Conscientious Objection

Thank-you for your request for my opinion on MAID.
As a retired family doctor working in rural medicine I am very familiar with end of life medical care. My opinion is that MAID is a an immoral disgrace on the medical profession. It is another symptom of moral decay based on a culture that denies objective morality because it denies the plain reality of the moral law giver-God.
The reality is every person will stand before God and give an account of their actions. There is a reason everyone’s conscience knows this is wrong. God made us with an inner moral compass. Some choose to disregard it and will certainly face judgement.
I am against MAID in everything it stands for because it is killing people. Something the culture based on subjective moralism refuses to see. People dying in pain riddled torment is a myth perpetuated by the promoters of this killing. Pain is very controllable in modern medicine.
Thankfully I do not need to deal with the college promoting it as “conventional medicine.”
I of course speak for all sorts of physicians who temper their responses rather than face the real possibility of negative consequences and losing their very hard earned profession.

I'm glad that there is intentional inclusion of wording to protect conscientious objectors, especially in this area of medicine that is still quite controversial and where decisions from the medical body and leadership regarding standards do not represent the opinions of many physicians. Ensuring protection for physicians should continue to be a consistent aspect of any future revisions.

Thank you for all of your hard work to maintain a standard of excellence for physicians in Alberta! 

I have read through the draft policy and am concerned about the term "effective referral" used in 1f. Part of the brilliance I have admired in our system is the ability for patient's to access types of care that perhaps not 100% of physicians are comfortable providing and/or referring for. This has led to physicians being able to practice according to their conscience, while all patients maintain access to the full suite of legal services available in Alberta. In conversations I have had over the years with physicians who do conscientiously object, they have always noted their willingness to provide information about where patients can access and self-refer for the things they seek. This seems to be the perfect balance of patients and physicians rights.

In other provinces, where similar wording has been enacted, we have seen physicians close their practice or leave the province. At a time when, as you are certainly aware, there is a real crisis in family medicine fomenting, it would seem a real shame to give primary care physicians another reason to give up their practice or move out of general family practice into a more niche area. Medicine is hard work, and the demands feel like they have increased very significantly over the last few years. To increase that burden on physicians who are doing their best to serve those in their care seems a great shame - particularly at this moment.

It is not an uncommon thing for patients and physicians to disagree about what the best course of action is - that is just the nature of humans in relationship. But medicine is the dance we do while working with patients from a place of deep mutual respect for often differing values to navigate these issues. Physicians who conscientiously object are very rarely barriers. And if they are barriers, they violate the policies already in existence.

I do not think that this policy change will serve patients better, and it will not serve physicians better. At a time where patients are increasingly facing inappropriately long wait times and suboptimal care because of the impossibly heavy burdens physicians are being expected to bear, this policy feels out of step with the good work of the College. Remove the words "effective referral" and maintain the morale of Alberta physicians.

Slippery slope. Provide health care, not death care.

This document has significant conflicting advice.
-the vast majority of those who object to MAiD, which is, in fact, state condoned physician assisted suicide, will have this objection due to obvious religious reasons, valuing the sanctity of life as primary. These 'conscientious objectors', would see this as murder, and not only outside the bounds of the hippocratic oath, but outside the bounds of any conceivable action. MAiD would definitely not fit in the definition of 'care' according to any objector. So any objection to provide information or referral would not, by definition of the objector, be preventing access to 'care'. Condensed preamble points 2-4 therefore do not make sense.
-standard 1b- conventional medical options. MAiD is in no way conventional. It was passed only in 2015. It is new and non-conventional. It is available only in 7 jurisdictions worldwide. It is condemned heavily by the majority of humanity, and has created a significant rift in physician groups in the countries in which it is practiced. If 'convention' is defined as: a way in which something is usually done, especially within a particular area or activity, then MAiD is decidedly NOT conventional. The vast majority of humanity current and historical have not died in this manner. The vast majority of physicians current and historically would view this as opposing the hippocratic oath, which is the oath binding physicians back to the time of Hippocrates, around 460BCE. The majority of the developed west being Christian, current and historic, would also vehemently oppose this as murder. So it should not be listed as 'conventional medical treatment'.
-section 1 e,f and all of 2 collectively oppose the charter of rights and freedoms. This actively seeks to prevent a physician from having freedom of religion. To proactively send someone to seek planned death at the hands of a physician is a sin of commission. The Charter, particularly freedom of religion in this case, is not superseded by a medical licensing board. If the CPSA desires a human rights challenge, then carry on. But this should be rethought to avoid that. The CPSA has faced enough damage in recent years by not doing the right thing about serious manners, and this is dead serious.

I do not think that doctors should be forced to refer any procedure which they have a constitutional right to object to. Example MAID, abortions etc.

I would not feel comfortable knowing that my doctor must refer me against their conscience. I hope our medical system continues to welcome and include people from diverse backgrounds, values and perspectives. Please don’t make changes that will ostracize segments of our society and deter them from entering the medical profession.

Please remove the "effective referral" portion from this policy. Referring is done if a physician thinks something will be in the patient's best interests. It is akin to participating in the act. For the majority of physicians who will not participate in providing MAID, a referral forces them to act against their conscience. This is not simply a preference, but a deeply held moral conviction. Our current system allows a patient to find a MAID provider without their objecting physician being forced to be involved. It respects the mutual freedoms of both parties. Let's keep it that way.

I see activists campaigning to make the "effective referral" piece mandatory for all physicians, and pushing for censure of any objectors. This is not how a free, respectful society works. Nor will it build trust in the medical system by vulnerable patients.

I propose the following revisions to the draft Standard of Practice:

Section 1.f. could be revised as “Proactively maintain a non-judgmental approach and be aware of resources to provide for frequently requested services they are unwilling to provide.”
Section 2.c. should be removed due to lack of clarity.
Specifically, “adverse clinical outcomes” and “delayed” are not objectively defined and are open to wide subjective interpretation.
If a patient were to experience pain while waiting for MAID, this could be claimed an adverse clinical outcome. Although the procedure sought out should not be impeded as in 2c, there are a lot of subjective possibilities that could emerge from so-called "exposures" from "delayed effective referral."
"Delayed" is not clearly defined either and in many ways the seeking of care is dependent on what the patient decides to do after visiting a provider.
Many psychiatrists have warned that it will be extremely difficult for physicians to discern which patients are making a fully informed, consensual decision to pursue MAID and which are not.

Other concerns:
It needs to be clearly stated, whether in this policy or for the understanding of the draft standard committee, that a member who declines to provide a service (e.g. MAID) or a referral for the same (while still providing resources) is doing so because they believe it is in the best interest of the patients. Their care of the patient compels them down this path. A sober second thought on the part of a provider who wants to provide a variety of different perspectives may allow a patient to see their concerns from a new or different angle and can be a source of support for that patient.
While this standard emphasizes the right of a physician, it also needs to consider the fact that many patients want providers whose values fit with theirs, and a large group of patients want to be served by providers who decline to offer certain procedures like MAID. Finding the right physician fit requires a diverse medical system with a variety of different providers with different opinions.
Many from the disability community have called for safe spaces where they know the practitioner sees their life as worth living and wouldn’t agree to end their lives when they are at a low point.
Since "effective referral" has been introduced in other provinces, many providers have left, retired early, or sought registration in Alberta because of our more reasonable conscience objection standard. Adopting this language from other provinces potentially exposes our system to further loss of providers who would be frustrated with the addition of this wording.
It should be emphasized that the Supreme Court gave its assurance that nothing in its original ruling on the constitutionality of MAID “…would compel physicians to provide assistance in dying.” Participation through an effective referral would directly involve physicians in MAID to which many of us are opposed.
The government and College does not want to micro-manage the doctor-patient relationship but does expect non-judgmental professionalism adhering to obligations
Based on opinion polling, many Canadians are concerned about compelling physicians to do something they are not comfortable with, e.g. "54 percent of Canadians give “quite a lot” or a “great deal” of weight to the concern that the confidence of patients in doctors could be compromised, given that patients look to doctors “to heal, comfort, and fight for them.” Sixty-three percent of visible minorities share this concern.
This is not about competing rights but about mutual freedoms. It is not about limiting access but about redirection to different resources. In reality, patients' and physicians' rights are not opposed. The patient and physician work together as a team and navigate medical decisions in a shared decision making framework.
Conscience is not an expression of a physician’s personal preference, it is a judgment based on what the physician feels is in the patient’s best interest. Patients and physicians disagree on a regular basis on a large number of issues, and these usually do not come to the point of conflict; they are usually resolved in professional and friendly ways.
Physicians are not solely responsible for ensuring access to medical assistance in dying. CMAJ February 20, 2018 190 (7) E181; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.180153.

I would also like to say that what we need is increased access to high quality hospice and palliative care instead of directing funds into assisted suicide. Many if not all of patients asking for MAID would likely not get to that point if they had adequate and compassionate palliative care or hospice, or for chronic illnesses adequate supports, pain management and adequate financial and housing support. Additionally, I think it is absolutely criminal and dangerous to be offering MAID to patients with mental illness. Who is going to be next on the list for the suicide squad?

