Human Resources Committee on Nov. 20th, 2018

[Elizabeth Cahill, Committee Researcher]

The issue is not so much what we would need in terms of instructions from you guys and to draft the report; the issue is the production of a report that could be ready for consideration. It needs to be available in both languages. It also needs to be available now in a template that requires accessible format. That requires between two and a half to three weeks, just to turn around before we even write the report.

Unfortunately, it is the production of a report that the committee can consider in the formats that need to be available that is really the issue that makes it very difficult for us.

We calculated that if you gave us drafting instructions next.... Was it the 22nd?

[Matthew Blackshaw, Committee Researcher]

The original idea had been the 27th. I think Mr. Richards mentioned the 22nd.

[Elizabeth Cahill]

We'd basically have a couple of days to draft a report.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

No, that leaves you 12 days to draft the report.

[Elizabeth Cahill]

No, it's the production of the report that can be tabled to the committee, unfortunately.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

We have a request to suspend. I'm going to say—

Excuse me.

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

Given the analyst's comments here, I move that the debate be adjourned.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

I will point out that this is exactly what we expected to have happen, and it's very unfortunate.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Excuse me; you don't have the floor.

We have a vote. This is continued debate. We cannot continue debate. We have a motion.

All those in favour of that motion to adjourn the debate, please signify.

(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Mr. Richards, you have—

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

I'd ask people to note that the vote proceeded, and what side voted for it and what side voted against it. I think that makes it very clear what occurred here.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Mr. Richards, you have four minutes remaining on your time. Do you wish to use that time?

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Yes, I certainly do, Mr. Chair.

I find it incredibly unfortunate that despite evidence being presented to the contrary that this could be done—it certainly could be—it is very unfortunate that the government is choosing to ignore that evidence and to unfortunately not take this issue seriously for parents to make sure that they get the opportunity to see this done and dealt with before a federal election. I certainly hope that people will remember that and put the pressure on this government to move on a much faster timeline.

Having said that, I want to move now to some questioning. I do apologize for the interruption. That was obviously a very important thing, because we have to ensure that this gets dealt with. If the committee report is not dealt with before Christmas, we may lose the opportunity for it to get dealt with before a federal election, unfortunately. I would find it incredibly unfortunate for this to simply be a report that gathers dust on the shelf. That's why it was important that we do that.

Again, I apologize, but I do want to ask some questions, certainly.

I'll start with one that all of you—or any of you who would like to respond and are able to—can respond to.

It seems that throughout the study when we've heard from the various parents, and from advocates for grieving parents as well, two things have come up quite consistently. Some of you brought them up this morning as well.

These are the need for a couple of things, one of them being a grief benefit that would be universal, automatic and specific to grief and not about trying to find ways to make other programs work for them, so they don't have to continue to tell their stories over and over again. That would be the first suggestion. The second one we've heard quite frequently is about some kind of dedicated resources for grieving parents as well, maybe a dedicated line at Service Canada or a dedicated section on the website and these types of things.

I want to hear comments from any of you who would like to comment on those two things as to whether you see them being the appropriate response and whether you think those would be important.

Who would like to go first?

[Dr. Susan Cadell]

I think the idea of a grief benefit, a bereavement benefit, would go a long way to recognizing that grief exists and that death is a part of life.

On the pieces that are lacking in behind some of these issues in terms of the education in professions like mine—in social work—I think that if there were a benefit and that recognition, the education would follow. I think some kind of dedicated line, service, website or whatever again puts the recognition out that this is something that requires care.

[Dr. Mary Ellen Macdonald]

Go ahead, Moire.

[Dr. Moire Stevenson]

I'd like to speak to the second point about the dedicated resources, because I think that falls more in line with my expertise as a psychologist and also with the research that I obtained.

If you're going to have dedicated resources, they should be evidence-based. Also, bereaved parents should be consulted on those resources to make sure that they actually fit with their experiences. I'd also like to underline the importance of training the professionals working with the bereaved in general and bereaved parents and siblings specifically.

We did a small project here in Montreal with Le Phare, which is a children's hospice. They created an online training program for nurses at CLSC in pediatric palliative care, and it included a section on bereaved parents and supporting bereaved parents. I'm mentioning that to show the feasibility of doing something like that. Not only should we have dedicated resources, but we should have easy-to-obtain training for professionals working with bereaved parents.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Go ahead, Mr. Long, please.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Thank you, and I apologize.

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the committee for testifying this morning. I'm sorry that you had to witness that. I think we've been making great bipartisan progress on this study. I'm new to politics, but I apologize. Sometimes politics and political stunts get in the way of trying to do the right thing.

My first question will be for you, Dr. Stevenson. Do you have any suggestions as to how we as a government can craft a definition of grief that encompasses the individualized experience of Canadians with grief, does not medicalize it and does not inadvertently create a hierarchy of types of grief?

[Dr. Moire Stevenson]

In defining grief, there are many things to consider. One of the main ones is that grief is a process, and most often a lifelong process. This process also includes changes in meaning-making and understanding of the world, and the bonds that those parents or the bereaved have with the people they've lost.

If I was to write a definition of grief that would be most valid to the research we now have, those would be the two things I would include. There would be three, actually: the process, the making sense or the meaning-making, and the continuing bonds with the deceased.

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

Thank you.

Do any of our other witnesses want to chime in on that one?

[Dr. Susan Cadell]

The three of us are all guests or members of an incredible resource that none of us has mentioned, which is the International Work Group on Death, Dying and Bereavement, and of which there are many proud Canadian members.

Our most recent meeting was in June this past year. I was one of the co-hosts, and it was in London, Ontario, at King's University College. It is an international group of experts in the field, and they, especially the Canadian ones, would jump at the challenge to help craft a definition.

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

Are you saying the group's composed of different countries? Is it international?

[Dr. Susan Cadell]

Members are from different countries. There are many Canadian members, and they're members from many different disciplines. There are psychologists and social workers and physicians and nurses and bereavement counsellors. There are funeral directors. There are people who practise in the area, as well as those who research in the area. We cross all aspects of death, dying and bereavement.

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

Is it based in Canada?

[Dr. Susan Cadell]

No, it's not. It's an international organization, and the past president is based in Canada. Our last meeting was in Canada, but the meetings move around. Our next one is in Zimbabwe.

Mary Ellen and I knew each other, and we met Karima at the last meeting, yet none of us mentioned this. It just seemed a great lack at this point, so I wanted to mention it.