Testimony to Government

This page is dedicated to the public testimony that has NOT been heeded by the parliaments, courts, governments and committees over the years. You can watch the whole session by clicking on the link at the top of each meeting — you will be taken to the website where you can watch 5-minute presentations, followed by questions from committee members. Clips featured on this page highlight outstanding testimony by disabled advocates and allies. Most recent evidence is featured up top, and older evidence is farther down.

**********************************************************************************

2026 (April and May)

This round of meetings was dedicated to determining if Canadian systems are ready, willing and able to remove criminal sanctions from doctors and nurse practitioners who provide MAID to people whose sole underlying medical condition is a mental illness.

May 5, 2026 — AMAD Meeting #7 (Final Meeting for this round).

Panel #1 – Testimony from Dutch Psychiatrists

• Dr. Jim van Os, Professor of Psychiatry, University of Utrecht, and Fellow of Kings College in London, UK

“My message to Canada is this: Do not expand. The evidence is not there. The UN, the International Association for Suicide Prevention and our lived experience point the same way. The social trials that we ran in the Netherlands show another path: care that builds relational continuity, hope and connectedness. That is the system worth building, not procedural pathways to death.”

• Dr. Wilbert van Rooij, Psychiatrist

“When [patients] say to me, “I don’t want to live anymore,” in most cases they are not asking to die. Often they are asking for pain to stop, for meaning to return and for someone to not give up on them.”
“As a psychiatrist, I am trained to tolerate despair without endorsing it, to stay present and still say, “I don’t know the answer yet, but I am not done with you.” That stance is not paternalism. It’s fidelity.”
“If you extend euthanasia to psychiatric suffering, you will not simply add an option. You will reshape the moral landscape of care.”

• Dr. Sisco van Veen, Psychiatrist, Amsterdam Medical Centre;
(Pro psychiatric MAID, against polarization of debate)

Panel #1 Q&A

Panel #2

• Alicia Duncan, Family member

“My mother’s death demonstrated these three things: One, families cannot reliably intervene to stop a MAID death in real time, even in a clear crisis. Two, after death, there is no effective pathway to determine whether the law was followed. Three, oversight in this system, therefore, is not verifiable in practice.”

• Helen Long, Chief Executive Officer, Dying with Dignity Canada

• Alexander Schadenberg, Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

“I’ll only highlight one key issue. Section 241.2(3) and section 241.2(3.1) of the Criminal Code state that medical practitioners or nurse practitioners are only required to be “of the opinion” that the eligibility criteria are met. Now, we’re talking about life and death decisions here. That, in practice, makes accountability extremely difficult, and it makes it impossible to prosecute a medical or nurse practitioner in Canada, even when the MAID death is clearly wrong or deeply disturbing.”

Panel 2 Q&A

Part 3 of this final AMAD meeting was held in camera.

****************************************************************************

April 28, 2026 — AMAD Meeting #6

Panel #1

• Prof. Brian Mishara, Director, Centre for Research and Intervention on Suicide, Ethical Issues and End-of-Life Practices, Université du Québec à Montréal

” I believe MAID should be available when suffering is not remediable by other means. However, in the case of mental illness, this is not possible to determine. I believe suicides are preventable, even in seemingly hopeless situations. I agree with the position of the International Association for Suicide Prevention that the overlap between MAID requests and suicide makes it impossible to distinguish between them and that MAID for mental illness will undermine suicide prevention by communicating that death is a viable alternative to treatment.”

• Dr. Sanjeev Sockalingam, Senior Vice-President, Education and Chief Medical Officer, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health

“In sum, only when we have evidence-informed, consensus-based criteria for determining the irremediability of a person’s mental illness and for distinguishing between a request for MAID and suicide intent—and only when such criteria can be introduced into a well-resourced mental health system—would it be possible to offer safe, adequate and equitable MAID services to people whose sole underlying condition is mental illness. That is why CAMH recommends that the federal government delay indefinitely the extension of MAID eligibility to people whose sole underlying condition is a mental illness.”

Panel #1 Q&A

Panel #2

• Neil Belanger, Chief Executive Officer, Indigenous Disability Canada

“IDC was the lead organization working with over 55 national disability groups on Canada’s second and third reviews of the CRPD. From this review, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities recommended to Canada, under article 10, which is the right to life, to repeal track 2 MAID, including the provision to expand MAID to those whose “sole underlying medical condition is a mental illness”. To date, despite one year passing, Canada has failed to respond.”