Thank you for considering my concerns!

I have reviewed the draft and the excellent comments provided by my colleagues to date. It is hard to add anything beyond their excellent opinions, especially Dr. Rebecca Genuis and Dr. Matt McIssac.

In my practice I offer my patients MAIL (Medical Assistance in Living) and not MAID. I will never refer a patient for MAID as this is opposed to everything I have practiced as a physician for the last 30 plus years. I have strived to give my patients hope and compassion along their journey of life no matter what they have had to face. I will always walk with them and provide them the best possible care no matter what challenges they face. My patients know this and respect this.

Conscientious objection must be paramount in any CPSA standard that is so contentious and controversial. It is also so important to recognize that not all conscientious objectors are doing so on the basis of religious conviction. Many of us object to MAID on the basis of sound medial ethics - fundamentally we are called as physicians to first of all do no harm. What is more harmful them taking a life?

In the short time that Canada has allowed euthanasia, MAID is now the fifth leading cause of death in Canada and we are number two in the world in euthanasia deaths. With the possible expansion to patients with mental health illnesses, we will become number one in the world.

This is not a legacy to be proud of. The slippery slope of MAID has become an avalanche.

Effective referral needs to be removed from the current standard. It makes physicians like myself complicit in the death of our patients. Furthermore there has to be significant protection for conscientious objectors. Otherwise we are going to loose compassionate and caring physicians who, like me, chose not to offer euthanasia to our patients.

I am writing to respond to the request for feedback on, and to express my concerns with regards to the proposed CPSA Standard of Practice for Conscientious Objection. In the preamble, the Standard states that “These expectations accommodate the rights of objecting physicians to the greatest extent possible, while ensuring that patients’ access to healthcare is not impeded”. However, the subsequent text contains some contradictions and lack of clarity which invalidate this dual principle.

The area of concern in the policy is 1.e. and 1.f.

To begin, Section 1.e. states that a member must ensure timely access to:

“i. a regulated member who is willing to provide the medical treatment, service or information; or
ii. a resource that will provide accurate information about all available medical options;”

There is a lack of clarity here as to what exactly qualifies as “a resource”, especially as the following section requires “an effective referral plan”, about which I will provide more feedback later.

For greater clarity, and consistency with the MAID Standard of Practice, which states the information for the Care Coordination Service must be provided to requesting patients, this policy should be updated to explicitly state the requirement detailed in Section 1.e.ii. is satisfied by the provision of information regarding the MAID Care Coordination Service. This is in keeping with the Policy of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Manitoba, and would best balance rights of conscientious objectors with the rights of patients.

I am also concerned by the inclusion of the phrase “effective referral” in section 1.f. of this Standard. As commonly understood, this phrase indicates “Taking positive action to ensure the patient is connected to a non-objecting, available, and accessible physician, other health-care professional, or agency” (from the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario” Policy on Human Rights In the Provision of Health Services). At least on some readings, this requirement would not be satisfied by providing information about the Care Coordination Service. This is of concern to many Conscientious Objectors, who cannot in good conscience actively implicate themselves in intentionally causing the death of another human being.

Therefore, I request that the phrase “effective referral” be removed from the policy.

I’d like to conclude by stating that Conscientious Objectors should not be seen as “a problem constituency”. Instead, please try and understand that their conscientious objection is driven by a reverence and deep regard for human life, and an unwillingness to participate in practices that they view as degrading it. While this unwillingness means that they will not participate in the provision of some few services, the opportunity to retain these employees should not be missed: the same deep regard for humanity that drives conscientious objection also motivates these colleagues to go above and beyond in providing superb, caring and gentle health care to their patients. Even if there is disagreement on specific practices, this kind of devotion to humanity will only enrich the teams and places where they work. So please see this as an opportunity for fruitful coexistence, rather than just a “problem to be solved”.

Sincerely,

Karol Boschung

The inclusion of "timely" access to referral elsewhere is problematic, given our current broken system involves protracted referral to treatment times, that has to do with factors outside of the physician's control. This needs to be re-worded, I think.
Conscientious objection is important to protect, as a physician who is in moral distress over pressure to comply will not function well and the patients in their care will also suffer. There should be room for conscientious objection in the currently evolving/complex issues of MAID and gender dysphoria/affirmation.

I do not support the changes in this draft standard to require physicians to refer patients for treatments that they personally might be morally or consciously opposed to. I believe physicians should be protected to act and refer patients for treatments within their beliefs and I believe this is in the best interest of doctors and their parents.

I am a registered nurse who graduated in 1983. I have seen many changes in healthcare over the years.

I feel privileged to care for dying patients. They give me more than I can ever give them. I did not become a nurse to kill my patients but to journey with them to their natural end & I know many physicians feel the same way.

I, hereby, I propose the following revisions to the draft standard:
 Section 1.f. could be revised as “Proactively maintain a non-judgmental approach and be
aware of resources to provide for frequently requested services they are unwilling to
provide.”
 Section 2.c. should be removed due to lack of clarity.
o Specifically, “adverse clinical outcomes” and “delayed” are not objectively
defined and are open to wide subjective interpretation.
If a patient were to experience pain while waiting for MAID, this could be claimed an adverse clinical outcome. Although the procedure sought out should not be impeded as in 2c, there are a lot of subjective possibilities that could emerge from so-called "exposures" from "delayed effective referral."
o "Delayed" is not clearly defined either and in many ways the seeking of care is dependent on what the patient decides to do after visiting a provider.
o Many psychiatrists have warned that it will be extremely difficult for physicians to discern which patients are making a fully informed, consensual decision to pursue MAID and which are not.

Trust in nurses and doctors is declining, Many patients, me included, want providers whose values fit with theirs, and a large group of patients want to be served by providers who decline to offer certain procedures like MAID. Finding the right physician fit requires a diverse medical system with a variety of different providers with different opinions.

Healthcare professionals should NEVER have to violate their conscience in providing care to their patients.

I wanted to share feedback regarding the proposed changes to the Conscientious Objection standard of practice. I strongly oppose the compulsion of “effective referral” in this policy. Alberta already has a solid framework for patients to access services they are seeking, without mandating that doctors violate their professional judgment. Many physicians are ethically opposed to newer aspects of medicine, such as MAID (euthanasia), as well as more established controversial medical services, such as abortion. If I will be forced to participate, even at arms length, to a procedure I am morally opposed to, something I view akin to murder, I will be unable to continue practicing medicine in this province. Many excellent physicians like myself will find themselves in similar positions. I hope that CPSA will carefully consider the inclusion of "effective referral" in this document.
Many thanks,
Shauna Burkholder, MD FRCPC

I strongly request the "effective referral" to be removed from the Standard. The whole point of conscientious objection is to not be involved in a referral, which means you are agreeing with the procedure, just referring to those with the technical skill to execute it. For example, as Canada does not condone capital punishment, if we extradite someone to a country where we know they will be executed for that crime, have we washed our hands of the capital punishment? Or have we just referred to a country that will do that since we don't? Similarly, objecting practitioners don't want to be involved in the referral process to be part of a link that will end in that patient's MAiD death. Alberta has done a great job of balancing on the tightrope of patient and physician rights by establishing a self-referral service.

As well, I feel kind of cheated in that when MAiD first was legalized (physician-assisted suicide having been considered unthinkable for centuries if not millenia before), we were promised that we wouldn't have to participate against our consciences, and that it would ONLY be used in cases where death was imminent. Already the slippery slope we were told wouldn't happen is here; MAiD is now being used for non-imminent death and the slope is only getting steeper as mental health sufferers (including mature minors) may be able to end their life if the expansion of MAiD goes through. As society slides down the slope, please give those who didn't want to hop on in the first place the right to stay off - all the while continuing to maintain the rest of the standard: like mutual respect, providing resource information (care coordination service), not violating boundaries and all the other Hippocratic professional behaviours expected of ethical practitioners.

Have we forgotten;

Neither will I administer a poison to anybody when asked to do so, nor will I suggest such a course.

Hippocratic Oath

I am deeply disgusted about the revision of Bill C-7 and the extension of MAiD eligibility to Canadians with mental illness as the sole condition underlying their request after March 2024.

Since the legalization of Medical Assistance in Dying in 2016, the number of Canadians accessing MAiD has increased significantly. Normalizing euthanasia will reinforce the hopelessness inherent in mental illness and erode the support offered them by the community. To be human is to be vulnerable. To be a citizen of Canada with a mental disorder or disability will be dangerous if Bill C-7 amendment is passed.

As a person who did not wish to live any longer due to mental illness years ago, if MAiD was available then, I'd just be talked into ending my life instead of getting the help I needed??? Well if that were the case, I would not have gotten help, not completed university, not gotten married, not had a child, and not enjoy the life I live now. My parents would have been without a daughter, my siblings withouot a sister, my aunts and uncles without a niece, my friends without a friend, my husband wouldn't have met me, and my and my precious child wouldn't exist. I am utterly disgusted that my life and the lives of many I know are not as valuable as someone without mental illness. And you should realize that a mentally ill person often in the moment wants to kill themselves and often needs to be certified in an institution until they can get healthy again and not want to end their life. Mentally ill people were some of those killed back in the holocaust, because they didn't measure up to the "perfect society" Hitler was trying to create. You really want to do this to a large group of our society, thus aligning yourself with Hitler's values??

