Bill C-7 explained in plain English
An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying)
Federal Parliament bill summary, status, timeline, sponsor, votes, and official sources.
At a glance
Official Parliament of Canada snapshot for 43rd Parliament, 1st Session. MP vote breakdowns appear when the House of Commons publishes a recorded division export for that bill. Senate and House stage details include official debate/sitting links when LEGISinfo publishes them.
Our plain-language take, written for civic education.
Source: By PoliticalData.ca
Bill C-7 amends the Criminal Code to expand medical assistance in dying (MAiD) eligibility beyond those with reasonably foreseeable death, creates stronger safeguards for those without imminent death, excludes those whose only condition is mental illness, and allows advance consent for persons who lose capacity before the procedure.
Bill C-7 changes federal law governing medical assistance in dying (MAiD) in Canada. Currently, only people whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable can access MAiD. This bill removes that requirement, meaning people with serious medical conditions may be eligible even if death is not imminent. However, the bill maintains protections: people whose only medical condition is mental illness cannot access MAiD. The bill creates two levels of safeguards. For people whose death is reasonably foreseeable, the process requires an independent assessment and a 10-day waiting period (shorter if death is imminent). For people whose death is not reasonably foreseeable, safeguards are stricter, including a 90-day waiting period, consultation about other ways to relieve suffering, and agreement that the person has considered alternatives. The bill also allows a person who becomes incapable of consenting after a prior written agreement to still receive MAiD if they previously consented in writing and do not show signs of refusing. Similarly, if someone self-administers a substance as part of the MAiD process but loses consciousness before completing it, a medical practitioner can finish the process if there was a prior written arrangement. Care providers (like nurses or personal support workers) can now act as independent witnesses, except for the actual practitioners providing MAiD. Medical practitioners and nurse practitioners must report information about MAiD to authorities for monitoring purposes, and failing to comply with the safeguards is a criminal offence.
- Removes the requirement that a person's natural death be reasonably foreseeable to be eligible for medical assistance in dying
- Specifies that mental illness alone cannot be the sole underlying condition for accessing medical assistance in dying
- Creates two sets of safeguards: one for those with reasonably foreseeable death (with 10-day waiting period) and one for those without reasonably foreseeable death (with 90-day waiting period)
- Requires medical practitioners or nurse practitioners to obtain written confirmation from a second independent practitioner before providing MAiD to someone whose death is not reasonably foreseeable
- Requires medical practitioners or nurse practitioners to ensure persons have been informed of and offered consultations with alternatives to relieve suffering, such as counselling, mental health support, disability support, community services, and palliative care
- Reduces the number of independent witnesses required from two to one for written requests
- Permits medical assistance in dying to be provided to a person who has lost the capacity to consent if they previously entered into a written agreement with a practitioner, provided they do not demonstrate refusal or resistance
- Permits medical practitioners or nurse practitioners to complete medical assistance in dying after self-administration of a substance if there was a prior written arrangement and the person loses capacity
- Allows paid care providers (such as nurses or personal support workers) to act as independent witnesses, with limited exceptions
- Requires medical practitioners, nurse practitioners, pharmacists, and pharmacy technicians to provide information about MAiD to designated recipients for monitoring purposes
- Creates new offence for knowingly failing to comply with the safeguards when providing MAiD
- Provides a transitional provision allowing those who signed requests before the bill receives royal assent to proceed under the old rules (with limited exceptions)
- Persons with grievous and irremediable medical conditions who may seek medical assistance in dying
- Medical practitioners and nurse practitioners who assess eligibility and provide medical assistance in dying
- Pharmacists and pharmacy technicians who dispense substances for medical assistance in dying
- Persons designated as independent witnesses to written requests for medical assistance in dying
- Care providers (such as nurses and personal support workers) paid to provide health care or personal care services
- Persons who would be excluded from accessing MAiD because mental illness is their sole underlying condition
- Healthcare regulators and government bodies responsible for collecting and monitoring MAiD information