“Simply put, if this expansion is allowed, there is no way to predict that the individual euthanized could not have led a good life and a full life once proper supports and treatments were in place. There are no safeguards, policies or procedures that can be put in place to correct this.”

– Roderick McCormick, Professor, Indigenous Health, Thompson Rivers University

“The expansion of MAID for mental illness goes against every effort I have made in my work in suicide prevention and life promotion.”
” MAID is culturally biased, in my opinion, in that it emphasizes the individual’s right to autonomy and choice without taking others into consideration. Other cultures do not place such a high value on individualism and autonomy. By encouraging indigenous people to put individual rights ahead of collective responsibilities, Canada is, in a sense, perpetuating colonization.”

“What do I mean by an abdication of responsibility? If we don’t provide the care that people need, then we shouldn’t be offering them death as an alternative to that care. There is a failure to understand that appropriate and timely help is the key to survival. “
“How can we, as Canadian citizens, empower our communities and governments so that they feel able to respond? Until we figure that out, I urge the Canadian government to continue to prohibit the use of MAID for mental illness and to instead take the responsible path by improving the mental health services available to indigenous people and to all Canadians.”

Panel #2 Q&A

********************************************************************************

April 27, 2026 — AMAD Meeting #5

Panel #1

• Dr. Margaret McKinnon, Professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioural Neurosciences, McMaster University; also a person with a long history of depression and suicidal ideation.

“I therefore appeal to the committee on two fronts. The first is to consider Canadians who, like me, will feel at risk and unsafe should this legislation be enacted. The second is to acknowledge that not all Canadians will have equal access to all recommended gold standard treatments prior to undergoing MAID in a country marked by economic, geographic and cultural inequities that continue to persist despite marked efforts to address such wrongs.”

• Dr. Lilian Thorpe, Full Professor, Department of Community Health and Epidemiology and Department of Psychiatry, University of Saskatchewan

Note: Dr. Thorpe is generally pro-MAID for Track 1 patients; Track 2 also, by reputation; but in this presentation she is on-the-fence about Track 2 and MDSUMC in particular. In her experience, Track 2 MAID requests often spring from unmet need; She testifies that Saskatchewan has hired extra social workers to make sure Track 2 applicants are supported to live and is wary that the need for dignified life supports would be much greater if MDSUMC becomes legal.

• Dr. Stefanie Green, CAMAP; MAiD Provider.

• Dr. Gordon Gubitz, CAMAP; MAiD Provider (Q&A ONLY)

PANEL #1 Q&A

Panel #2

• Dr. Eliana Close, End of Life Research Program, Australian Centre for Health Law Research, Queensland University of Technology

• Dr. Allison Crawford, Chief Medical Officer, 9-8-8: Suicide Crisis Helpline; University of Toronto

” I’ll be direct. I do not believe Canada should expand MAID to include those whose underlying condition is a mental disorder.
I’m basing that on four core points:
1) what we’re seeing at 988,
2) the absence of evidence that requests for MAID for mental disorder can be reliably distinguished from suicidal intent,
3) shortcomings of recent clinical guidance, and
4) public health and media risks.

“As it becomes more visible, the absence of responsible public messaging increases the risk that people will see MAID as a means of alleviating their mental suffering. This will undermine suicide prevention efforts.”
” Suicide is preventable. The vast majority of people who contemplate or attempt suicide do not go on to die by suicide. Public health approaches to suicide prevention have been a priority in Canada, which is one of the reasons that the establishment of 988 received unanimous support in the House of Commons. Given the significant overlap between suicidal thoughts and behaviours in MAID, we will best serve those who are suffering by enhancing suicide prevention efforts and by shifting our focus to medical assistance in living. That is what Canadians deserve.”

• Dr. Douglas Grant, Registrar and Chief Executive Officer, College of Physicians and Surgeons of Nova Scotia;

Panel #2 Q&A Part 1; Panel #2 Q&A Part 2

Panel #3

• Dr. Jitender Sareen, Head of Psychiatry and Professor, Department of Psychiatry, University of Manitoba

“As for Manitoba, when this issue was brought to our provincial psychiatry leadership council in 2022, and again in 2026 in the context of operational planning, the council reached a clear consensus on both occasions that expansion to mental disorders should not proceed.”