Reguarding other disabilities, loneliness, vulnerability, and the fear of being a burden are just some of the issues that have been brought forward regarding people facing end of life decisions. If those are the reasons a person might no longer want to live, that may be more a reflection on how our disabled persons are treated than the real desire to end their lives. Euthanasia is not a cure for pain, disabilities, mental anguish, or loneliness: It is a death sentence.

As a Christian, I support the sanctity of life from birth to natural death. There are also many doctors who are Christians, as well as from other backgrounds who would have to stop practising medicine if this bill went through as ending someone's life would violate their beliefs. Many doctors still stick to the Hippocratic Oath; "I will do no harm or injustice to them.[their patients] Neither will I administer a poison to anybody when asked to do so, nor will I suggest such a course." Does that mean killing vulnerable people, espcially those not in their right minds? Definitely not! If this Bill is passed, expect to have a shortage of doctors. Many are moving to the US for better pay and many other reasons and this will just give moral doctors the biggest reason to leave Alberta. It is imperative that the fears and concerns of all Canadians be considered before expanding MAiD.

Please do not under any circumstances extend Bill C-7’s of MAiD eligibility to Canadians whose sole eligibility arises from mental illness.

CHOOSE LIFE!!!

Medical Professionals should always have the right to express and practice what their conscience dictates. More information and proper services of palliative care as well as hospice care should be first priority, so as to maintain the integrity of the profession named Alberta 'HEALTH"

I am a concerned member of the public as well as a Health Care worker. I am writing this to express my very strong opinion that Doctors who are unable to perform things such as abortion, MAID and other ethically questionable procedures such as sex change surgeries should NEVER be forced to do referrals to other Doctors who will. I am totally opposed to the proposed “effective referral”. I believe it is unacceptable and no Doctor should be reprimanded or face consequences for not “effectively referring” their patients. Citizens who choose to have abortions and such should have to go through the process of finding Doctors willing to perform such procedures on their own accord. Thank you for considering my rightful opinion.

This is very disturbing to say the least !!! Canada is not the same country anymore I hope that this does not happen in our country and I believe we are under mass genocide !!! Why are politicians not speaking up more about this ?

Physicians should not be forced to refer patients for "treatment" they object to, such as assisted suicide.

All doctors should be able to Conscientiously object to items that are against their morals, values or religion. This includes prescribing medicines they don’t believe in and treatments they don’t agree with, including, but not limited to MAID and abortion.

First do no harm.

I am writing to express my strong support for a conscientious objection provision in your new Standards, that is, that healthcare professionals should NOT be forced to violate their conscience and how they perceive the meaning of the Hippocratic oath which many of them have taken by forcing them to refer patients for abortions, euthanasia, and other controversial practices which they as doctors do not see as in the best interests of their patients. Abortions, for example, do have consequences for the mother, as well. Our current system allows a patient to find a MAiD - or abortion - provider without their objecting physician being forced to be involved. Forcing a doctor to make an “effective referral plan” is forcing them to participate in the evil of abortion or euthanasia.
Patients seek providers whose values align with theirs. As a senior, I do not want a doctor who will pressure or even facilitate euthanasia for me as I firmly believe it is God's decision as to when I depart this life, not mine or any other human. I am sure, too that many disabled persons or persons suffering from mental illness who despite their suffering do not desire to die, want to find doctors who will help them live, not assist them to die.

Adopting the proposed wording in the new standards will drive doctors and other health professionals out of Alberta. We already have a shortage of physicians. Enforcing these new "standards" will result in the loss of many fine physicians dedicated to the saving of lives.

I implore you, DO NOT force doctors into violating their consciences by making them do referrals for those “medical procedures” which they consider to be evil, or at least not in their patients’ best interests.,, euthanasia (maid) and abortion. If you do so then we will lose caring doctors; they will leave Alberta for places where they can practice with freedom of conscience. This is not rocket science, it’s easy to understand! What is wrong with you?!?!?!

I am very concerned about this situation. My husband and I do not believe in abortion or forcing doctors to kill people.
This is really bad and against God Almighty! If this is put into law, God will punish all those involved.
Life is sacred. Already many babies have been murdered. Those who believe in and purpetrate such beliefs will be punished. Take heed! This definitely signals a downward spiral, morally.

I do not think that doctors should be forced to refer any procedures like abortion and MAID which they have the right to object to.

Doctors objection to participating in MAID should not have them referring to doctors that will. A patient is fully capable of pursuing that themselves. As seen in other provinces, failure to protect current doctor rights will result in doctor shortages. A doctor that refuses to refer to MAID is not a liability to the patient, and many great doctors have serious misgivings about the program. Doctors should not be punished for protecting patient life.

“Do no harm”. Surely that is still the benchmark.

Doctors are definitely not called upon to kill their patients.

Not so long ago, suicide was s crime. We had suicide hotlines designed to help people with getting the resources they needed. Now people may be just encouraged to access MAID.

MAID lets the doctors be responsible for taking the patient’s lives. And why? Maybe because people won’t do it themselves, suggesting that maybe the patients really don’t want to die; they want help, and they want to live.

Many many people are now afraid of their doctors. And going to the hospital frightens them. I have heard that MAID is recommended for some. How is it that human lives have become so cheap?

I totally oppose MAID, and wish we could stand behind our doctors who want to help and not to kill their patients.

I believe that MAID is actually evil.

1. Doctors should not be forced to do abortions or assisted suicide against their conscience.. Nor should they be required to give a referral to another physician who will do it. That is the equivalent of being an accomplice to a crime for someone who believes that that is morally wrong. Doctors should not be required to go against their consciences in any way.
2. As I am a senior citizen I prefer to go to a Doctor who shares my morality. I have heard of cases where depressed or elderly individuals were encouraged to use MAID by their doctor if they struggled with depression or sickness. I do not want this kind of “treatment” suggested to me if I happen to be in a depressed state and looking for help with my depression rather than to end my life So I would like to have the choice to go to a Doctor who has my same values.. “Safe spaces” are given to many people nowadays and I would like to have a “safe space” at my doctors office
3. When other provinces instituted the law that physicians were required to refer abortions or assisted suicide to another doctor, many of these providers left their practices, took early retirement, or moved to Alberta. We already have Dr. shortages in Alberta. I am struggling to find a good doctor currently and do not want to lose qualified conscientious doctors due to the wording you are proposing.
Please do not require doctors to do abortions or assisted suicide, or require them to give a referral to another doctor as that would be unacceptable for some doctors as they feel they would then be complicit in the act.
Thank you for providing the opportunity for feedback.

On multiple grounds I strongly oppose your proposed changes to your Standards of Practice.
If doctors of conscience are forced to flee Alberta’s medical scene, then all the province will be left with are doctors who have no problem with killing their patients. I want a doctor who can choose his/her moral stand.
Life is a sacred trust and these proposed changes to the referral system cheapens life’s value.
When a patient is at a low point, steering them in a direction that offers them the easy way out is nothing short of irresponsible.

Doctors are supposed to save lives, they are not supposed to be killers. Effective referral is forcing a doctor to send a target to a paid hitman.

This is very wrong. A person has a basic human right to follow their conscience. A doctor whose conscience tells them that abortion or assisted suicide is wrong (which IT IS) needs to have the right to refuse to participate in such practice, including the right to refuse to participate in referring to another doctor for such procedure. Doctors should have the right to listen to their conscience, be able to sleep at night and still do their job

Doctors, like anybody else, should be free to act according to their conscience. This is, after all, a free country, is it not? A country where we have freedom of conscience according to the Constitution? Since when do governments have the right to tell people what to believe, or that their belief is wrong/doesn't matter and they must act in opposition to it? Why should doctors be forced to perform procedures which conflict with their beliefs or their conscience? We cannot let this happen! Governments need to be told in no uncertain terms to butt out, even if the health profession is publicly funded. If anybody wants an abortion or MAID, there's plenty of doctors who are willing; so let people looking for death simply go to another doctor, the same way if I don't like my mechanic I find a different one.

I do not feel that any medical practitioner or doctor should be forced to be involved in any capacity to assist in the
ending of any persons life or other 'procedures' that goes against their conscience, morals, or religion. If certain
people feel that these 'procedures' are what they desire, then they should have that discussion with practitioners
objection to these actions. This also refers to gender altering surgeries.

These proposed changes to section 1e. and 1f. are incredibly concerning as they could and will prevent doctors from continuing to practice in Alberta. Doctors need to be able to contentiously object to practices that violate their principles and convictions. They can't and shouldn't ever be forced to "effectively refer" someone for a treatment that they believe is harmful. Moreover, many people desire physicians that can correspond to their beliefs and convictions. There are more than enough doctors who are already eliminating their patients through MAID. We don't need to force every single one of them to refer patients or do it themselves.

