The first set of safeguards applies to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period responds to the concerns raised by patients and their families, healthcare professionals and other stakeholders that these safeguards pose an access barrier to MAID, do not provide protection to vulnerable persons, and unnecessarily prolong patient suffering.For this group of persons, a waiver of the requirement for consent to be given immediately before MAID is provided is also possible following the Bill C-7 amendments. This change ensures that persons do not choose to have MAID earlier than they would like out of fear of losing their capacity to consent on their preferred day. If a person retains decision-making capacity on their preferred day, they must give consent in whatever manner of communication they are able. If they do not have decision-making capacity, the legislation clarifies that the procedure must not go forward if the person demonstrates refusal or resistance to the administration of MAID by words, gestures or sounds.The second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request MAID and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request MAID. The new safeguards for this group include all of the safeguards that apply to the first group, along with new and enhanced safeguards, to ensure that a request by a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable is fully informed and considered, and that patients have been informed about and have seriously considered all reasonable and available treatment options and social services.The amendments in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations held at the beginning of 2020 with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill protects vulnerable individuals and the equality rights of all Canadians, while supporting the autonomy of eligible persons to seek MAID.
Application processCapacity of consent for careHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanismPersons with disabilities
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledApril 12, 2021432-00590432-00590 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABFebruary 26, 2021April 12, 2021January 28, 2021Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and; Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and; Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation; Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to: 1) Restore the 10-day reflection period for people whose deaths have been determined to be "reasonably foreseeable"; 2) Restore the original requirement that a person must give consent to the life-ending procedure immediately before it is performed; 3) Restore the original requirements for the signatures of two witnesses, who cannot provide personal care to the person seeking to end their life; 4) Require medical professionals to do everything possible to enable the person to access life-affirming services to relieve their suffering other than physician-assisted death; and, 5) Accommodate persons with communication disabilities by clarifying "refusal or resistance to administration" of physician-assisted death.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn March 17, 2021, Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying), received Royal Assent. Bill C-7 responds to the Superior Court of Québec’s September 2019 Truchon decision, which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.  Our Government believes that those who are experiencing enduring and intolerable suffering from their medical condition – including those who are not approaching the end of life – should be allowed to decide for themselves when they wish to end their life, and that medical and nurse practitioners who are willing to help them have a peaceful and painless death should not be criminally culpable for doing so.As the Truchon decision applies only in Québec, Bill C-7 amended the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the MAID law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion no longer applies as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining MAID, but is instead used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards applies to a particular MAID request.The first set of safeguards applies to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period responds to the concerns raised by patients and their families, healthcare professionals and other stakeholders that these safeguards pose an access barrier to MAID, do not provide protection to vulnerable persons, and unnecessarily prolong patient suffering.For this group of persons, a waiver of the requirement for consent to be given immediately before MAID is provided is also possible following the Bill C-7 amendments. This change ensures that persons do not choose to have MAID earlier than they would like out of fear of losing their capacity to consent on their preferred day. If a person retains decision-making capacity on their preferred day, they must give consent in whatever manner of communication they are able. If they do not have decision-making capacity, the legislation clarifies that the procedure must not go forward if the person demonstrates refusal or resistance to the administration of MAID by words, gestures or sounds.The second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request MAID and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request MAID. The new safeguards for this group include all of the safeguards that apply to the first group, along with new and enhanced safeguards, to ensure that a request by a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable is fully informed and considered, and that patients have been informed about and have seriously considered all reasonable and available treatment options and social services.The amendments in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations held at the beginning of 2020 with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill protects vulnerable individuals and the equality rights of all Canadians, while supporting the autonomy of eligible persons to seek MAID.