• Dr. Sandip Singh Gandham, Assistant Clinical Professor, Department of Family Medicine, University of Alberta

“I’m a family physician with experience working in addictions medicine, mental health and end-of-life care. My perspectives are shaped by providing care for those with profound suffering, including an expressed wish to die. I’ve also worked as a MAID assessor and provider since 2016. I come to the discussion not as an ideologue, but as a clinician who has sat with suffering in many forms—physical, mental, existential and social.”
“In my view and from my clinical experience, the risks of proceeding currently outweigh the potential benefits. These risks are not just incidental; they’re fundamental.”
“Recovery in mental illness can be non-linear and surprising. Patients who at one point seemed like they were beyond hope may later improve from treatment, sometimes because their circumstances change—housing stabilizes, trauma is addressed, substance use remits, relationships repair or hope returns—and sometimes simply from the passage of time itself. I’ve seen patients who had once believed death was their only relief find stability, meaning and reasons to live later. That uncertainty matters deeply when the intervention being considered is irreversible.”
“Where doubt exists in matters of life and death, where prognosis is uncertain and where vulnerability is profound, caution is not paternalism. It is an ethical responsibility.”

• Melissa Prokopy, Vice-President, Policy and Advocacy, Ontario Hospital Association presenting with Dr. Kevin Young, Vice-President, Medical Affairs and Chief of Staff, Waypoint Centre for Mental Health

“I want to outline three key concerns we have heard from our hospital members with respect to the proposed expansion:
1) existing challenges to access to mental health care services more broadly,
2) the impact of inequities in accessing these services by different parts of the population, and
3) broader system readiness by health care providers to deliver MAID.”

“Recent data from the Canadian Institute for Health Information reveals that 41% of adults aged 18 or older who were diagnosed with mental health disorders say that their needs were only partially met or were completely unmet. These challenges are relevant not just on a patient level but also when looking at overall system readiness.”
“Statistics Canada reported in 2024 that among indigenous people who required or were seeking mental health care, the vast majority—approximately three-quarters—reported that their needs were unmet or partially met.”

“Our final point is that hospitals have identified clinical gaps that constrain system capacity. For example, we have heard that there is still no clear agreement among clinicians about determining eligibility for MAID where mental illness is the sole medical condition. This includes how to decide whether mental illness cannot be treated and how to tell the difference between a MAID request and suicidal intent.”
“Given the lack of clinical consensus across the board on MAID at an individual level, we think the focus at this point in time should really be on broader access to mental health services across the health care continuum.”

Panel #3 Q&A


****************************************************************************

April 21, 2026 — AMAD Meeting #4

Panel #1:

• Dr. Christopher Lyon, Visiting Research Fellow, Centre for Death and Society, University of Bath (by videoconference)

” I find myself forced to ask very uncomfortable questions about what happens in those secret encounters with patients, despite all the MAID laws and safeguards meant to protect them from negligent care or unlawful death.”


• Dr. John Maher, Psychiatrist, Ontario Association for ACT & FACT (by videoconference)



Panel 1 Q&A

Panel #2:
– Gabrielle Peters, Co-Founder, Disability Filibuster
(by videoconference)

– Dr. Catherine Frazee, Professor Emerita,
School of Disability Studies, Toronto Metropolitan University
(by videoconference)


– Dr. Michelle Hewitt, Board Chair,
Disability Without Poverty (by videoconference)


– Krista Carr, Chief Executive Officer, Inclusion Canada

Panel 2 Q&A

Panel #3:
– Dr. Kerri A. Froc, Associate Professor, University of New Brunswick


– Daphne Gilbert, Full Professor, University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law; VICE-CHAIR OF DYING WITH DIGNITY CANADA (although appearing as an individual …)


– Dr. Elizabeth Sheehy, Professor Emerita of Law, University of Ottawa
– Dr. Isabel Grant, University Killam Professor, University of British Columbia (Q&A Only)

Panel 3 Q&A

*********************************************************************************

April 14, 2026 — AMAD Meeting #3
Panel #1:
Sarah Lawley, ADM, Health Policy Branch, Department of Health
Kimberly Gibner, DADM, Policy Section; Department of Justice
Julia Nicol, Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section

Government advisors panel Q&A

Panel #2:
– Dr. Claire Gamache, psychiatrist, and Dr. Guillaume Barbès-Morin, psychiatrist, Association des médecins psychiatres du Québec.


– Dr. Ramona Coelho, family physician


– Dr. Karin Neufeld, psychiatrist and chair of the department of psychiatry at McMaster University.