Propose the following revisions to the draft Standard of Practice:
 Section 1.f. could be revised as “Proactively maintain a non-judgmental approach and be
aware of resources to provide for frequently requested services they are unwilling to
provide.”
 Section 2.c. should be removed due to lack of clarity.
o Specifically, “adverse clinical outcomes” and “delayed” are not objectively
defined and are open to wide subjective interpretation.
 If a patient were to experience pain while waiting for MAID, this could be
claimed an adverse clinical outcome. Although the procedure sought out
should not be impeded as in 2c, there are a lot of subjective possibilities
that could emerge from so-called "exposures" from "delayed effective
referral."

o "Delayed"  is not clearly defined either and in many ways the seeking of care is
dependent on what the patient decides to do after visiting a provider.
o Many psychiatrists have warned that it will be extremely difficult for physicians
to discern which patients are making a fully informed, consensual decision to
pursue MAID and which are not.

Other talking points
 It needs to be clearly stated, whether in this policy or for the understanding of the draft
standard committee, that a member who declines to provide a service (e.g. MAID) or a
referral for the same (while still providing resources) is doing so because they believe it
is in the best interest of the patients.  Their care of the patient compels them down this
path. A sober second thought on the part of a provider who wants to provide a variety of
different perspectives may allow a patient to see their concerns from a new or different
angle and can be a source of support for that patient.
 While this standard emphasizes the right of a physician, it also needs to consider the fact
that many patients want providers whose values fit with theirs, and a large group of
patients want to be served by providers who decline to offer certain procedures like
MAID. Finding the right physician fit requires a diverse medical system with a variety of
different providers with different opinions.

 Many from the disability community have called for safe spaces where they know the
practitioner sees their life as worth living and wouldn’t agree to end their lives when they
are at a low point.
 Since "effective referral" has been introduced in other provinces, many providers have
left, retired early, or sought registration in Alberta because of our more reasonable
conscience objection standard. Adopting this language from other provinces potentially
exposes our system to further loss of providers who would be frustrated with the addition
of this wording.
 It should be emphasized that the Supreme Court gave its assurance that nothing in its
original ruling on the constitutionality of MAID “…would compel physicians to provide
assistance in dying.” Participation through an effective referral would directly involve
physicians in MAID to which many of us are opposed.
 The government and College does not want to micro-manage the doctor-patient
relationship but does expect non-judgmental professionalism adhering to obligations
 Based on opinion polling, many Canadians are concerned about compelling physicians to
do something they are not comfortable with, e.g. "54 percent of Canadians give “quite a
lot” or a “great deal” of weight to the concern that the confidence of patients in doctors
could be compromised, given that patients look to doctors “to heal, comfort, and fight for
them.” Sixty-three percent of visible minorities share this concern.
 This is not about competing rights but about mutual freedoms.  It is not about limiting
access but about redirection to different resources.  In reality, patients' and physicians'
rights are not opposed. The patient and physician work together as a team and navigate
medical decisions in a shared decision making framework.  
 Conscience is not an expression of a physician’s personal preference, it is a judgment
based on what the physician feels is in the patient’s best interest.  Patients and physicians
disagree on a regular basis on a large number of issues, and these usually do not come to
the point of conflict; they are usually resolved in professional and friendly ways. 
 Physicians are not solely responsible for ensuring access to medical assistance in dying.
 CMAJ February 20, 2018 190 (7) E181; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.180153
o "The responsibility to ensure access to MAiD does not rest with an individual
physician, but with society. Recognizing this, most provinces have developed access
programs for MAiD... When it comes to MAiD, balancing the rights of physicians
and patients is not an easy task, but both deserve protection."

I disagree with the CPSA’s proposed wording states that doctors must “proactively maintain an effective referral plan for the frequently requested services they are unwilling to provide.”

If this change was to happen, doctors would be forced to violate their conscience or face disciplinary actions or even give up their practice which is just not right.

I'm glad you want to hear from Albertans.

Similar to the retired Alberta doctor who wrote his response on this webpage, I too feel that this new Update is morally wrong... because it is literally helping to kill people.

Your words to make an: "Update to the stands and practices of medical doctors" would force doctors to participate in the killing of preborn babies by abortion or the killing of the sick, the elderly, or those with mental illness by assisted suicide, by requiring doctors opposed to such practices to actively refer patients to someone who will provide it.

Which goes against our freedoms as Canadians.

Your proposed wording states that doctors must “proactively maintain an effective referral plan for the frequently requested services they are unwilling to provide.”

We know what this means: It means that if all of at the CPSA have its way, doctors will be forced to violate their conscience or face disciplinary actions or even give up their practice.

Making this change is in Direct Violation of our Charter of Rights and Freedoms as Canadians!

We have freedom of religion... which means if we choose(this includes doctors, surgeons and ordinary people across Canada) to not do something that violates our conscience -- we will not be forced to do that. The Honorable Brian Peckford who still living -- and one of the creators and co-signors of the Original Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms -- has repeatedly explained that the the intention of all of those who signed our charter of rights and freedoms, was that the government would not overstep their boundaries to deny us our constitutional rights and freedoms.

This new change that you are suggesting -- would absolutely without question -- violate the rights and freedoms of Doctors and surgeons across Alberta.

I believe ensuring the rights and freedoms of All doctors, surgeons and all care givers across Alberta is essential. Not only that, but I believe doctors need to hold to their Hippocratic oath which states: "Neither will I administer a poison to anybody when asked to do so, nor will I suggest such a course."

Canada has religious freedom so why would
a proposal to force all doctors to refer
patients who request abortions or end of life procedures to practitioners who do these procedures.Many doctors beliefs do not approve these end of life procedures.You are forcing doctors to violate their conscience if they continue to practice in Alberta.Doctors who do above procedures can easily be found and do
not require all doctors to do referrals.Doctors will leave Alberta and leave profession resulting
In more doctor shortages.

It is completely unacceptable in a democratic system and given the intent and wording of Canada's constitution to force doctors to act against their convictions, especially convictions that have their base and origin in the religious and related ethical beliefs and principles of these doctors. Further, the Hippocratic Oath requires doctors to swear to do no harm. Evidently and arguably, abortion and assisted suicide do cause harm to at least one of the parties involved/affected and psychological harm to anyone who does not agree with these practices, but might be forced to participate in them against his/her will (for example, through forced referral). The proposed change in policy would force doctors who do not support abortion or assisted suicide to cause horrible psychological harm to themselves at the command of the state. That is 1984 stuff and totally unacceptable.
Regrettably, there already are too many in the health system who are all to willing to provide referrals for abortion and assisted suicide. These people will do what they want to do and are not hard to find. LEAVE THE OTHER DOCTORS ALONE AND DO NOT VIOLATE THEIR CONSCIENCES, THEIR HEALTH - ESPECIALLY THEIR MENTAL HEALTH, AND THEIR RIGHT TO PROVIDE MEDICAL SERVICES AS THEY SEE BEST FOR THEIR PATIENTS. THE PROPOSED CHANGES WILL DRIVE A LOT OF GOOD AND CONSCIENTIOUS DOCTORS OUT OF PRACTICE.

You have to ask yourself, is this practice pleasing the Lord? We all are accountable to Him, and will be judged by Him.
I think this is not healthcare at all! This is the path to end our western civilization!

I agree with: "We want health care not death care."

This not right, I don’t agree with this action
They need to protect life, not take it
Cynthia Raabis

No one especially doctors should be forced to perform a procedure that goes against their values, under any circumstances. To require that is an abomination and should never be required by law or those who claim such authority.

It's unfair to force doctors to refer patients for MAID or abortion, if they are unwilling to perform the procedure themselves, because it violates their freedom of conscience. you would not force doctors to refer patients to pro-life physicians or services, under pain of losing their career, so why should pro-life doctors be discriminated against in this way.

Allowing physicians to opt out of performing those procedures is meaningless, if they are still required to participate in them by referring patients to those who will do them.

The issue of conscientious objection is one of great weight within the medical profession. In this, there is a great difference between situations where (a) a physician would not be conscientiously willing to provide a procedure for a patient themselves but has no objection to others providing it and (b) a physician finding a procedure morally objectionable by the nature of the procedure itself as they deem it harmful to the patient.

In this second situation, doctors refusing to provide a procedure they object to yet having to provide an effective referral for that procedure is, for that doctor, the equivalent of having a moral objection to over prescribing medication but having to make an effective referral to a doctor who will over prescribe. If doctors with these kinds of moral objections are forced to make effective referrals, the CPSA will be telling these doctors that they must ignore that care for a patient that is essential to a healthy practice. As such, doctors will have to either morally compromise their standards of patient care (which makes it easier to compromise their standards in other areas of their practice thereby degrading the quality of their practice) or leave the medical profession as they refuse to compromise their standards.

By conflating the two kinds of conscientious objection into a single undifferentiated policy that requires effective referral is harmful to the medical system (as doctors who seek to maintain their moral standards decide to leave the practice while Alberta is seeking to relieve a shortage or doctors decide to compromise the standards of their practice) and to the patients they care for (as patients cannot find doctors and those doctors they do find may be willing to compromise the standards of their practice).

Please reconsider this effective referral policy and rewrite it.