- Medical practitioners and nurse practitioners must ensure that a written opinion confirming eligibility for MAiD from another independent practitioner has been obtained before providing MAiD to a person whose death is not reasonably foreseeable
- Medical practitioners and nurse practitioners must ensure a waiting period of at least 10 clear days between signing of request and provision of MAiD (shorter if death or loss of capacity is imminent) for those with reasonably foreseeable death
- Medical practitioners and nurse practitioners must ensure a waiting period of at least 90 clear days between the first assessment and provision of MAiD for those whose death is not reasonably foreseeable (shorter if loss of capacity is imminent)
- Medical practitioners and nurse practitioners must inform persons of available means to relieve suffering and ensure they have given serious consideration to those means before providing MAiD to those whose death is not reasonably foreseeable
- A person has the right to withdraw a request for medical assistance in dying at any time and in any manner
- A person cannot access medical assistance in dying if mental illness is their sole underlying medical condition
- A person with capacity can enter into a prior written agreement allowing MAiD to proceed even if they subsequently lose capacity, unless they demonstrate refusal or resistance at the time of provision
- Persons must be given an opportunity to withdraw their request and provide express consent immediately before receiving medical assistance in dying
- Medical practitioners, nurse practitioners, and pharmacists must file information about MAiD requests and provision for monitoring and accountability purposes unless exempted by regulation
- The bill received royal assent on 17 March 2021 (based on the preamble referring to future provisions and the metadata indicating it is at second reading in the 43rd Parliament, 1st Session)
- A person who signed a written request for MAiD before the day the Act receives royal assent must have MAiD provided under the old rules, except the bill's new provisions on advance consent (subsections 241.2(3.2) to (3.5)) will apply
- The bill text does not specify when specific provisions come into force; it is assumed provisions come into force upon royal assent unless otherwise specified
- The bill text does not specify any financial or tax impacts
- A medical practitioner or nurse practitioner who knowingly fails to comply with all of the required safeguards when providing MAiD is guilty of an offence (under section 241.3)
- A person responsible for preliminary assessments who knowingly fails to provide required information to designated recipients is guilty of an offence (under section 241.31(4))
- A pharmacist or pharmacy technician who knowingly fails to provide required information to designated recipients is guilty of an offence (under section 241.31(4))
- The bill text does not specify the maximum penalties for these offences; existing Criminal Code penalty provisions would apply
- The bill text does not specify the maximum criminal penalties for offences under sections 241.3 and 241.31
- The bill does not provide details of the regulations that will govern the collection and reporting of MAiD information; these are to be made by the Minister of Health
- The bill does not define what constitutes 'involuntary' words, sounds, or gestures for the purpose of determining whether a person is refusing or resisting MAiD after losing capacity
- The bill defers a decision on whether to allow MAiD for persons whose sole underlying medical condition is mental illness to a future parliamentary review (scheduled to begin in June 2020)
- The bill refers to a future review of advance requests and requests where mental illness is the sole underlying condition, but does not specify when this will be completed or what changes may result
- The practical application of the safeguards (such as determining what constitutes 'serious consideration' of alternatives to relieve suffering) is not detailed in the bill text
- The bill does not specify how provinces will implement or regulate the delivery of MAiD services or the conduct of the assessments required
Removes the requirement that natural death must be reasonably foreseeable; adds exclusion that mental illness alone does not qualify; creates separate eligibility assessments for two categories of persons (those with and without reasonably foreseeable death)
Updates the offence provision to reference the new safeguard requirements under subsections 241.2(3) and 241.2(3.1), making it criminal to knowingly fail to comply with the new requirements
Expands reporting requirements to include persons carrying out preliminary assessments and pharmacy technicians; requires collection of information at various stages for monitoring purposes; updates offence provisions to capture failures to report by all affected persons
Generated using AI from official bill text. Not legal advice. It is written by PoliticalData.ca for civic education, automatically checked and spot-reviewed before publishing.
Official textThe official summary published alongside the bill, shown exactly as written.