Panel #2 Q&A

Panel #3

–Dr. Harvey Max Chochinov, Distinguished professor of psychiatry, University of Manitoba

–Dr. Pierre Gagnon, Psychiatrist in Palliative Care

Panel #3 Q&A

*********************************************************************************

March 24, 2026 — AMAD Meeting #2
– Dr. Sonu Gaind, professor of psychiatry, faculty of medicine, University of Toronto


– Dr. Mona Gupta, full clinical professor, Department of Psychiatry and Addictions, Université de Montréal. (testifying to clinical readiness)

Meeting #2 – Q&A

******************************************************************************

March 10, 2026 — AMAD Meeting #1 was given to the election of new joint chairs and other procedural matters. Part 2 of the meeting was held in camera.
This round of meetings is dedicated to determining if Canadian systems are ready, willing and able to remove criminal sanctions from doctors and nurse practitioners who provide MAID to people whose sole underlying medical condition is a mental illness.

**********************************************************************************

**********************************************************************************

AMAD 2023

November 28, 2023 — AMAD Meeting #40

If you have time to watch the entire hearing, I would strongly encourage you to do so. Here are some outstanding presentations.

Part 1 of Meeting #40

Testimony of Professor Archie Kaiser, Professor, Schulich School of Law and Department of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine (Cross-Appointment), Dalhousie University


Testimony of Dr. Tarek Rajji, Chair,
Medical Advisory Committee, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH)

Session Q&A

Part 2 of Meeting #40

Testimony of Dr. Sonu Gaind

Testimony of Dr. Eleanor Gittens, Clinical Psychologist

Part 2 Session Q&A
Additional Questions and Points of Order

************************************************************

November 21, 2023 — AMAD Meeting #39
The committee heard testimony again from presenters. Most of the witnesses were there to tell the committee members how safe and secure things are looking from their point of view. We learned how to pronounce MAiD – MDSUMC: It goes like this “Maid eMDee Sum See”, in a kind of sing-song voice (Think Humpty Dumpty).

One presenter, Trudo Lemmens, challenged their thinking based on evidence from Belgium and the Netherlands, as well as many legal scholars here in Canada. A head of psychiatry in Manitoba gave powerful evidence, then dealt deftly with questions in the Q&A. Presenters on the side of caution were out-numbered eight to two.

Here is that testimony:

Part 1:
Testimony of Trudo Lemmens, Professor, Scholl Chair, Health Law and Policy, Faculty of Law, University of Toronto

The rest of the witnesses in Part 1 and Part 2 of meeting #39 were not speaking to our safety concerns.

Part 3 of Meeting #39

Testimony of Dr. Jitender Sareen, Head of University of Manitoba Department of Psychiatry

with Dr. Pierre Gagnon, Director of Department of Psychiatry and Neurosciences, Université Laval

And speaking for 6 other university heads of psychiatry (8 out of 16) across the country.

Session Q & A

******************************************************************************

November 16, 2023
LWD made a paper Submission to the Joint Committee on MAiD – MDSUMC, urging them to exercise extreme caution in authorizing a new category of people who can legally be terminated by MAID practitioners. You can read our submission here.

November 7, 2023
AMAD met to consider whether or not the Canadian “medical, legal and political systems” are prepared for the inclusion of MAID – MDSUC in the system. MDSUC stands for Medical Assistance in Dying for people for whom a Mental Disorder is the Sole Underlying Condition. What are “Mental Disorders” ? This broad term covers everything that is included in the DSM5, apparently — everything from cognitive and intellectual disabilities, dementia, all the conditions associated with post-traumatic stress, everyone on the autism spectrum, anyone with an eating disorder, depression, anxiety, obsessive/compulsive disorder, learning disabilities, mood disorders, an on and on.

The committee’s Meeting #38 was on November 7th. The link will take you to the hearing, which you can watch in full if you have three hours to spare. It must report by the end of January 2024. If it believes the “experts” as it has been prone to do in the past, the change in the law will go ahead. The “experts” are convinced that there’s nothing to fret about. People with disabilities, by and large. disagree, some vehemently. They do not feel “safeguarded” by the safeguards that the “experts” are happy with. A lot of psychiatrists disagree with the experts who are speaking for them, and agree with people with disabilities and “mental disorders”. So … time will tell.

2023 – Quebec Bill 11

The bill was read and reviewed by the Quebec Commission on End-of-Life Care. “The provisions of this Act will come into force on the date or dates to be set by the Government“.
The Bill allows advance requests, which are not yet legal federally.
The bill provides that a mental disorder is not considered to be an illness.
The Bill states that palliative care hospices may not exclude medical aid in dying from the care they offer.
Amongst other changes.