Doctors MUST be able to opt out of procedures that go against their conscience - specifically abortion and MAID services. It is crucial that their moral beliefs are respected, That means they should not be forced to refer a patient to another provider that would engage in abortion or MAID.
I feel very strongly about this.

I do NOT think a Doctor should be required to referr a client seeking abortion to an abortionist if he is ethically and/or morally opposed to the practice.

I believe It should be MANDATORY that every Dr. inform their client that an abortion stops a beating heart (kills the unborn child) The doctor must provide full disclosure of the immediate and longterm risks of the procedure to the client (both physically and psychologically) . It should also be mandatory that the doctor provide alternate options available to the client with an unwanted pregnancy.

I am totally against this change in wording that would force doctors who are opposed to MAID and abortion to refer their patients to a medical professional willing to commit these heinous acts. Like what has been stated, the only doctors left in Alberta will be those willing to do harm to their patients.

It is very wrong to force doctors to refer people to abortion or other life ending options!! I can imagine they choose their job to help people instead of killing people!!
There is only One Who is giver and taker of all life!! We should leave these discussions in His hands!!
This discussion will only give more problems for the health system! It’s not a solution!!

Stop 🛑 forcing Drs, nurses, medical personnel etc etc from going against their conscience, beliefs or whatever it may be. Just because some believe abortion, MAID or whatever else to be a good thing does not mean we all have to be forced to think the same, or partake of these actions. Our healthcare is already a big enough mess without putting more stress on the ones who are left!!

It is immoral, unethical and blind ignorance to force doctors to make death referrals and to participate in killing their patients. Who do you think you are - some kind of elitist overlord? Serve the people, honor a well formed conscience and stop promoting some freakish ideology.

It is a violation of a healthcare provider’s ethical code to force him/her to be involved in any way in providing access to services which cause active harm to the patient. We as a province must maintain support for our mentally or physically handicapped individuals. We must never imply that they would be better off dead.
We must not expect their primary caregiver to imply that their patient would be better off dead. An unborn child by extension is also a patient of their parent’s doctor.
It is our duty to protect and nourish life.

I am against MAID. Forcing doctors to go against conscience will only destroy our health system which you have already screwed up. Hands off!!

I appreciate the effort being made to ensure that physicians are able to do their best for their patients. Not allowing physicians to act according to their conscience does a great disservice to Albertans. We need to know that physicians are able to speak their mind and give us all available options, not just the ones that are "politically correct". This leads to great distrust of our healthcare system. We also do not want to lose any more health care practitioners because they must work in a stressful environment that goes according to their conscience. To be able to conscientiously object should be a right for every citizen.

Doctors must be free to follow their conscience.I object to rules or laws that force them otherwise.

Greetings

Merriam-webster dictionary decribes a 'physician' as:

1
: a person trained in the art of healing
specifically : a health-care professional (such as a dermatologist, internist, pediatrician, or urologist) who has earned a medical degree, is clinically experienced, and is licensed to practice medicine as usually distinguished from surgery : a doctor of medicine or a doctor of osteopathic medicine
2
: someone or something that has a beneficial effect or influence.

Mandating such language as "effective referral" to CO standards will add in the destruction of the physician ("beneficial- art of healing").

"Many patients want providers whose values fit with theirs, and a large group of patients want to be served by providers who decline to offer certain procedures" ei... MAIDS and Abortion.

Albertians want health and care, a mandate death referal is neither. Please do not lower a physician role to "deathsician". The "right to healing" needs to replace "effective referral"

thank you.

Please protect our medical professionals from being forced to offer services which violate their conscience. I want to receive care from people who value my life and worth. I do not want referrals for killing, my unborn or born family members.

I believe it to be morally wrong to force a doctor to refer someone to another doctor to perform a procedure that he does not believe would be in the best interest of the patient. Individuals have always been able to seek a second opinion on medical procedures without being referred by the first doctor. The CPSA should not be forcing doctors to accept CPSA's ethical or moral views or lack thereof.

Doctors should not be required to have any involvement in the killing of their patients. Good doctors will avoid practicing here because they are not fully protected in their views on the value of human life. (I know of one brilliant surgeon who would love to practice here eventually, but suspects that it may never be possible because she will not refer a patient to someone who would assist rather than prevent death.) As a patient with pain issues, I also want to know that my doctor's only interest is in keeping me as comfortable as possible, rather than pushing other options on me and my family members to speed up my death and save the system time and money. Therefore, I need the assurance that truly pro-life doctors will still be able to practice in Alberta. When doctors had to swear to the hippocratic oath, that was a given.

It is clear to me that government funded and promotion of abortion and euthanasia is all about the money. Our taxes are funding murder. The value and respect for life is non existent inder the present governing party and SHAME on them.

It is clear to me that government funded and promotion of abortion and euthanasia is all about the money. Our taxes are funding murder. The value and respect for life is non existent inder the present governing party and SHAME on them.

Appreciate the fact that my opinion is requested on the standard of practice but like most surveys, my opinion is minimal. I find this topic of Maid absolutely disgrace, who do we think we are, playing God Almighty! I am totally against the taking of a human life to pacify our crumbling healthcare.

During the Covid pandemic AHS lost many healthcare workers due to mandates putting much strain on the healthcare system.Is the CPSA again wanting to add more loss. This policy opposes the Hippocratic oath. MAID is not “conventional medical treatment “. Section 1 e and f and all of 2 oppose the charter of rights and freedoms. Health care providers should never have to violate their conscience. I was a healthcare provider for 36 years and was forced early retirement due to forced mandates, sounds like it’s coming again

It's still murder, whether inside the womb or outside the womb. Our HEALTH care professionals all SHOULD adhere to oath they took to CARE for their patients. God creates life and God ends life. This concept is really quite simple, so we the creatures should not confuse the issue by thinking we are God. Judgement day is frightening enough for some people even without the added sin of murder, either directly or indirectly.

Doctors should not be required to refer patients for procedures which violate their conscience and their oath as doctors. I want to have a doctor who doesn’t refer for euthanasia or abortion.

Doctors should not be required to refer patients for procedures which violate their conscience and their oath as doctors. I want to have a doctor who doesn’t refer for euthanasia or abortion.

Of all the jobs out there that require compassion It would be a doctor where it is the most important. These changes reduce doctors to robots by not allowing them to have a conscience.

When Sue Rodriguez wanted MAID in the 90's, the entire nation took part in that debate. Now Canada is second only to China - a population much greater than our own - in MAID deaths. It used to be that ambulances rushed patients to hospitals for care; now ambulances go out to harvest organs from MAID victims and rush these back. Many of these people were in need of counseling and support. This is sick. I lost a brother to suicide and can tell you that the hurt and grief still haunt his family. My organization - IronWillReport.com- has interviewed many doctors, nurses and ethics experts (such as Professor Douglas Farrow) on this corruption of the Hippocratic Code. MAID and abortion denigrate and cheapen human life and violate the principles of human dignity and value as part of God's creation that are core values of our Judeo Christian society in the West.

“I oppose the compulsion of ‘effective referral’ in this policy. Alberta already has a solid framework for patients to access services they are looking for without mandating that doctors violate their professional judgment, Doctors must have the right of conscientious objection. MAID must be opposed not supported in Alberta. Abortion must be opposed and not supported in Alberta. We need to be a province that supports life from conception to natural death.

I disagree with this ruling.

The oath that doctors take us to do no harm. How can they refer people to MAID or perform abortions without breaking their oath.
How can anyone trust doctors who do this.

Physicians need to have conscience rights. Being a physician is a difficult job. This week I have had to console two patients who had suicide in the family over the holidays and one who had a twenty-something grandson die in a motor vehicle collision. If physicians are robbed of conscience rights, it will select for physicians who can accept being treated as machine-like technocrats and against physicians who are whole humans with philosophical, spiritual, and creative attributes.

I strongly oppose the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta proposal of updating your Standards of Practice that would force doctors to violate their conscience by having them participate in the killing of preborn babies by abortion or the killing of the sick, the elderly, or those with mental illness by assisted suicide. This is incredibily immoral and undemocratic.

Do not do this!

Medical professionals must not be forced to take any action that is contrary to their beliefs or conscience.

According to my feed back from the Federal Minister of Justice David Lameti, when MAID was updated after the original law was first introduced he assured me there were safe guards included to make sure of no abuses. The Physician was not to be the one to broach the subject of MAID with their patients. If their patient inquired about MAID the physician was to explain all the options like home care, palliative care, hospice care available. I encouraged him to have all the Provincial Medical Associations sign on. Obviously this has not happened as I am aware of a number of occasions where the attending physician has in fact raised the issue of MAID. As well, we need robust "Conscience Protection" legislation in our Province to protect Physicians and all Health Care Providers from being forced to participate in procedures like Abortion and MAID and even referrals which violates there deeply held personal beliefs. Physicians and all health care providers are trained to save life and not to take life. Abortion and MAID are a tremendous blight on a civilized society.