Source: Parliament of Canada (LEGISinfo)
A legislative summary is currently being prepared for this bill by the Parliamentary Information and Research Service of the Library of Parliament. Meanwhile, the following executive summary is available. On 24 February 2020, the Minister of Justice introduced Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying), in the House of Commons and it was given first reading. Bill C-7 amends the Criminal Code to, among other things, (a) repeal the provision that requires a person’s natural death be reasonably foreseeable in order for them to be eligible for medical assistance in dying; (b) specify that persons whose sole underlying medical condition is a mental illness are not eligible for medical assistance in dying; (c) create two sets of safeguards that must be respected before medical assistance in dying may be provided to a person, the application of which depends on whether the person’s natural death is reasonably foreseeable; (d) permit medical assistance in dying to be provided to a person who has been found eligible to receive it, whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable and who has lost the capacity to consent before medical assistance in dying is provided, on the basis of a prior agreement they entered into with the medical practitioner or nurse practitioner; and (e) permit medical assistance in dying to be provided to a person who has lost the capacity to consent to it as a result of the self-administration of a substance that was provided to them under the provisions governing medical assistance in dying in order to cause their own death.
This is the official summary published by the Parliament of Canada, shown verbatim. Not legal advice. PoliticalData.ca did not write or edit this text.
View on LEGISinfoParliamentary Process
The Senate has not yet begun the first reading of Bill C-7, which is currently at the second reading stage in the House of Commons.
This artifact describes the procedural stage of Bill C-7 in the Senate. It indicates that the bill has not yet reached the 'First reading' stage in the Senate. The bill's current status is 'At second reading in the House of Commons', and its latest activity was a debate at second reading on Thursday, February 27, 2020, in the House of Commons. First reading occurred on Monday, February 24, 2020, and second reading occurred on Wednesday, February 26, 2020, in the House of Commons, which included speeches from David Lametti, Rob Moore, Luc Thériault, and Alistair MacGregor.
The Senate has not yet begun the second reading stage for Bill C-7, which is currently at second reading in the House of Commons, with debates having occurred there in February and March 2020.
This record indicates that the Senate has not yet reached the second reading stage for Bill C-7. The bill's status is currently shown as being at second reading in the House of Commons. The latest recorded activity related to this bill was a debate at second reading in the House of Commons on Thursday, February 27, 2020. The bill had its first reading on Monday, February 24, 2020, and its second reading in the House of Commons on Wednesday, February 26, 2020. Major speeches at the second reading in the House of Commons occurred on various dates in February and March 2020.
Bill C-7 has not yet reached Third Reading in the Senate, as it is currently at the Second Reading stage in the House of Commons.
This artifact describes the legislative process for Bill C-7. It indicates that the bill has not yet reached the Third Reading stage in the Senate, as its current status is "At second reading in the House of Commons". The latest recorded activity was debate at second reading in the House of Commons on February 27, 2020. The artifact also lists the dates of First and Second Reading in the House of Commons and identifies the sponsor and respondents of major speeches during the Second Reading debate on February 26, 2020.
Bill C-7, concerning medical assistance in dying, was introduced at first reading in the House of Commons on February 24, 2020, and subsequently debated at second reading.
On February 24, 2020, Bill C-7, an Act to amend the Criminal Code concerning medical assistance in dying, received first reading in the House of Commons. This is a procedural step where the bill is formally introduced. The record indicates that the bill was later debated at second reading, with speeches from various Members of Parliament on February 26 and 27, 2020.
During a House of Commons sitting on February 24, 2020, Members debated various government orders and introduced new bills, with no specific procedural actions taken on Bill C-7 concerning medical assistance in dying during this particular record.
On February 24, 2020, the House of Commons debated Bill C-6, an act to amend the Criminal Code concerning medical assistance in dying. This specific sitting record details the first reading of the bill and related procedural matters. The record primarily consists of statements made by Members of Parliament regarding various government orders and business, including statements by members, oral questions, and routine proceedings where new bills were introduced.
Bill C-7, concerning medical assistance in dying, was undergoing second reading debate in the House of Commons as of February 27, 2020.
This record indicates that Bill C-7, an act to amend the Criminal Code concerning medical assistance in dying, was at the second reading stage in the House of Commons on February 27, 2020. The second reading debate began on February 26, 2020, and continued on February 27, 2020. Major speeches related to the second reading occurred on February 26 and March 10, 2020.