Application processCapacity of consent for careHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanismPersons with disabilities
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledApril 12, 2021432-00570432-00570 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABFebruary 25, 2021April 12, 2021January 28, 2021Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn March 17, 2021, Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying), received Royal Assent. Bill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.Bill C-7 amended the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion no longer applies as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, but is instead used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards applies to a particular medical assistance in dying request.The first set of safeguards applies to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period responds to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying do so after careful consideration.The second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that an expert be consulted if neither of the two practitioners assessing eligibility has the required expertise, and clarifications related to informed consent.The Bill C-7 amendments were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. They support greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledApril 12, 2021432-00556432-00556 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABFebruary 23, 2021April 12, 2021December 15, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and; Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and; Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation; Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to: 1) Restore the 10-day reflection period for people whose deaths have been determined to be "reasonably foreseeable"; 2) Restore the original requirement that a person must give consent to the life-ending procedure immediately before it is performed; 3) Restore the original requirements for the signatures of two witnesses, who cannot provide personal care to the person seeking to end their life; 4) Require medical professionals to do everything possible to enable the person to access life-affirming services to relieve their suffering other than physician-assisted death; and, 5) Accommodate persons with communication disabilities by clarifying "refusal or resistance to administration" of physician-assisted death.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn March 17, 2021, Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying), received Royal Assent. Bill C-7 responds to the Superior Court of Québec’s September 2019 Truchon decision, which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.  Our Government believes that those who are experiencing enduring and intolerable suffering from their medical condition – including those who are not approaching the end of life – should be allowed to decide for themselves when they wish to end their life, and that medical and nurse practitioners who are willing to help them have a peaceful and painless death should not be criminally culpable for doing so.As the Truchon decision applies only in Québec, Bill C-7 amended the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the MAID law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion no longer applies as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining MAID, but is instead used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards applies to a particular MAID request.The first set of safeguards applies to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period responds to the concerns raised by patients and their families, healthcare professionals and other stakeholders that these safeguards pose an access barrier to MAID, do not provide protection to vulnerable persons, and unnecessarily prolong patient suffering.For this group of persons, a waiver of the requirement for consent to be given immediately before MAID is provided is also possible following the Bill C-7 amendments. This change ensures that persons do not choose to have MAID earlier than they would like out of fear of losing their capacity to consent on their preferred day. If a person retains decision-making capacity on their preferred day, they must give consent in whatever manner of communication they are able. If they do not have decision-making capacity, the legislation clarifies that the procedure must not go forward if the person demonstrates refusal or resistance to the administration of MAID by words, gestures or sounds.The second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request MAID and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request MAID. The new safeguards for this group include all of the safeguards that apply to the first group, along with new and enhanced safeguards, to ensure that a request by a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable is fully informed and considered, and that patients have been informed about and have seriously considered all reasonable and available treatment options and social services.The amendments in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations held at the beginning of 2020 with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill protects vulnerable individuals and the equality rights of all Canadians, while supporting the autonomy of eligible persons to seek MAID.
Application processCapacity of consent for careHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanismPersons with disabilities
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledApril 12, 2021432-00517432-00517 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABFebruary 17, 2021April 12, 2021December 2, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and; Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and; Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation; Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to: 1) Restore the 10-day reflection period for people whose deaths have been determined to be "reasonably foreseeable"; 2) Restore the original requirement that a person must give consent to the life-ending procedure immediately before it is performed; 3) Restore the original requirements for the signatures of two witnesses, who cannot provide personal care to the person seeking to end their life; 4) Require medical professionals to do everything possible to enable the person to access life-affirming services to relieve their suffering other than physician-assisted death; and, 5) Accommodate persons with communication disabilities by clarifying "refusal or resistance to administration" of physician-assisted death.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn March 17, 2021, Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying), received Royal Assent. Bill C-7 responds to the Superior Court of Québec’s September 2019 Truchon decision, which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.  Our Government believes that those who are experiencing enduring and intolerable suffering from their medical condition – including those who are not approaching the end of life – should be allowed to decide for themselves when they wish to end their life, and that medical and nurse practitioners who are willing to help them have a peaceful and painless death should not be criminally culpable for doing so.As the Truchon decision applies only in Québec, Bill C-7 amended the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the MAID law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion no longer applies as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining MAID, but is instead used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards applies to a particular MAID request.The first set of safeguards applies to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period responds to the concerns raised by patients and their families, healthcare professionals and other stakeholders that these safeguards pose an access barrier to MAID, do not provide protection to vulnerable persons, and unnecessarily prolong patient suffering.For this group of persons, a waiver of the requirement for consent to be given immediately before MAID is provided is also possible following the Bill C-7 amendments. This change ensures that persons do not choose to have MAID earlier than they would like out of fear of losing their capacity to consent on their preferred day. If a person retains decision-making capacity on their preferred day, they must give consent in whatever manner of communication they are able. If they do not have decision-making capacity, the legislation clarifies that the procedure must not go forward if the person demonstrates refusal or resistance to the administration of MAID by words, gestures or sounds.The second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request MAID and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request MAID. The new safeguards for this group include all of the safeguards that apply to the first group, along with new and enhanced safeguards, to ensure that a request by a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable is fully informed and considered, and that patients have been informed about and have seriously considered all reasonable and available treatment options and social services.The amendments in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations held at the beginning of 2020 with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill protects vulnerable individuals and the equality rights of all Canadians, while supporting the autonomy of eligible persons to seek MAID.