This proposal is horrifying. Unnecessary
This is a forcing of an evil agenda
Doctors and all citizens must have freedom of conscience. Why this desire to ruin a health care system even more by inciting doctors and nurses to leave the province or even profession
Grow up

Doctors choice. They should be able to act on their conscience. Why should they take a life by abortion, or end of life (maid) if that is against their upbringing? Why should they be forced to be an exacutioner? Doctors have taken an oath to protect life. We are not God, who can bring forth life and take life. Why does the doctor’s Standards of practice need to be changed to fit a culture which is showing moral decay, loss of respect to life and the old and sick are nothing but a burden to our health care system?

Doctors should never be forced to violate their conscience!!! I thought Alberta was trying to get more doctors to come and practice in Alberta??? Why would any doctor come to Alberta??? So sad!!!!!

This proposal is horrifying. Unnecessary
This is a forcing of an evil agenda
Doctors and all citizens must have freedom of conscience. Why this desire to ruin a health care system even more by inciting doctors and nurses to leave the province or even profession
Grow up

These guidelines are wrong! Please don’t let these guidelines be brought forward!
People have a right to live!

No doctor should be forced to participate in any procedure or referral that is against his conscience.

MAiD started with the intent to end the suffering of the near-to death in rare cases. This was expanded to individuals with fatal medical conditions who wanted to avert the suffering that was to come. Next came the drug-addicted and the mentally-ill -- those who might not have the mental faculties to understand what they are doing (and now there are conversations of "Mature Minors" with medical conditions being allowed to make these decisions as well). It has become increasingly clear that MAiD is state-condoned murder, and is now the fifth leading cause of death in Canada. Up until now, the many doctors who saw it for what it is have been able to refuse to participate in either committing the act or referring a patient to someone who will.

But now, with the revisions to the Conscientious Objection Standard, particularly the proposed guidelines for "effective referral", physicians who oppose this "treatment" on moral or religious grounds will still be obligated to provide a referral at the request of a patient. What will be next? Will all Doctors be required to participate in killing their patients? Will euthanasia become mandated practice for treating certain conditions? Will Doctors be mandated to refer patients who belong to certain groups for euthanasia?

These might still seem like outrageous questions now, but any who study history will know that tyranny --or dare I say genocide -- does not happen over night. It is a gradual process. We are on a slippery slope -- one that is already getting out of hand with people living in poverty looking at MAiD as their only way out. The only way to stop the coming avalanche is to stop the program all together. But short of that, we must object to every small step down the path of destruction.

Nobody should be forced to do anything against their will, whether it be for ethical or religious beliefs. The government must step in immediately and block these proposed changes because we are short doctors and we don't need any to relocate due to the proposed changes. Many believe abortion and MAID is murder, so they should not be reprimanded for not wanting to be involved with any of those procedures and processes.

As a practicing Christian I find the changes which would force doctors to violate their own consciences to refer patients to those who perform assisted suicide to be abhorrent. I also agree with Pro-Life alberta that this would also lead to shortages of medical doctors who would have to resign or retire as a result of these changes to the law in Alberta. MAID is misguided and evil and no physician should be forced to comply with it against their will.

Doctors should not and never be forced to make decisions to end a patients life.
That includes aborting babies, killing disabled, mentally ill, or elderly patients. Every life is worth living, and doctors must not play God, instead they must hold up their hippocratic oath: At first do no harm. Always!

The College of Physicians and Surgeons must not interfere in the doctor patient relationship.
The College of Physicians and Surgeons must not interfere in doctors practicing the hippocratic oath.

Please protect the conscience rights of physicians and all health care workers in Alberta. Forcing physicians to go against their beliefs will lead to a worsening shortage of physicians!

I think coercing doctors to refer patients to MAID or an abortion when the system is set up so that the doctor can refer the patient to this or that service if they think it’s in the patient’s best interest. Obviously if the doctor is prolife then they don’t think an abortion or MAID is in the patient’s best interest. T
Forcing doctors to do violate their consciences by forcing them to refer patients to these services is wrong!

"Effective referral" should NOT be introduced in its 'Standard of Practice'. Forcing ethical and moral Doctors to actively refer patients to someone who will provide the killing of preborn (abortion), assisted suicide to the sick, the elderly, or those with mental illness (MAiD) is still aiding and abetting in a premature death.

MAiD and abortion is immoral and unethical. STOP playing God. It is not for a physician to oblige to the termination of a life.

So saddened to hear about changes the CPSA wants to make to the Standards of Practice.
This change would require physicians to refer patients for treatments that they personally might be morally or consciously opposed to.
I am opposed to MAID and abortion. This is not sanctity of life. Life is precious.
Provide health care.
Thanks much for the opportunity to express my concern.
Debra

We are now in a war of GOOD against evil we all should be on the good side. But there are evil people working in the medical profession. These evil people should be fire then arrested for murdering our future generations

Hello,
Hope all is well.
The Hippocratic oath is "First - do no harm." The Bible tells the ancient story of a woman who went to many doctors, and not only was she broke from their fees, she also got worse! During the 70th anniversary of the WW2 Nuremburg Trials, history shows that of all professions, doctors were the largest group of professional disciplines (doctors, lawyers, dentists, etc.) to join the Nazi party. Furthermore, upon joining the Nazi Party, research showed that doctors were more likely to become more fully Nazified. The research showed that thousands of doctors began to see the state as their patient, rather than the precious human being they were supposed to be helping. The documentation of the horrific experiments and atrocities committed against innocent people and war prisoners is sickening. The Tuskegee Experiments and many other historical documents show us that there are many in the medical community that have a terrible proclivity to commit unspeakable evil. The current wicked ideologies of communism have greatly penetrated the halls of medicine. Ideas such as "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" might sounds wonderful, but they are devious lies meant to erase the sanctity of life and the value of an individual. No group of people is more important than an individual. This is the story of saving Private Ryan. The lives of 10 men were risked to save the life of one man. The Nobel Prize winner Albert Schweitzer said, "if we lose respect for any part of life, we lose respect for all life." Canada is an object of horror to many nations around the world as they look at our MAID program which has killed over 10,000 people in a very short period of time. Even European countries that have legalized this wicked Nazi ideology of "useless eaters" do not have the number of murdered people that Canada does. Winston Churchill said “the only thing we learn from history, is we don’t learn from history. What is the thinking and ideology of a person that spends the beginning of their life getting an education that ostensibly is to learn about saving lives and relieving the discomfort of people, and then turns to murdering, and experimenting on them instead? Literally billions of people would say they were depressed or feeling down and discouraged due to pain or suffering and at one point or another in their lives had a thought of killing themselves. Most of these people will also tell you that they got help, they began to believe the truth and saw the value of themselves and others, and did not succumb to the temptation of believing that suicide was the only answer. As a person that has suffered from debilitating migraines for many years myself, I can tell you from personal experience that I am one of these people. Lying on the floor of a hospital shower, in unbearable agony, I seriously thought about killing myself. The tyrannical doctor that was implementing my so called “care” at the time had decided that despite my file showing I had a 10 year history of migraines, that he knew better, and told people “I didn’t have migraines.” One of the nurses involved in my care saw my horrific condition and she kindly advocated for me. Soon, I was out from the care of this so-called “doctor”, and was able to get counselling, get different medications, and move forward. I still deal with the problems today, but I did not give up. I did not leave my family in anguish by ending my life and leaving them to suffer through the trauma of losing me. My Grandson still has his grandpa. My Son still has his dad. My Daughter still has her dad. Their Spouses still have their father-in-law. My Wife still has her husband. We also have many other family members and friends who have suffered and needed support, and because I did not listen to a culture of death, I have been here to help them my family and others walk through the valley of the shadow of death, and emerge alive and grateful. The men and women that died in WW1, WW2, Korea, Afghanistan, and other conflicts, did not risk their lives for a nation that turns its back on its most vulnerable and weakest people. Justin Trudeau sends hundreds of million to newspapers and then claims the government has no money for vets. The province of Saskatchewan even had an option for Maid on its phone system! THIS HAS TO STOP. History will judge those who turned their backs on the most vulnerable, and termed them “useless eaters” like Hitler did. How can we claim to be a kind and benevolent society when we are willing for the sake of convenience or ideology to further the most wicked, evil, and despicable crimes of the Nazi party? Actively encouraging and promoting the genocide of any deemed not “productive members of society”? The answer is we cannot claim to be kind, good or benevolent. If we are to go down this path of darkness, we will doom our civilization. It will only be a matter of time until all who do bend their knee to this evil will soon themselves be in the cross hairs of this murderous cult. No one will escape this evil, the evil of sacrificing living breathing precious human beings on the altar of convenience, money, and religious cult worship of death. We must stand up now. We must peacefully stand and unite against this cult worship of death. We must stand together and peacefully oppose those who would promote this culture of death, and instead promote and defend the sanctity of life at all costs. The future of humanity and our very existence depends on it.
Sincerely,
Brandon Pringle

Whether you have an atheistic or theistic worldview, the human race does not need any more ways to kill each other. Any reason for killing a human being, other than defending your own life, can not be justified by any type of sweet talking language. Support for killing human beings by MAID or ABORTION shows a hatred for oneself and also the human race on this planet. STOP!

