Discussion · Government Orders
Garnett Genuis Conservative
“I oppose this bill. It lets people sign a paper asking to be medically killed years later, even if they are not told when it is about to happen. People could sign this out of fear right after a diagnosis. We offered to quickly pass the part stopping medically assisted dying for mental illness on its own, so that is not the real issue here.”
“Mr. Speaker, as my colleague has pointed out well, the bill is fundamentally about the idea of advance directives for MAID. We could fix the mental health issue in 48 hours. We have already proposed splitting the bill and expediting the mental health section. It could move forward very quickly, so that is not the issue in tonight’s debate. The issue is that the government is proposing a radical change to our MAID laws to allow a person today to sign a document that would allow someone to kill them at some point in the future. The law would not even require that they be told at that future point in time. Someone could be killed without even being told what is about to happen to them, simply on the basis of a document that they signed years ago before they even had any lived experience with their illness. They might receive a diagnosis, be terrified about what that means, sign a document based on what somebody tells them and then years later have someone take their life as a result of that document. This is gravely concerning, and it is something that I strongly oppose and that we should strongly oppose.”
Mr. Speaker, as my colleague has pointed out well, the bill is fundamentally about the idea of advance directives for MAID. We could fix the mental health issue in 48 hours. We have already proposed splitting the bill and expediting the mental health section. It could move forward very quickly, so that is not the issue in tonight’s debate. The issue is that the government is proposing a radical change to our MAID laws to allow a person today to sign a document that would allow someone to kill them at some point in the future. The law would not even require that they be told at that future point in time. Someone could be killed without even being told what is about to happen to them, simply on the basis of a document that they signed years ago before they even had any lived experience with their illness. They might receive a diagnosis, be terrified about what that means, sign a document based on what somebody tells them and then years later have someone take their life as a result of that document. This is gravely concerning, and it is something that I strongly oppose and that we should strongly oppose.