Application processCapacity of consent for careHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanismPersons with disabilities
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledApril 12, 2021432-00503432-00503 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABFebruary 16, 2021April 12, 2021December 2, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and; Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and; Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation; Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to: 1) Restore the 10-day reflection period for people whose deaths have been determined to be "reasonably foreseeable"; 2) Restore the original requirement that a person must give consent to the life-ending procedure immediately before it is performed; 3) Restore the original requirements for the signatures of two witnesses, who cannot provide personal care to the person seeking to end their life; 4) Require medical professionals to do everything possible to enable the person to access life-affirming services to relieve their suffering other than physician-assisted death; and, 5) Accommodate persons with communication disabilities by clarifying "refusal or resistance to administration" of physician-assisted death.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn March 17, 2021, Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying), received Royal Assent. Bill C-7 responds to the Superior Court of Québec’s September 2019 Truchon decision, which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.  Our Government believes that those who are experiencing enduring and intolerable suffering from their medical condition – including those who are not approaching the end of life – should be allowed to decide for themselves when they wish to end their life, and that medical and nurse practitioners who are willing to help them have a peaceful and painless death should not be criminally culpable for doing so.As the Truchon decision applies only in Québec, Bill C-7 amended the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the MAID law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion no longer applies as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining MAID, but is instead used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards applies to a particular MAID request.The first set of safeguards applies to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period responds to the concerns raised by patients and their families, healthcare professionals and other stakeholders that these safeguards pose an access barrier to MAID, do not provide protection to vulnerable persons, and unnecessarily prolong patient suffering.For this group of persons, a waiver of the requirement for consent to be given immediately before MAID is provided is also possible following the Bill C-7 amendments. This change ensures that persons do not choose to have MAID earlier than they would like out of fear of losing their capacity to consent on their preferred day. If a person retains decision-making capacity on their preferred day, they must give consent in whatever manner of communication they are able. If they do not have decision-making capacity, the legislation clarifies that the procedure must not go forward if the person demonstrates refusal or resistance to the administration of MAID by words, gestures or sounds.The second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request MAID and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request MAID. The new safeguards for this group include all of the safeguards that apply to the first group, along with new and enhanced safeguards, to ensure that a request by a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable is fully informed and considered, and that patients have been informed about and have seriously considered all reasonable and available treatment options and social services.The amendments in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations held at the beginning of 2020 with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill protects vulnerable individuals and the equality rights of all Canadians, while supporting the autonomy of eligible persons to seek MAID.
Application processCapacity of consent for careHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanismPersons with disabilities
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledJanuary 25, 2021432-00306432-00306 (Employment and labour)KarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonConservativeONNovember 27, 2020January 25, 2021October 13, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned, citizens of Canada,Draw the attention of the House of CommonsTo the following, that, in support of the undersigned Petitioner Theresa Doherty:We contend there is an as yet undisclosed need to examine and challenge existing standards of Police Officer recruitment and collective force(s) arbitrary decision of 'non-competitive' without explanation. To dispute Ontario Watchdog organizations for negligence and failure to provide mandate of transparency, accountability and impartiality. We suggest this request for remedy is pervasive in nature, a Canadian concern and that the Public has the right to be made aware of the hidden agenda in Police recruiting and imbalance of power from the very entities they entrust and expect the same from. We request to make transparent the determination for hire for a Police Officer in Canada with intention of changing public policy in police recruiting. I, Theresa Doherty intend to make Void a non-disclosure signed August 2017 on grounds of unconscionability against Toronto Police Services Board. This petition cannot be brought before a court of law or tribunal, as the HRT is one target, lawyers fail to involve for fear of retaliation from the police community and my particular Prayer is precedent setting.A Canadian resident, continuously qualified older mother to 6, who completed requirements repeatedly, including the Physical component 12 times. Additional contributions as community volunteer, University graduate, College graduate, vital role as mother were dismissed and devalued. I have received feedback from other citizens who agree this isn't the justice system in Canada they envisioned.I am competitive. A pioneer in a male and youth dominated industry who deserved consideration. Current standards are unethical, non-inclusive and archaic in practice.Therefore, your petitioners call upon the House of Commons, the addressee; to respond with action to the above Prayer by Theresa Doherty to consider changing public policy in police recruiting and remove discrimination in hiring procedure and investigate corruption in collective oversight agencies.