This absolutely cannot be done ! Every citizen has the absolute right to life as a God given right. No government, person ,elected or non elected body should have the right to take this right away. Ever!

I totally agree with Richard Pidde's feedback. I totally am against any kind of MAID in any shape or form. In today's medicine, there are all sorts of tools to deal with physical and mental issues; we just need people to understand that!
Using MAID is a cop-out, an easy way out, mostly for the survivors!

DO NOT AGREE With this proposal. We assume we live in a democratic society where NO ONE can tell us WHAT WE HAVE TO DO.
THANK YOU. Lets keep this freedom.

I truly believe in the sanctity of life. I also believe that no law should ever force any doctors, nurses or any medical staff to be involved in any procedure that they believe to be immoral. Especially when death is involved.

I do not understand how anyone can force a person to do a thing that is against their conscience and is a thing that is appallingly immoral.

All citizens, regardless of occupation should have conscience right protection.
Co- ersing medical professionals or allied professions to violate their moral objection to the killing and harming against their conscience is wrong.
These arbitrary guidelines and rules will negatively impact the practice and care of medicine in Alberta
Thank you.

This is the 21st century and the best we can offer is MAID and abortion. There’s something very wrong about that. Shameful to say the least. Haven’t we made great strides. Disgusting world we live in.

This plan is wrong, wrong, wrong,. It is forcing doctors to assist end of life, whereas the profession is based on making efforts to sustain life with the medicine now available to ease pain. Many towards end of life are confused, unable to think what is best for themselves. It is wrong to force doctors to determine who is the best to assist them to die.

A DOCTOR SHOULD NEVER BE FORCED TO PARTICIPATE IN EUTHANASIA OR ABORTION DECISIONS, I.E. DEATH DECISIONS, AGAINST HIS OR HER WILL.

You have become mirror images of the Nazi doctors of pre WWII Germany. It is disgusting what depths of deprivation you will sink to in aborting children, sexually mutilating children, putting people down like dogs, and hiding your horrible Covid lies and bungling stupidity. As an industry you are now due for a complete purging and sanitizing of your sick and perverted behaviour, you are a death cult in many ways. Nuremberg reckoning for you cannot come too soon!

I am totally against Alberta’s CPSA proposed changes that a doctor must “proactively maintain an effective referral plan for the frequently requested services they are unwilling to provide.”
This would force doctors to participate in the killing of preborn babies by abortion or killing of the sick, the elderly, or those with mental illness by assisted suicide, by requiring doctors opposed to such practices to actively refer patients to someone who will provide it. This is murder!! Where would this go from there?

The CPSA’s proposed wording states that doctors must

I am totally against Alberta’s CPSA proposed changes that a doctor must “proactively maintain an effective referral plan for the frequently requested services they are unwilling to provide.”
This would force doctors to participate in the killing of preborn babies by abortion or killing of the sick, the elderly, or those with mental illness by assisted suicide, by requiring doctors opposed to such practices to actively refer patients to someone who will provide it. This is murder!! Where would this go from there?

The CPSA’s proposed wording states that doctors must

Do not force doctors to go against their convictions unless you want to further reduce the number of good dedicated doctors.

This is such a piviotal issue - thank you for asking.

I look for health care providers who care for me as a whole person. I ask for their personal views on these life and death issues. I need to trust that if I were in a period of serious physical/emotional crisis that those providers would remain true to those values. Doctors should stand firm in their comittment to their patients and never be forced to comply with a government dictate that they do not believe is in the best interest of their patient. Doctors should never be complicit in willfully ending the lives of their patients.
No to killing the sick, hopeless, preborn, disabled or mentally ill. Let's figure out how to help our suffering humanity.

I do not think that doctors should be forced to refer any procedure which they have a constitutional right to object to. Example MAID, abortions etc.
This situation would further hinder my trust in our health care system.

It would be immoral to require physicians to refer people to providers who are willing to do procedures that the physician believes are immoral. You would be making a problem rather than solving one. Leave the matter to individual conscience not to compulsion.

Health support vs Death support?
Doctors should not be supporting death!
At minimum Doctors should have the freedom of choice to not support or encourage in any way including referrals to death sentences!
Why is the CPSA so bent on supporting Death as opposed to supporting Life?
Maybe they need to re-evaluate their purpose, morals, and conscience!

I believe that each human being is created by God and our physicians have to keep their oaths Do no Harm, meaning to protect the unborn child who can’t defend him or herself, the elderly who are the anchor for their country the disabled who are so precious and the once who are mentally ill who need our love. MAID is immoral and criminal.

We should not allow Doctors to violate their oath at all leave alone to force them to do the opposite. This is unacceptable in every aspect.

The Alberta Medical Association should be ashamed ....trying to force doctors (and other medical personnel) into going againist their moral and professional obligations to do not harm. Obviously this association has become comfortable with killing people or unborn babies. I believe forcing people into believing it's ok to vaccinate with the Covid injections was the first step in lying to the community. Now they are trying to play God again with this move!

Over the past few years, many people been forced to make choices between their conscience and their livelihood. When a person of morals is forced to violate their knowledge of right and wrong, it is a 'little death' of their sense of self. To be forced to assist in a death by maid or by abortion is a violation of most people's moral code. The CPSA should not be making people choose to go against their beliefs. Have you learned nothing from the Covid years? You lost many, many good doctors and medical professionals during that time and you will be forcing other good people to either leave their professions or violate their conscience. How is such a concept acceptable to you?

Doctors take an oath to do no harm. Being forced to refer for procedures that kill their patients (MAiD, abortion) violates this. Why should a doctor be forced to refer for a procedure they think is bad for their patient? How is anyone supposed to trust their doctor when they are just as likely to kill you as help you? There is already a huge shortage of doctors and if you force them to violate their conscience many more will quit or leave, and even more people will be left without access to primary care. It is an insane plan.

The proposed changes are a horrible idea. If doctors of conscience are forced to flee Alberta’s medical scene, then all the province will be left with are doctors who have no problem with killing their patients.

Here is why the proposed changes are a bad idea:

"Doctor Referrals" are done if a physician thinks something will be in the patient's best interests. Our current system allows a patient to find a MAiD - or abortion - provider without their objecting physician being forced to be involved. Forcing a doctor to make an “effective referral plan” is forcing them to participate in the evil of abortion or euthanasia.

Finding the right patient-physician fit requires a diverse medical system with a variety of different providers with different opinions. Many patients want providers whose values fit with theirs, and a large group of patients want to be served by providers who decline to offer certain procedures. For example, many from the disability community have called for "safe spaces" where they know the practitioner sees their life as worth living and wouldn’t agree to end their lives when they are at a low point.

Result in increased doctor shortages: since "effective referral" has been introduced in other provinces, many providers have left, retired early, or sought registration in Alberta because of our more reasonable conscience objection standard. Adopting the "effective referral" language from other provinces potentially exposes our system to further loss of providers who would be frustrated with the addition of this wording.

With all due respect, I am not going to be nice for the sake of false pretenses. This is my Clarion Call to you.

A society, a profession, a culture, that turns away from the Living God shall likewise reap the results of their Godlessness and moral decadence.

REPENT!

Give God the honor glory and obedience that He is due.
God is a God of LIFE!

Nobody has the right to take a life
This is not going forward in Medical support for all of life is valuable , this is a step backwards. From my Heart I I believe this is an attack on the Humans That some group of people think they have authority to Kill …. NOT TO BE …..
I am praying Gods Hand Will Move this Mountain In Jesus Name Amen
Thankyou for bringing this to the attention of everyone person, Who Matter !

Society is destroyed when liberty of conscience is restricted in arbitrary ways that amount to tyranny. This is especially true when applied to professionals, in this case physicians. We must not abandon high moral values for the sake of the tyranny of the majority. We do well to remember that "God alone is Lord of the conscience, and hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men, which are, in anything, contrary to his Word"

I am not in favour of this proposal. I feel doctors should not be forced to participate in maid or euthanasia in any form.

No more abortions, or killing people of the sick, the elderly, or those with mental illness by assisted suicide, by requiring doctors opposed to such practices to actively refer patients to someone who will provide it. No Doctor shortages.

Please remove the words “effective referral”from the draft.
This goes against all health care ..
Thanks,

Please do not force doctors to participate in the rferral of people seeking abortion or death by MAID. Referral is an indication of approval that any conscieintous objector would not want. Has there been any indication of "need" for this service, or is the medical association simply trying to punish those who disagree with their wishes?

Doctors take an oath - "At first do no harm"! This is the Doctor's conscience, choice, and values guiding and directing his patient's care. What is in the best interest of the patient? The doctor/patient relationship must be first and foremost a trust relationship. I, the patient must be allowed to trust him to act according to his oath, to "do no harm". Therefore, the doctor must not be coerced or obliged, in any way, by any government interference in the patient's care. This care is private and personal, between the doctor and his patient. If this sacred trust is broken between the doctor and patient due to this intrusive overreach of government, the patient has no one to turn to for his healthcare. Human life is sacred, not disposable, when it becomes inconvenient

Alberta Doctors must retain their rights to defend the sanctity of life, which is one of their primary purpose’s.

