Discussion · Government Orders
Garnett Genuis Conservative
“I am worried about letting people ask for medically assisted dying in advance. If people lose the ability to make decisions later, they cannot change their minds. Doctors would not even have to tell them they are about to end their lives.”
“Mr. Speaker, there has been some confusion in the debate tonight around the issue of whether a person could withdraw consent if they make an advance directive. Let us clear it up. If I sign an advance directive today but three weeks later, still having capacity, think I actually do not want to do this anymore, could I withdraw my advance directive? Yes, I could. However, if a person signs an advance directive and then loses capacity, they are not in a position to withdraw it. In addition, if a person does not want MAID at the time they are about to receive it, they could still be given MAID, because there would be no requirement to tell them what is about to happen to them. Yes, if the person resists physically in the moment, the legislation would require that the process of MAID stop, but if a person is simply told— An hon. member: Oh, oh! Garnett Genuis: Mr. Speaker, I hear the member saying, “needle in the skin”. There does not have to be a needle in the skin to administer MAID. Someone could already be on an IV, and the content of the IV could be changed. There would be no requirement to tell someone what is about to happen, which is clearly concerning in terms of the right to withdraw consent, is it not?”
Mr. Speaker, there has been some confusion in the debate tonight around the issue of whether a person could withdraw consent if they make an advance directive. Let us clear it up. If I sign an advance directive today but three weeks later, still having capacity, think I actually do not want to do this anymore, could I withdraw my advance directive? Yes, I could. However, if a person signs an advance directive and then loses capacity, they are not in a position to withdraw it. In addition, if a person does not want MAID at the time they are about to receive it, they could still be given MAID, because there would be no requirement to tell them what is about to happen to them. Yes, if the person resists physically in the moment, the legislation would require that the process of MAID stop, but if a person is simply told— An hon. member: Oh, oh! Garnett Genuis: Mr. Speaker, I hear the member saying, “needle in the skin”. There does not have to be a needle in the skin to administer MAID. Someone could already be on an IV, and the content of the IV could be changed. There would be no requirement to tell someone what is about to happen, which is clearly concerning in terms of the right to withdraw consent, is it not?