{"id":6506,"date":"2016-02-25T23:55:13","date_gmt":"2016-02-26T07:55:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/news.consciencelaws.org\/?p=6506"},"modified":"2018-04-26T22:10:59","modified_gmt":"2018-04-27T05:10:59","slug":"canadian-parliamentary-committee-recommends-mandatory-participation-in-euthanasia-assisted-suicide","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/news.consciencelaws.org\/?p=6506","title":{"rendered":"Canadian parliamentary committee recommends mandatory participation in euthanasia, assisted suicide"},"content":{"rendered":"

Federal committee\u00a0wants provincial governments to address most contentious issue<\/h2>\n

News Release<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

Protection of Conscience Project<\/p>\n

A special joint committee of the Canadian House of Commons and Senate\u00a0has produced a first report concerning legalization of euthanasia and physician assisted suicide.<\/p>\n

The report recommends that physicians who, for reasons of conscience, are unwilling to\u00a0kill patients or help them to commit suicide\u00a0\u00a0should be compelled to find someone willing to do so.\u00a0 It also recommends that all publicly funded facilities – not excluding objecting denominational institutions – be compelled\"Canadian
\nto provide <\/em>euthanasia and assisted suicide.\u00a0 This goes beyond recommendations made by others to the effect that objecting institutions should at least allow<\/em>\u00a0an external provider to\u00a0perform the procedures on their premises.\u00a0 It also ignores the advice of the Canadian Medical Association, which told the Committee <\/a>that euthanasia and assisted suicide could be provided without suppressing freedom of conscience by forcing objecting physicians\u00a0to refer for the procedures.<\/p>\n

The main report is followed by a dissenting report signed by four Conservative (C) Members of Parliament.\u00a0 With respect to freedom of conscience, the dissenting report erroneously states, “Quebec physicians are free to act according to their conscience,” and recommends\u00a0Quebec legislation that is purported to accommodate freedom of conscience and religion.\u00a0 The Quebec model has been rejected<\/a> by many objecting physicians because it requires them to become parties to homicide by referring a patient to an administrator, who will arrange for euthanasia.<\/p>\n

A supplementary opinion filed by two New Democrat (NDP) Members of Parliament states that legislation “must ensure that every eligible patient\u2019s right to access medical aid in dying is upheld, and protect any healthcare professional who objects for reasons of conscience from disciplinary action.”\u00a0 However, the authors of the supplementary opinion do not dissent from the main report, so they must mean that objecting physicians should<\/em> be disciplined if they refuse to arrange for someone to kill patients or help them commit suicide.<\/p>\n

In Canada, the federal government has no jurisdiction over the regulation of medical practice or the operation of hospitals.\u00a0 In effect, then, the committee wants\u00a0the federal government\u00a0to pressure provincial governments to force unwilling\u00a0physicians, health care workers\u00a0and institutions to become parties to homicide and suicide.\u00a0 This is arguably more contentious than the legalization of assisted suicide and euthanasia, so it is politically advantageous for the federal government to pass this particular buck to the provinces.<\/p>\n

The federal government has full jurisdiction to prevent people from being forced to\u00a0become parties to homicide and suicide, and this was recommended <\/a>to the Committee by the Protection of Conscience Project and others.\u00a0 Instead, the Committee has taken the opposite tack, insisting that the state should impose and enforce an obligation to kill, even upon those who believe that killing people or helping them to commit suicide is gravely wrong.<\/p>\n