Meanwhile, the Quebec Intellectual Disability Society submitted a brief to the Commission just in case they might be paying attention to voices of dissent from the community. The link will take you to their statement. You can click on the link included to read the entire excellent brief.

********************************************2022

2022: AMAD (Special Joint Committee)
Statutory Review – Medical Assistance in Dying
(after the passage of Bill c-7 which removed the “RFND” criterion (i.e. Reasonably Foreseeability of Natural Death)and added Track 2, allowing non-dying people with disabilities to apply for and receive medical assistance in dying (i.e. suicide assistance).

Note: This Committee’s Final Report was issued on February 15, 2023.

A video made by Inclusion Canada showing the disrespect and contempt shown to members of the disability rights communities as they presented their points of view to the committee.



Nov. 25, 2022 – AMAD Meeting 29 [Protection of People with Disabilities]

Image shows four women: Top row, Yonah Martin, panel co-chair; Catherine Frazee. Bottom row, Megan Linton; Isabel Grant

PANEL #1

Testimony of Dr. Catherine Frazee, TMU
Testimony of Isabel Grant, Professor, UBC School of Law
Testimony of Megan Linton, Researcher

Session Q & A

Part 2 of Meeting 29 [Mature Minors]

Testimony of Jennifer and Mike Schouten [Parents of Marcus]


*********************************************************************

Nov. 22, 2022 – AMAD Meeting 28 [Protection of People with Disabilities]

Panel 1:

Testimony of Dr. Heidi Janz, Associate Professor

Testimony of Tim Stainton, UBC


Session Q & A

Panel 2:

Testimony of Dr. Karen Ethans

Testimony of David Shannon

Session Q & A

************************************************************************

Nov. 18, 2022 – AMAD Meeting 27 [Protection of People with Disabilities]

Panel #1

Testimony of Gabrielle Peters, Disability Filibuster

Testimony of Krista Carr, Inclusion Canada



Session Q & A


Panel # 2


Testimony of the Duncan sisters, Daughters of Donna

Testimony of Kerri Joffe, ARCH

Session Q & A

Nov. 4, 2022 AMAD Meeting 25 [Inclusion of Mature Minors]



Part 1: Testimony of Elizabeth Sheehy, Law Professor and sister

Part 2: Testimony of Neil Belanger, Indigenous Disability Canada

Session Q & A (Part 1)
Session Q & A (Part 2)


October 28, 2022. AMAD Meeting 23 [Advance Directives]

Panel # 1

Testimony of Dr. Alice Chung, Geriatrician

Panel # 2

Testimony of Jonas-Sebastian Beaudry, McGill



Testimony of Dr. Marcia Sokolowski, Psychologist

Session Q & A

Testimony of a MAID practitioner (AMAD Meeting 23, Part 2)

I have included the shortest possible clip. This physician is a person who is not on our side of the argument. However it is notable that in her testimony, she freely (even cheerfully) tells the committee that she has been the consulting doctor on 800 MAID cases, and has actually provided at least 400 assisted deaths to date. This is a shockingly high number that should be accurately reflected in forthcoming Annual Reports.

In the most recent annual report there is no quantification beyond “10+”.

A colourful bar chart showing that most doctors have performed less than 9 assisted deaths.


This chart from the Annual Report requires some unpacking! The skinny bar at the top is misleading. 83.5% of doctors have performed less than 10 assisted suicides. About half of those, only 1. The 16.5% at the top represents a very big number of patients who had MAID performed by a very small number of physicians. While there may be good reasons to keep the identities of physicians confidential, there are NO good reasons for obscuring the facts in this way.

October 21, 2022. AMAD Meeting 21 [The state of palliative care in Canada]

Testimony of Derek Ross, CLF (Christian Legal Fellowship)

Session Q & A

October 18, AMAD Meeting 20 [The state of palliative care in Canada]

Testimony of Dr. Romayne Gallagher, UBC

Testimony of Baroness Finlay of Llandaff

Testimony of Dr. David Henderson, Integrated PC, NS

Testimony of Dr. Madeline Li, Psychiatrist & Ass. Professor

Q & A Session 1

Q & A Session 2

October 4, 2022 AMAD Meeting 18 [Mental Illness as sole underlying condition]

Testimony of Dr. Marie Nicolini, Psychiatrist, Ethicist, Researcher



September 23, 2022 AMAD Meeting 16 [Mental Illness as Sole Underlying Condition]

Testimony of Ellen Cohen, mental health consumer advocate, review panel resignee
[Ellen Cohen died in March 2025, in Geneva, Switzerland, while participating in ARCH’s presentation to the UN Committee on the CRPD.]