This House of Commons sitting on February 26, 2020, featured debates on various issues, including a significant discussion on Bill C-7 concerning medical assistance in dying, alongside oral questions and other legislative business.
This document is a record of a House of Commons sitting on February 26, 2020, where a debate took place regarding Bill C-7, an Act to amend the Criminal Code concerning medical assistance in dying. The sitting included statements by members on various topics, oral questions focusing on natural resources, public safety, Indigenous affairs, and the economy, and discussions on several other bills and routine proceedings before moving to the debate on Bill C-7. The debate on Bill C-7 involved the Minister of Justice introducing the bill and members from different parties, including the Conservative, Bloc Québécois, New Democratic, and Liberal parties, expressing their views, concerns, and support for its provisions. The discussion touched on eligibility criteria, safeguards, advance consent, the impact on vulnerable individuals, and the role of palliative care. The sitting concluded with adjournment proceedings on topics such as carbon pricing, Indigenous affairs, and agriculture and agri-food.
The Minister of Justice introduced Bill C-7, proposing changes to medical assistance in dying laws to expand eligibility and adjust safeguards in response to a court ruling, following extensive public consultations.
This is a record of a speech given by the Minister of Justice, Honourable David Lametti, during the second reading debate on Bill C-7. The bill proposes amendments to the Criminal Code concerning medical assistance in dying (MAID). The Minister explained that the bill responds to a Quebec court decision that found the previous MAID law unconstitutional because it limited access to individuals whose death was reasonably foreseeable. The bill aims to expand eligibility for MAID to those whose natural death is not reasonably foreseeable, while introducing new safeguards for these cases. It also proposes changes to existing safeguards for those nearing the end of life, such as eliminating the 10-day reflection period and reducing the number of independent witnesses required. The Minister highlighted that the government consulted extensively with Canadians and experts in developing the bill. He also addressed concerns raised by the disability community and reiterated the government's commitment to balancing individual autonomy with the protection of vulnerable persons. The speech also touched on allowing advance consent arrangements for individuals eligible for MAID who might lose capacity before their scheduled procedure.
During a House of Commons debate on Bill C-7, the Minister of Justice introduced proposed amendments to the Criminal Code concerning medical assistance in dying, aiming to expand access and adjust safeguards in response to a court decision, sparking debate on the balance between autonomy and protection of vulnerable individuals.
During a House of Commons debate on Bill C-7, an act to amend the Criminal Code concerning medical assistance in dying, the Minister of Justice introduced the bill. He explained that the bill proposes changes in response to a Quebec court decision that found the previous eligibility criteria unconstitutional. The bill aims to expand access to medical assistance in dying (MAID) by removing the requirement that natural death must be reasonably foreseeable. It also proposes a two-tiered system of safeguards: one for those nearing death and another, more stringent one, for those whose death is not reasonably foreseeable. The bill also addresses advance consent arrangements. Opposition members raised concerns about the removal of certain safeguards, the potential impact on vulnerable individuals, the adequacy of consultations, and the need for robust palliative care. The debate included discussions on the balance between individual autonomy and the protection of vulnerable persons, as well as the role of Parliament in legislating on sensitive issues.
During a House of Commons debate on Bill C-7, Members of Parliament discussed proposed amendments to medical assistance in dying laws, focusing on eligibility criteria, safeguards, and the balance between individual autonomy and protection for vulnerable persons.
This document records a debate in the House of Commons on February 26, 2020, concerning Bill C-7, an Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying). The debate focused on proposed changes to the existing medical assistance in dying (MAID) regime, particularly in response to a Quebec Superior Court decision that found the previous law too restrictive. Several Members of Parliament from different parties expressed their views on the bill. Key discussion points included the removal of certain safeguards, the introduction of a 90-day assessment period for MAID in cases where natural death is not reasonably foreseeable, the allowance for advance consent, and the exclusion of mental illness as the sole underlying condition for MAID eligibility. There was also discussion on the importance of palliative care and the protection of conscience rights for healthcare professionals. The debate highlighted the sensitive and complex nature of MAID, with various perspectives on autonomy, suffering, and the protection of vulnerable individuals.
