Bill C-14 - May 18 2016

Comments May 18 2016

I have been watching CPAC (cable channel 123) and I am getting addicted to it.  It is like a reality show but it is real.

Mulcair (NDP) is a lawyer and he is saying that Bill C-14 is unconstitutional. He said there was just a court case in Alberta that said Bill C-14 is unconstitutional.  I hope to hear more about that decision.  He said that the government is trying to pass the legislation by exhaustion.  Sitting in front of the television alone is exhausting.  I am developing a real respect for some of the legislators.  The hours they put is more than 8 hours a day.

I keep looking for discussions on safeguards. They seem to be worried about safeguarding professional health care workers.  And what safeguards do we have against patients. How do we do know that the physicians are doing their job in good faith.  It seems that a doctor only has to say that he made an error but he did it in good faith (i.e. he believed it to be true).  In any other work an error would get an employee fired but not true for doctors.

From reading Bill C-14 it says that only one doctor has to determine capability; the second doctor only approves the paperwork.  A doctor who is overworked and for expediency steers his bias towards death as he believes it is what the patient wants even though the patient might show uncertainty.  He can circumvent the minimal safeguards be they written in Bill C-14 or whatever the regulators (Colleges) mandate.

10:23 am

The Alberta Appeal Court decision reflected the Carter decision and not the proposed Bill C-14.  A woman was granted the right to MAID (medical aid in dying) and is not terminal (CBC) and had a psychiatric condition (severe conversion disorder).  C-14 says that a person cannot ask for MAID unless she is terminal and does not suffer from a mental illness.  The decision was affidavidized by four physicians (one was a shrink who did his assessment by Skype).

In the light of this (CPAC) the Minister of Justice still wants to pass Bill C-14.  Jody says the proposed Bill must pass fundamentally as is because there are many people out there that want MAID under the above criteria and it would not be constitutional for them to wait when they are suffering intolerably.  The Liberals want to enact a law that says no one under 18, no one who is mentally ill,  has to be terminal, and no to conscience objections of health care professionals. Time of reflection is ten days instead of fifteen. Carter says MAID has to be approved by a court (oversight) for Taylor; the government says doctors are best to do the MAID assessment.  Bill C-14 is not Carter. However, the BCCA said doctors are the worst people to know if a patient is competent or incompetent.

12:12 pm

Elizabeth May (Green Party) asked the House to amend Bill C-14 to comply with Carter.  Justin said that in committee this question was discussed with the Colleges.

I personally would like to see Bill C-14 rewritten so that anyone can go to the Act C-14 and understand it (especially medical personnel). A check list.  Considering how important this Act is, this should happen  The way it is now if someone does not understand Bill C-14 or the Carter decison he has to go and see a lawyer and the lawyer most like does not understand it and he will charge him $800 to do research (that is if he can find a lawyer to help him.)  Lawyers do not want to get involved with  regulatory health law.  So, you have no choice but to trust doctors/social workers who may not know what informed consent is.  Informed consent is legally complex. I personally do not believe that one can have informed consent when you are in the health care system.  You are in hospital, you are sick, you are vulnerable, you are relying on strangers to tell you what to do.

The crux of the Carter decision is the Constitution:  Canadians have the right to life but not a duty to live.  The right to life means you own your body.  A duty to live means the State owns you. Figure that one out.