June 27, 2022

Testimony of Cheryl Romaire, MAiD applicant

June 16, 2022. AMAD Meeting 13 [Protection of Persons with Disabilities, and Mental Illness]

Testimony of Trish Nichols, Family member of Alan Nichols

June 6, 2022 AMAD Meeting 11 [Inclusion of Mature Minors]

Testimony of Ahona Mehdi, DJNO

Testimony of Henry Myeengun, Indigenous Knowledge Keeper

May 30, 2022 AMAD Meeting 10

Testimony of Dr. Ramona Coelho, Physician

Testimony of Michelle Hewitt, Disability without Poverty

Testimony of Bill Adair, Spinal Cord Injury Canada

Testimony of Amelie Duranleau and Samuel Ragot, Quebec Intellectual Disability Society

Testimony of Conrad Saulis, Wabenaki Council on Disability

May 26, 2022 AMAD Meeting 9 [Inclusion of Mental Illness]

Testimony of John Maher, Ontario Association for ACT & FACT

Testimony of Georgia Vrakas, Psychologist

Testimony of Mark Sinyor, Professor

May 25, 2022 AMAD Meeting 8 (Suicide Prevention)

Testimony of Brian Mishara, CRISE (Centre for Research and Intervention on Suicide, Ethical Issues and End-of-Life Practices)

Testimony of Sean Krausert, CASP (Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention)


May 16, 2022 AMAD Meeting 7

Testimony of Sara Jama, DJNO

Testimony of Brian Mishara, CRISE

May 9, 2022 AMAD Meeting 6 [Advance Requests]

Testimony of Trudo Lemmens, U of T

Testimony of Dr. Catherine Ferrier, Geriatric Medicine

Testimony of Dr. Romayne Gallagher, Palliative Care


May 5, 2022 AMAD Meeting 5 [Advance Requests]

Testimony of Michael Bach, IRIS


April 28, 2022 AMAD Meeting 4 (Palliative Care)

Testimony of Dr. Ebru Kaya, Canadian Society of Palliative Care Physicians

Testimony of Dr. Harvey Chochinov, U of Manitoba

Testimony of Dr. Marjorie Tremblay, Physician


April 25, 2022 AMAD Meeting 3

Testimony of Dr. Felix Pageau, Geriatrician

Testimony of Dr. Leonie Herx, Queen’s U, Palliative Care

Testimony of Dr. Sonu Gaind, Professor

April 13, 2022 AMAD Meeting 2

Testimony of Jay Potter, Acting Senior Counsel, Department of Justice

2021 AMAD – Special Joint Committee on Medical Assistance in Dying

Only a few meetings were held in 2021, somewhat pro forma, to technically comply with the 5-year time limit for review of the original legislation.

Jun 21, 2021 Meeting 3

Testimony of Trudo Lemmens, Law Professor, U of T;

Session Q & A

The Q & A involved the two witnesses, Trudo Lemmens and Jocelyn Downie.

2020

November 27, 2020. Submission to the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs by Laverne Jacobs, Law Professor; Canada’s representative to the UN – CRPD Committee (The first Canadian ever to be elected to that committee)

2020 – Bill C-7 – An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying) 

On October 5, 2020, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada introduced former Bill C-7: An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying) in Parliament, which proposed changes to Canada’s law on medical assistance in dying. These changes were introduced in response to the Superior Court of Québec’s 2019 Truchon decision, in which it found the “reasonable foreseeability of natural death” eligibility criteria in the Criminal Code, as well as the “end-of-life” criterion from Québec’s Act Respecting End-of-Life Care, to be unconstitutional. The Federal government chose not to appeal that decision, effectively allowing Quebec to change the law for the rest of Canada.

Pro forma public hearings ensued. The hearings are documented here. On March 17, 2021, Parliament passed former Bill C-7 to revise eligibility criteria for obtaining MAID and the process of assessment. These changes took effect immediately. 

There were several good speeches opposing Bill C7 from the floor of the Senate at third reading. Notable among these:

2016 – Bill C-14 – Legislative Processes

Senate Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights

May 3-17, 2016

Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs

May 4-12, 2016

Meetings of the Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs – 2016 – Bill C-14


Where can I get more information about The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, i.e. CAMH’s position on MAiD?

More to come! Please visit again …