During the second reading debate of Bill C-7 on medical assistance in dying, Members of Parliament discussed proposed changes to eligibility and safeguards, reflecting diverse views on autonomy, suffering, and the impact of the Truchon court decision.
This artifact is a record of a debate that took place in the House of Commons on February 26, 2020, during the second reading stage of Bill C-7. The bill, titled "An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying)", was being discussed. The debate included speeches from various Members of Parliament from different parties, focusing on proposed changes to the Criminal Code related to medical assistance in dying (MAID). Key discussion points included the eligibility criteria for MAID, particularly in relation to the "reasonably foreseeable natural death" requirement, the safeguards surrounding the process, and the implications of the Quebec Superior Court's Truchon decision. Different perspectives were shared regarding the balance between individual autonomy, protection of vulnerable persons, and the role of palliative care. The debate also touched upon related procedural matters and other government business.
During the second reading debate on Bill C-7, Members of Parliament discussed proposed changes to MAID legislation, including modifications to safeguards, eligibility criteria, and the issue of advance consent, while also emphasizing the need for palliative care and careful consideration of vulnerable populations.
On February 27, 2020, the House of Commons began its second reading debate on Bill C-7, an Act to amend the Criminal Code concerning medical assistance in dying (MAID). The debate included various perspectives from Members of Parliament, touching upon the removal of safeguards like the 10-day waiting period and the number of witnesses required, the conditions under which MAID can be accessed, the issue of advance consent, and the role of palliative care. The debate also addressed the exclusion of mental illness as the sole condition for MAID eligibility and the complexities of applying these provisions in rural and remote areas. Several members raised concerns about the thoroughness of public consultations and the speed at which the bill was being advanced, suggesting that these changes should align more closely with the upcoming mandatory five-year review of the MAID legislation.
Bill C-7, an Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying), is currently awaiting 'House of Commons Consideration in committee' after completing its second reading stage, which involved several debates.
This artifact indicates that Bill C-7, concerning amendments to the Criminal Code related to medical assistance in dying, has reached the stage of 'House of Commons Consideration in committee'. However, this specific stage has not yet been reached. The latest activity recorded was debate at second reading on February 27, 2020. The bill had its first reading on February 24, 2020, and its second reading on February 26, 2020, during which several major speeches were delivered by members of Parliament.
Bill C-7, concerning medical assistance in dying, has not yet reached the House of Commons Report stage, with its latest procedural activity being debate at Second Reading.
This artifact indicates that Bill C-7, which aims to amend the Criminal Code concerning medical assistance in dying, has not yet reached the Report stage in the House of Commons. The latest activity recorded was debate at the second reading stage on February 27, 2020. The bill had its First Reading on February 24, 2020, and its Second Reading debate on February 26, 2020, with speeches from the sponsor and responses from Members of Parliament from the Conservative, Bloc Québécois, and NDP parties.
Bill C-7 has not yet reached the third reading stage in the House of Commons, with its most recent procedural activity being debate at second reading.
The provided text describes the procedural status of Bill C-7 concerning its progress through the House of Commons. The bill has not yet reached the "House of Commons Third reading" stage. The latest activity noted was debate at second reading on February 27, 2020. First reading occurred on February 24, 2020, and second reading on February 26, 2020. Major speeches related to the second reading debate were delivered on February 26 and March 10, 2020, with speeches from the sponsor (David Lametti) and respondents (Rob Moore, Luc Thériault, Alistair MacGregor) noted.
Debate and sitting links point to official parliamentary sources when LEGISinfo publishes them. Any plain-language discussion summaries should be generated from those official texts and reviewed before public display.
Vote Summary
This bill is still active. We only show vote counts after the legislature publishes a recorded division.
No published representative vote breakdown
This bill is still moving through the process. When a recorded division is published, representative positions can be listed here.
Official sources
Status, sponsor, votes, and timeline on this page are drawn from these official legislative sources and public records. Each summary above is attributed to its own source.
How this data is sourced