Summary#

This bill amends the Criminal Code to create two new offences related to medical assistance in dying (MAID). It aims to protect the freedom of conscience of health care workers by making it a crime to intimidate or coerce them to take part in MAID, directly or indirectly, and to make it a crime to fire or refuse to hire them only because they refuse to take part in MAID (Preamble; Bill cl. 2(1)–(2)). It does not change who can receive MAID or how MAID is provided.

• Creates a criminal offence for using coercion or any form of intimidation to compel a health care worker to take part in MAID, directly or indirectly (Bill cl. 2(1)).
• Creates a criminal offence for dismissing or refusing to employ a health care worker only because they refuse to take part in MAID, directly or indirectly (Bill cl. 2(2)).
• Applies to medical practitioners, nurse practitioners, pharmacists, and other health care professionals (Bill cl. 2(1)–(2)).
• Offences are punishable on summary conviction (a less serious criminal offence category) (Bill cl. 2(1)–(2)).
• Comes into force on Royal Assent; no implementation date is specified in the bill text.

What it means for you#

• Households and patients

  • No change to who qualifies for MAID or the legal status of MAID. The bill targets intimidation and employment practices, not patient eligibility (Bill cl. 2).
  • Access pathways may vary by province or institution if policies change in response to the new offences. The bill itself does not set patient referral or coordination rules. Data unavailable.

• Health care professionals (physicians, nurse practitioners, pharmacists, others)

  • You cannot be criminally coerced or intimidated to take part in MAID, directly or indirectly (which can include activities short of the procedure itself) (Bill cl. 2(1)).
  • Your employer cannot lawfully fire you or refuse to hire you only because you refuse to take part in MAID, directly or indirectly (Bill cl. 2(2)).
  • The bill does not define “indirectly.” Practices like “effective referral” may fall within this term, creating legal uncertainty that may require guidance or case law. Data unavailable.
  • You must still follow all other applicable laws and professional standards. The bill does not provide civil immunity or change licensing rules.

• Employers (hospitals, clinics, pharmacies, long-term care, private practices)

  • You risk a criminal charge if you use coercion or intimidation to compel participation in MAID (Bill cl. 2(1)).
  • You cannot dismiss or refuse to hire someone for the reason only that they refuse to take part, directly or indirectly, in MAID (Bill cl. 2(2)). You should document legitimate, non-MAID-related reasons for employment decisions.
  • Review policies, contracts, and training to avoid practices that could be viewed as coercive or as making MAID participation a condition of employment. Data unavailable.

• Professional regulators and managers

  • Rules or directives that effectively compel participation “directly or indirectly” could face challenge or create criminal exposure if enforced through coercive measures (Bill cl. 2(1); Preamble).
  • Clarify expectations, complaint processes, and non-punitive accommodations for conscience objections. Data unavailable.

• Law enforcement and prosecutors

  • New summary conviction offences may require updates to charging practices and guidance on evidence of “coercion,” “intimidation,” and “indirect” participation (Bill cl. 2(1)–(2)).
  • No new funding or institutions are created by the bill.

Expenses#

Estimated net cost: Data unavailable (no fiscal note; no appropriations; potential minor enforcement costs through existing systems).

• No appropriations or transfers are authorized in the bill text.
• Creates two new summary conviction offences enforceable by existing police and provincial prosecution services (Bill cl. 2(1)–(2)).
• Data unavailable on expected case volumes, training needs, or administrative costs.

Proponents' View#

• Protects freedom of conscience and religion guaranteed by the Charter by preventing coercion to participate in MAID, including indirect participation (Preamble; Bill cl. 2(1)).
• Shields health care workers from job loss or hiring discrimination solely for refusing to take part in MAID (Bill cl. 2(2)).
• Establishes clear, uniform national criminal law standards rather than varying workplace practices across provinces (Bill cl. 2).
• Targets intimidation and coercion without restricting the legality of MAID for eligible patients (Bill cl. 2).
• Addresses concerns that “effective referral” requirements can infringe conscience rights by covering indirect participation (Preamble; Bill cl. 2).

Opponents' View#

• May impede timely access to MAID if providers decline to participate or refer, especially in rural or underserviced areas; the bill offers no alternative access mechanism. Data unavailable.
• “Indirectly” and “coercion/intimidation” are undefined, creating legal uncertainty and potential conflict with provincial or regulatory policies that require effective referral (Bill cl. 2; Preamble).
• Could chill legitimate managerial actions (e.g., scheduling, performance management) if seen as pressure related to MAID participation (Bill cl. 2(1)–(2)).
• The “for the reason only” standard may make enforcement difficult; employers may cite multiple reasons, complicating proof and consistency (Bill cl. 2(2)).
• Increases enforcement and training burdens on institutions, regulators, and police without dedicated resources. Data unavailable.