Response by the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency PreparednessSigned by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): Joël Lightbound, M.PAuthority for policing in Canada is decentralized across different levels of government. The administration of justice — including policing — is a provincial responsibility. Throughout Canada, police services may have different mandates, serve different sizes of population, be presented with different community circumstances and operational requirements. The provinces or municipalities determine policing models including policies relating to recruitment. The communities are responsible for governing police services through a police board, band council, or other authority.As the provider of front-line policing services in all provinces and territories except Ontario and Quebec, the Royal Canadian Mounted police (RCMP) works closely with individual communities to tailor its policing model to their needs.The RCMP is committed to modernizing its recruitment practices through proactive action aimed at increasing diversity and reducing bias so that that its police officers reflect the communities it serves. Diversity in the RCMP’s workforce provides the organization  with an enhanced understanding of the communities it serves and  increases collaboration.The RCMP is pursuing a transformation agenda with advice from its independent Management Advisory Board to: tailor the policing model and approach to communities’ needs; strengthen accountability and transparency; advance equity, diversity and inclusion in RCMP decision-making, training and recruitment.The RCMP is also developing a renewed Recruitment Strategy in order to attract diverse applicants with the necessary skills required for modern policing.  As part of this  Strategy, the RCMP will focus on increasing diversity among proactive recruiters, to represent the diversity it seeks to attract. The RCMP will also implement modern applicant screening tools to promote diversity and ensure candidates have the attributes needed for policing of the future, including screening for bias. Consultation with the RCMP management across the country is underway to support this important work.The RCMP is also applying a Gender based Analysis plus (GBA+) approach to the recruitment process to identify any unintended barriers in the application process. As part of the GBA+,  a new RCMP aptitude test will be introduced to ensure an effective and inclusive approach. Further, a full refresh of the RCMP recruiting website was recently conducted to simplify language and remove unintended barriers. Additionally, the RCMP has adjusted the recruitment application process allowing Permanent Residents, who have lived in Canada for three of the last five years, to apply to be a police officer.We are committed to implementing these necessary modernization efforts — and others — in collaboration with partners and stakeholders, to build a stronger, more inclusive and more resilient country, to keep all communities safe and secure.
DiscriminationOversight mechanismPolice officersStaffing
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledJanuary 25, 2021432-00286432-00286 (Justice)RachaelThomasLethbridgeConservativeABNovember 24, 2020January 25, 2021April 30, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn October 5, 2020, the Government re-introduced Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying). Bill C-7 is identical to former Bill C-7, which died on the Order Paper following the prorogation of Parliament in August 2020. Bill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.Bill C-7 proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request.The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledJanuary 25, 2021432-00284432-00284 (Justice)JohnWilliamsonNew Brunswick SouthwestConservativeNBNovember 24, 2020January 25, 2021April 30, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn October 5, 2020, the Government re-introduced Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying). Bill C-7 is identical to former Bill C-7, which died on the Order Paper following the prorogation of Parliament in August 2020. Bill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.Bill C-7 proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request.The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledJanuary 25, 2021432-00283432-00283 (Justice)CathyMcLeodKamloops—Thompson—CaribooConservativeBCNovember 24, 2020January 25, 2021April 30, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn October 5, 2020, the Government re-introduced Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying). Bill C-7 is identical to former Bill C-7, which died on the Order Paper following the prorogation of Parliament in August 2020. Bill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.Bill C-7 proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request.The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledJanuary 25, 2021432-00280432-00280 (Justice)KarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonConservativeONNovember 24, 2020January 25, 2021April 30, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn October 5, 2020, the Government re-introduced Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying). Bill C-7 is identical to former Bill C-7, which died on the Order Paper following the prorogation of Parliament in August 2020. Bill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.Bill C-7 proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request.The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledJanuary 25, 2021432-00277432-00277 (Justice)GlenMotzMedicine Hat—Cardston—WarnerConservativeABNovember 24, 2020January 25, 2021April 30, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn October 5, 2020, the Government re-introduced Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying). Bill C-7 is identical to former Bill C-7, which died on the Order Paper following the prorogation of Parliament in August 2020. Bill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.Bill C-7 proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request.The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledJanuary 25, 2021432-00274432-00274 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABNovember 24, 2020January 25, 2021June 2, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn October 5, 2020, the Government re-introduced Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying). Bill C-7 is identical to former Bill C-7, which died on the Order Paper following the prorogation of Parliament in August 2020. Bill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.Bill C-7 proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request.The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledJanuary 25, 2021432-00416432-00416 (Justice)CathayWagantallYorkton—MelvilleConservativeSKDecember 10, 2020January 25, 2021December 2, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and; Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and; Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation; Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to: 1) Restore the 10-day reflection period for people whose deaths have been determined to be "reasonably foreseeable"; 2) Restore the original requirement that a person must give consent to the life-ending procedure immediately before it is performed; 3) Restore the original requirements for the signatures of two witnesses, who cannot provide personal care to the person seeking to end their life; 4) Require medical professionals to do everything possible to enable the person to access life-affirming services to relieve their suffering other than physician-assisted death; and, 5) Accommodate persons with communication disabilities by clarifying "refusal or resistance to administration" of physician-assisted death.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn February 24, 2020, the Government of Canada introduced Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying), to amend the provisions related to medical assistance in dying (MAID) in response to the Superior Court of Québec’s September 2019 Truchon decision, and to address issues on which there is emerging societal consensus. On October 5, 2020, the Government re-introduced the Bill.Our Government believes that those who are experiencing enduring and intolerable suffering from their medical condition – including those who are not approaching the end of life – should be allowed to decide for themselves when they wish to end their life, and that medical and nurse practitioners who are willing to help them have a peaceful and painless death should not be criminally culpable for doing so.As the Truchon decision applies only in Québec, Bill C-7 proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the MAID law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining MAID, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards to apply to a particular MAID request.The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by patients and their families, healthcare professionals and other stakeholders that these safeguards pose an access barrier to MAID, do not provide protection to vulnerable persons, and unnecessarily prolong patient suffering.For this group of persons, a waiver of the requirement for consent, to be given immediately before MAID is provided, would also be possible under Bill C-7. This change would ensure that persons do not choose to have MAID earlier than they would like out of fear of losing their capacity to consent on their preferred day. If a person retains decision-making capacity on their preferred day, they must give consent in whatever manner of communication they are able. If they do not have decision-making capacity, the legislation clarifies that the procedure must not go forward if the person demonstrates refusal or resistance to the administration of MAID by words, gestures or sounds.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request MAID and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request MAID. The new safeguards for this group include all of the safeguards that apply to the first group, along with new and enhanced safeguards, to ensure that a request by a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable is fully informed and considered, and that patients have been informed about and have seriously considered all reasonable and available treatment options and social services.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations held at the beginning of 2020 with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill protects vulnerable individuals and the equality rights of all Canadians, while supporting the autonomy of eligible persons to seek MAID.
Application processCapacity of consent for careHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanismPersons with disabilities
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledJanuary 25, 2021432-00405432-00405 (Justice)BradVisMission—Matsqui—Fraser CanyonConservativeBCDecember 9, 2020January 25, 2021June 2, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn October 5, 2020, the Government re-introduced Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying). Bill C-7 is identical to former Bill C-7, which died on the Order Paper following the prorogation of Parliament in August 2020. Bill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.Bill C-7 proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request.The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledJanuary 25, 2021432-00400432-00400 (Justice)JohnWilliamsonNew Brunswick SouthwestConservativeNBDecember 9, 2020January 25, 2021December 2, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and; Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and; Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation; Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to: 1) Restore the 10-day reflection period for people whose deaths have been determined to be "reasonably foreseeable"; 2) Restore the original requirement that a person must give consent to the life-ending procedure immediately before it is performed; 3) Restore the original requirements for the signatures of two witnesses, who cannot provide personal care to the person seeking to end their life; 4) Require medical professionals to do everything possible to enable the person to access life-affirming services to relieve their suffering other than physician-assisted death; and, 5) Accommodate persons with communication disabilities by clarifying "refusal or resistance to administration" of physician-assisted death.