Skip to main content

Politics Liberal MPs to get free vote on bill for assisted death

this is an occasion to reaffirm life even as we permit those facing terrible suffering to choose death.

Thinkstock

The Liberal government has decided not to whip the vote on the physician-assisted dying bill set to be tabled Thursday, so backbench MPs can vote according to their conscience.

The government's bill will take a narrow approach to the issue of physician-assisted dying, ignoring many of the key recommendations made by a joint parliamentary committee struck to study the issue this winter.

Physician-assisted dying: The five stages that brought us to this point

Story continues below advertisement

In February, Liberal House Leader Dominic LeBlanc told The Globe and Mail that backbenchers would be forced to toe the party line on the legislation because it is a Charter of Rights issue. But he later suspended that decision, calling it "premature."

Liberal MP Rob Oliphant, who co-chaired the committee, told The Canadian Press the government should pre-empt any court challenges by referring the new law to the Supreme Court to determine whether it is Charter-compliant.

A source familiar with the legislation says it will exclude those who experience only mental suffering, such as people with psychiatric conditions, and will not allow for advance consent – a request to end one's life in the future – or for mature youth to end their own lives with the help of a doctor.

The Supreme Court gave the Liberal government until June 6 to pass a new law after unanimously striking down the Criminal Code ban on assisted dying last February. The court said the current laws infringe the Charter rights of competent adults who have grievous and irremediable medical conditions that cause enduring suffering, and who consent to ending their own lives.

Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould and Health Minister Jane Philpott will speak about the bill at a news conference on Thursday.

Ms. Wilson-Raybould told reporters this week the government has been working "thoughtfully" on the legislation, which seeks a balanced approach.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter