Thank you, Cardinal Collins.
Members of our coalition support the right of patients to refuse or discontinue treatment at end of life, allowing the underlying illness to take its course.
We wish to make it clear that should Parliament legalize medical aid in dying, we will not in any way obstruct patients who decide to seek that procedure, and we will never abandon our patients.
We know there are many ways to respect patient decisions that do not violate the conscience of health care workers or institutions. The Canadian Medical Association and other experts have said there is no necessity for there to be a conflict between these two values.
Our own proposal recommends the use of transfer of care and direct patient access, so patients have the choice of staying with their physician for care or transferring care to another physician.
Facilities that cannot provide the procedure on their premises are prepared to help transfer patients to the facility of their choice if the patient so desires.
To force providers to act against their moral convictions is to breach section 2 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. We know hospitals and regulators all across the country are right now developing policies on this subject. For example, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario has already provided a provisional policy that will force doctors to provide a referral for euthanasia and assisted suicide. At the same time at least seven other provincial colleges have not taken that approach.
Legislation from Parliament would send a clear signal that the charter rights of caregivers all across Canada can be protected. Canadians should not have to deal with a patchwork approach.
Parliament has legislated matters that overlap into provincial or territorial jurisdiction in the past. Consider, for example, the Civil Marriage Act passed by Parliament in 2005 to legalize and regulate same-sex marriage. While marriage falls under provincial jurisdiction, this is federal legislation that governs marriage. The act contains language in its preamble and a specific clause recognizing that officials of religious groups are free to refuse to perform marriages that are not in accordance with their religious beliefs.
Our coalition recommends Parliament use the same legislative approach in Bill C-14, including language both in the preamble to the bill and in a specific clause that confirms that individuals or faith-based health care institutions that oppose euthanasia or assisted suicide are not to be compelled to engage in it and are not to be discriminated against as a result of their opposition.
Our proposed amendments to the preamble of Bill C-14 read as follows, and in the interests of time I will read two of those that we submitted in our brief.
Whereas Parliament respects and affirms freedom of conscience and religion for health care practitioners and faith based institutions, and whereas nothing in this act affects the guarantee of freedom of conscience or religion, and in particular the freedom of health care practitioners and faith based institutions to refuse to provide or participate in the provision of medical assistance in dying.
Our proposed amendments to the body of the act would read as follows:
It is recognized that health care practitioners are free to refuse to participate in medical aid in dying, either directly or indirectly, if doing so is not in accordance with their conscience or religious beliefs. For greater certainty, no person or organization shall be deprived of any benefit or be subject to any obligation or sanction under any law of the Parliament of Canada solely by reason of their exercise or refusal to exercise in respect of medical aid in dying of the freedom of conscience and religion guaranteed under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
In closing, we would like to mention that the Carter case clearly stated that no physician could be forced to participate in assisted death. The court also said this was a matter that engaged the charter freedoms of conscience and religion.
It is not in the public interest to discriminate against the category of people based solely on their moral convictions and religious beliefs. This does not create the kind of tolerant, inclusive, or pluralistic society that Canadians deserve.
Thank you.