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn February 24, 2020, the Government of Canada introduced Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying), to amend the provisions related to medical assistance in dying (MAID) in response to the Superior Court of Québec’s September 2019 Truchon decision, and to address issues on which there is emerging societal consensus. On October 5, 2020, the Government re-introduced the Bill.Our Government believes that those who are experiencing enduring and intolerable suffering from their medical condition – including those who are not approaching the end of life – should be allowed to decide for themselves when they wish to end their life, and that medical and nurse practitioners who are willing to help them have a peaceful and painless death should not be criminally culpable for doing so.As the Truchon decision applies only in Québec, Bill C-7 proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the MAID law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining MAID, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards to apply to a particular MAID request.The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by patients and their families, healthcare professionals and other stakeholders that these safeguards pose an access barrier to MAID, do not provide protection to vulnerable persons, and unnecessarily prolong patient suffering.For this group of persons, a waiver of the requirement for consent, to be given immediately before MAID is provided, would also be possible under Bill C-7. This change would ensure that persons do not choose to have MAID earlier than they would like out of fear of losing their capacity to consent on their preferred day. If a person retains decision-making capacity on their preferred day, they must give consent in whatever manner of communication they are able. If they do not have decision-making capacity, the legislation clarifies that the procedure must not go forward if the person demonstrates refusal or resistance to the administration of MAID by words, gestures or sounds.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request MAID and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request MAID. The new safeguards for this group include all of the safeguards that apply to the first group, along with new and enhanced safeguards, to ensure that a request by a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable is fully informed and considered, and that patients have been informed about and have seriously considered all reasonable and available treatment options and social services.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations held at the beginning of 2020 with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill protects vulnerable individuals and the equality rights of all Canadians, while supporting the autonomy of eligible persons to seek MAID.
Application processCapacity of consent for careHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanismPersons with disabilities
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledJanuary 25, 2021432-00397432-00397 (Justice)DamienKurekBattle River—CrowfootConservativeABDecember 9, 2020January 25, 2021December 2, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn October 5, 2020, the Government re-introduced Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying). Bill C-7 is identical to former Bill C-7, which died on the Order Paper following the prorogation of Parliament in August 2020. Bill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.Bill C-7 proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request.The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledJanuary 25, 2021432-00391432-00391 (Justice)EricMelilloKenoraConservativeONDecember 9, 2020January 25, 2021December 2, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and; Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and; Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation; Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to: 1) Restore the 10-day reflection period for people whose deaths have been determined to be "reasonably foreseeable"; 2) Restore the original requirement that a person must give consent to the life-ending procedure immediately before it is performed; 3) Restore the original requirements for the signatures of two witnesses, who cannot provide personal care to the person seeking to end their life; 4) Require medical professionals to do everything possible to enable the person to access life-affirming services to relieve their suffering other than physician-assisted death; and, 5) Accommodate persons with communication disabilities by clarifying "refusal or resistance to administration" of physician-assisted death.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn February 24, 2020, the Government of Canada introduced Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying), to amend the provisions related to medical assistance in dying (MAID) in response to the Superior Court of Québec’s September 2019 Truchon decision, and to address issues on which there is emerging societal consensus. On October 5, 2020, the Government re-introduced the Bill.Our Government believes that those who are experiencing enduring and intolerable suffering from their medical condition – including those who are not approaching the end of life – should be allowed to decide for themselves when they wish to end their life, and that medical and nurse practitioners who are willing to help them have a peaceful and painless death should not be criminally culpable for doing so.As the Truchon decision applies only in Québec, Bill C-7 proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the MAID law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining MAID, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards to apply to a particular MAID request.The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by patients and their families, healthcare professionals and other stakeholders that these safeguards pose an access barrier to MAID, do not provide protection to vulnerable persons, and unnecessarily prolong patient suffering.For this group of persons, a waiver of the requirement for consent, to be given immediately before MAID is provided, would also be possible under Bill C-7. This change would ensure that persons do not choose to have MAID earlier than they would like out of fear of losing their capacity to consent on their preferred day. If a person retains decision-making capacity on their preferred day, they must give consent in whatever manner of communication they are able. If they do not have decision-making capacity, the legislation clarifies that the procedure must not go forward if the person demonstrates refusal or resistance to the administration of MAID by words, gestures or sounds.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request MAID and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request MAID. The new safeguards for this group include all of the safeguards that apply to the first group, along with new and enhanced safeguards, to ensure that a request by a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable is fully informed and considered, and that patients have been informed about and have seriously considered all reasonable and available treatment options and social services.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations held at the beginning of 2020 with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill protects vulnerable individuals and the equality rights of all Canadians, while supporting the autonomy of eligible persons to seek MAID.
Application processCapacity of consent for careHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanismPersons with disabilities
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledJanuary 25, 2021432-00387432-00387 (Justice)BradRedekoppSaskatoon WestConservativeSKDecember 9, 2020January 25, 2021June 2, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn October 5, 2020, the Government re-introduced Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying). Bill C-7 is identical to former Bill C-7, which died on the Order Paper following the prorogation of Parliament in August 2020. Bill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.Bill C-7 proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request.The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledJanuary 25, 2021432-00209432-00209 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABNovember 4, 2020January 25, 2021June 2, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn October 5, 2020, the Government re-introduced Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying). Bill C-7 is identical to former Bill C-7, which died on the Order Paper following the prorogation of Parliament in August 2020. Bill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.Bill C-7 proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request.The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledJanuary 25, 2021432-00197432-00197 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABNovember 2, 2020January 25, 2021June 2, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn October 5, 2020, the Government re-introduced Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying). Bill C-7 is identical to former Bill C-7, which died on the Order Paper following the prorogation of Parliament in August 2020. Bill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.Bill C-7 proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request.The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledDecember 9, 2020432-00154432-00154 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABOctober 26, 2020December 9, 2020June 19, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn October 5, 2020, the Government re-introduced Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying). Bill C-7 is identical to former Bill C-7, which died on the Order Paper following the prorogation of Parliament in August 2020. Bill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.Bill C-7 proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request.The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledNovember 23, 2020432-00095432-00095 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABOctober 8, 2020November 23, 2020June 19, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn October 5, 2020, the Government re-introduced Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying). Bill C-7 is identical to former Bill C-7, which died on the Order Paper following the prorogation of Parliament in August 2020. Bill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.Bill C-7 proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request.The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledNovember 23, 2020432-00088432-00088 (Justice)ArnoldViersenPeace River—WestlockConservativeABOctober 8, 2020November 23, 2020June 19, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn October 5, 2020, the Government re-introduced Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying). Bill C-7 is identical to former Bill C-7, which died on the Order Paper following the prorogation of Parliament in August 2020. Bill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.Bill C-7 proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request.The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledNovember 18, 2020432-00059432-00059 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABOctober 5, 2020November 18, 2020April 30, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn October 5, 2020, the Government re-introduced Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying). Bill C-7 is identical to former Bill C-7, which died on the Order Paper following the prorogation of Parliament in August 2020. Bill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.Bill C-7 proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request.The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledNovember 16, 2020432-00003432-00003 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABSeptember 24, 2020November 16, 2020April 30, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiOn October 5, 2020, the Government re-introduced Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying). Bill C-7 is identical to former Bill C-7, which died on the Order Paper following the prorogation of Parliament in August 2020. Bill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime.Bill C-7 proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request.The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflects the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledSeptember 24, 2020431-00240431-00240 (Justice)TamaraJansenCloverdale—Langley CityConservativeBCJune 8, 2020September 24, 2020April 30, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiBill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime. The Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on February 24, 2020, and is at Second Reading in the House of Commons.The Bill proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request. The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second   independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period is unnecessary and prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying often do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflect the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose deaths are not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person who is not dying to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledSeptember 24, 2020431-00260431-00260 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABJune 15, 2020September 24, 2020April 30, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiBill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying), responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime. The Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on February 24, 2020, and is at Second Reading in the House of Commons.The Bill proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request. The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period, would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period is unnecessary and prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying often do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflect the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose deaths are not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person who is not dying to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledSeptember 24, 2020431-00265431-00265 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABJune 16, 2020September 24, 2020April 30, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiBill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying), responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime. The Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on February 24, 2020, and is at Second Reading in the House of Commons.The Bill proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request. The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period, would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period is unnecessary and prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying often do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflect the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose deaths are not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person who is not dying to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledSeptember 24, 2020431-00292431-00292 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABJune 18, 2020September 24, 2020April 30, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiBill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying), responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime. The Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on February 24, 2020, and is at Second Reading in the House of Commons.The Bill proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request. The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period, would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period is unnecessary and prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying often do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflect the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose deaths are not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person who is not dying to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledJuly 20, 2020431-00226431-00226 (Justice)ArnoldViersenPeace River—WestlockConservativeABJune 2, 2020July 20, 2020April 30, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiBill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime. The Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on February 24, 2020, and is at Second Reading in the House of Commons.The Bill proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request. The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period is unnecessary and prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying often do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflect the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose deaths are not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person who is not dying to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledJuly 20, 2020431-00223431-00223 (Justice)ArnoldViersenPeace River—WestlockConservativeABJune 1, 2020July 20, 2020April 30, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiBill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime. The Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on February 24, 2020, and is at Second Reading in the House of Commons.The Bill proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request. The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period is unnecessary and prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying often do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflect the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose deaths are not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person who is not dying to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledJuly 20, 2020431-00219431-00219 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABMay 28, 2020July 20, 2020April 30, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiBill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime. The Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on February 24, 2020, and is at Second Reading in the House of Commons.The Bill proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request. The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period is unnecessary and prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying often do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflect the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose deaths are not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person who is not dying to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledJuly 20, 2020431-00217431-00217 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABMay 27, 2020July 20, 2020April 30, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiBill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime. The Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on February 24, 2020, and is at Second Reading in the House of Commons.The Bill proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request. The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period is unnecessary and prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying often do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflect the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose deaths are not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person who is not dying to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledJuly 20, 2020431-00201431-00201 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABMay 20, 2020July 20, 2020April 30, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiBill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime. The Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on February 24, 2020, and is at Second Reading in the House of Commons.The Bill proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request. The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second   independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period is unnecessary and prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying often do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflect the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose deaths are not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person who is not dying to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledJuly 20, 2020431-00195431-00195 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABMay 19, 2020July 20, 2020April 30, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiBill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime. The Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on February 24, 2020, and is at Second Reading in the House of Commons.The Bill proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request. The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second   independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period is unnecessary and prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying often do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflect the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose deaths are not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person who is not dying to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledJuly 20, 2020431-00175431-00175 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABMay 7, 2020July 20, 2020April 30, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiBill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime. The Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on February 24, 2020, and is at Second Reading in the House of Commons.The Bill proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request. The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second   independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period is unnecessary and prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying often do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflect the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose deaths are not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person who is not dying to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism
43rd Parliament223Government response tabledJuly 20, 2020431-00165431-00165 (Justice)GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanConservativeABMay 5, 2020July 20, 2020April 30, 2020Petition to the House of CommonsWe, the undersigned citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following:Whereas Bill C-7 further removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime, including the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses, thereby allowing a person's euthanasia request to be accepted and carried out within the same day and without robust consultation; and;Whereas the removal of the second required independent witness reduces oversight of the procedure, thereby leaving vulnerable persons at risk of abuse; and;Whereas the Canadian Government has an obligation to protect its citizens, especially those who are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation;Therefore we, the undersigned, urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable persons.
Response by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): The Honourable David LamettiBill C-7 responds to the September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling in Truchon,which struck down the eligibility criterion of “reasonably foreseeable natural death” from the Criminal Code medical assistance in dying regime. The Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on February 24, 2020, and is at Second Reading in the House of Commons.The Bill proposes to amend the Criminal Code to ensure consistency of the medical assistance in dying law across the country. The reasonably foreseeable natural death criterion would no longer apply as an eligibility criterion that could exclude persons from obtaining medical assistance in dying, and would instead be used to determine which of two different sets of safeguards apply to a particular medical assistance in dying request. The Bill’s first set of safeguards would continue to be tailored to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, where risks are reduced given the overall proximity of death and the fact that their suffering is most likely linked to the dying process itself. The removal of the requirement of a second independent witness and the repeal of the 10-day reflection period would respond to the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to the effect that: finding two independent witnesses is a challenge for many patients and poses an access barrier to medical assistance in dying; and, the 10-day reflection period is unnecessary and prolongs patient suffering unduly, as persons who request medical assistance in dying often do so after careful consideration.The Bill’s second set of safeguards reflect the more serious consequences of error for persons who request medical assistance in dying and whose deaths are not reasonably foreseeable. It recognizes the diverse sources of suffering and vulnerability that could potentially lead a person who is not dying to request medical assistance in dying. The new safeguards for this group include a minimum 90-day assessment period, a requirement that one of the two eligibility assessments must be conducted by an expert, and clarifications related to informed consent.The amendments proposed in Bill C-7 were informed by consultations with Canadians, the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, key stakeholders, experts, and practitioners. The Bill supports greater autonomy and freedom of choice for eligible persons, and provides appropriate safeguards to protect those who may be vulnerable.
Application processHealth care systemMedical assistance in dyingOversight mechanism