Interesting "proposition".... don't you think you they are killing enough people by not providing proper care and administrating questionable medications and procedures that do more harm than good and on top of that they want to be allowed to kill unborn babies and elderly people ? Who are they ? I thought we all agreed that medical system should be about preserving and saving lives not killing !!!! Some doctors and nurses still know it, thank God, but those who supposedly are the decision makers in medical system, what about them? Are they working for us or for some demonized organizations ? Fire them all right now for just thinking about something as idiotic as this proposal. !!!!

Normalizing euthanasia will reinforce the hopelessness inherent in mental illness and erode the support offered them by the community. To be human is to be vulnerable. To be a citizen of Canada with a mental disorder or disability will be dangerous if Bill C-7 amendment is passed.

I am totally against this change in wording that would force doctors who are opposed to MAID and abortion to refer their patients to a medical professional willing to commit these heinous acts. The only doctors left in Alberta will be those willing to do harm to their patients.

This is not the Canada I'm proud of

A Physician must be allowed to follow his religion, conscience. Must have free choice. The Alberta Physician & surgeon board I was horrified to learn is a private board.

Physicians must be able to follow their conscience in medical practice and not have to be a party to murder, be it abortion or medically assisted suicide!! They should not have to refer anyone for either of these procedures when it is against their personal beliefs.

There is not one good reason to go against Gods creation and give doctors the authority to end someone’s life. Stop pushing doctors to have to choose to either move away to practice within their morals or go into early retirement. We need doctors! Stop the euthanasia and abortions. How dare the government put murder on people's conscience.

Thank you for requesting feedback on the proposed policy changes.

I am concerned and disappointed in the proposed change in this policy to require an 'effective referral' from conscientious objectors. Alberta already has a system in place which does not present a barrier to anyone seeking to access MAiD, where both the rights of the patient and the rights of the physician are respected. By adding 'effective referral' to the policy the rights of the physicians are taken away, forcing them to make a referral against what they believe, are the best interests of their patients (there is no other area in medicine where physicians are required to make an effective referral for a patient for something that is not felt to be in their best interest). Therefore I request that this be removed.

As a retired palliative care physician I have walked and worked with many patients and their families in their end-of-life journey. It has been a privilege to do so. Unfortunately, especially in these latter years, the resources required to support patients and families at this time of their lives has been severely under-resourced and this may result in their seeking MAiD. There is a greater need for high quality hospice and palliative care because most people want to live well until the time of their death and do not want to hasten their death. As a physician who seeks to assist patients in living well until their death, the pressure of 'an effective referral' does not leave space to assist them and help them navigate their lament of loss and their lament of suffering that is a normal process in living well in the dying process.

A requirement against a doctor's conscience to make an "effective referral" is morally wrong and goes to the core of their deeply held convictions.
Please remove this wording from the Conscientious Objection Standard of Practice.

Freedom of conscience needs to be upheld!
Murder is murder and no one should be forced to participate. Murder is not health care!!! Plus these proposals go against the Hippocratic oath.

I believe that the College of Physicians and Surgeons is defying the oath taken, first being ‘do no harm’. This is totally unacceptable. The College banning the sale of ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine for treatment against Covid 19 infections is also contrary to the oath. Common sense needs to return to this organization.

I am pro life!

Please do not enshrine murder (pre born babies, elderly, sick, insane, depressed, or socially “unacceptable”) into your protocols/standards. The understanding of a doctor is one who heals. The activity of promoting, hastening, or causing death, or judging who should live or die, is not understood to be the role of an actual doctor. Redefining the doctor role to include murder, will force all to regard doctors as a potential risk to life and limb, and refute their current position and role in proper society

forcing people to die because they are struggling in life is wrong, lazy and satanic. i was suicidal for 30 years of my life and i have now healed and i am running my own business and am completely free from suicidal depression. with proper care and treatment it is possible to heal. please don't force people to die

I absolutely disagree with the government trying to force all doctors to participate in “referring”their patients to be murdered themselves or to murder their own unborn child.
Do not allow new definitions to sugar coat crimes against humanity!
Everyone faces judgement. Believe it!

Where the hell do you come from? Hell? How dare you mandate what a doctor is able to do or not do based on an ideological stand rather than real life?
A doctor has to be congruent with his/her beliefs and moral grounds to be effective in his/her practice. By forcing doctors to heel like some kind of dog to your own amoral and unethical standards you are further erasing the crucial doctor/patient relationship, a relationship you already almost killed during the plandemic.
I don't look at anything I am told by a doctor or nurse any more without major doses of 'salt'.
For God's sake, drop your Neomarxist/nazi stance and become real humans again, if you can.

As per the new world order we the people are nothing more than livestock and will be treated as such

This proposal is against the oath that doctors take and there is no gray area. DO NO HARM. The fact that is even being considered is disgusting and should be disregarded immediately. A doctor is required to provide the care that he/she took the oath to provide. If a patient wants to explore MAID let them seek out the misguided professional and it should never be a requirement to go against your own conscience.

As a senior, how frightening to think that I will not be able to access a doctor who is not involved in the killing of his/her patients! I can foresee good doctors leaving our beloved Alberta to avoid being part of this immoral practice. A good indication of evil is that people must be forced to comply. Stop this madness.

As Robert S Hauptman has stated, Effective Referral forces physicians of conscience to be complicit in the death of their patients. This is asking far too much.

Doctors should not be forced to recommend their patients to those medical practitioners that will help them end their lives. The individual’s rights of freedom of religion and conscience must be preserved above all else for doctors who are morally and ethically opposed to the termination of life through the policies and practices of MAID, legalized abortion, etc.

Doctors in Alberta should NOT be forced, through CPSA regulations, to prescribe, recommend or give referrals, to patients for services they (doctors) do not agree with.

There is too much government interference in the lives of every day citizens as it is without forcing doctors to adhere to decisions, which will affect many, made by 'a few' people at CPSA who have not been elected to make those decisions on behalf of the citizens of Alberta.

I believe that doctors should be allowed to make decision based on their moral conscious

I already know medical doctors and pharmacologists who have given up their professions because they were under pressure to make suggestions for ways to kill babies, elderly, or unhappy people. We need to protect these good members of our communities from pressure, rather than increasing the pressure for them to conform to someone else's idea of their responsabilities.

I wonder what happen to the HYPOCRITICAL OATH that doctors take, shouldn't that be the first priority of concern. DO NO HARM. Or is that still part of the Doctors creed/obligations. Asking anyone to take A LIFE should be punishable by law whether it's the government ruling or not. I am of the opinion that no one has that right and if I were to preform that act, that I believed that person needed to DIE because they didn't have the mental capacity to function I would be rightfully charged with murder. What ever degree that would be enforced by our nations laws. Murder is murder no matter how they want to Justify it. Threatening anyone with the loss of there occupation because they object to the government wants is in my opinion against the laws of our once great nation. It's no easy job to make a stand and say no when faced with the results of your governing body. THERE IS NO FREEDOM of CHOICE FOR THESE DOCTORS.

NO, NO, NO. It is morally wrong to force doctors to violate their conscience or face disciplinary action. They took an oath to give the best care for a patient. This violates everyones right to live. And who are you, to force a doctor to make a choice whether I live or die, against my wishes. This is violation against my rights and doctors rights as well. It is a doctors right to save lives, not being FORCED to end them. This would also prompt doctors to leave the province and we all know there is a shortage of doctors. There is more going on here than meets the eye. Shame on CPSA for even considering this.

Don’t force doctors the do things that are against their conscience. Doctors have duty bring life to all their patients not death.

Doctors should not be forced to refer procedures to which they have a constitutional right to object to. By taking away their freedom to say yay or nay regarding a referral, you are making them into puppets and we have too many puppets in this world right now.

As a retired RN. I remember having a choice in 1969 to participate in these horrible procedures. What happened to freedom of choice for the medical profession? Shame on forcing this upon our Medical staff in this day and age.

The general understanding of "health care" has been, and hopefully will continue to mean all things therapeutic. Any decision that would dictate the opposite is unconscionable. Though Do No Harm is not legally binding, it is the moral standard we expect all medical practitioners to uphold.

Life is sacred, life is beautiful. I’m afraid that we have lost our moral compass. My plea to you is that I DO NOT want medical doctors to be forced to KILL their fellow mankind against their moral conscience. Do not, please do not.

Abortion is the killing of a helpless baby,
no matter how we look at it. Physicians save lives, not willfully take them.
Adoptions and other caregiver support should be encouraged .
This is a travesty ....as is MAID !!
Compassionate Palliative Care is what is needed for for our dying and suffering.

For physicians and nurse practitioners, How does the proposed wording stating that doctors must “proactively maintain an effective referral plan for the frequently requested services they are unwilling to provide” reconcile with the Hippocratic oath to “do NO harm”? If a physician doesn’t believe their conscience will allow them to perform said “frequently requested services”, then to maintain an effective referral plan is morally just as reprehensible to them. What does timely mean anyway? Define the terms; then and only then should changes be made.

All physicians ,nurses and human beings have a right to object to demands that they violate there conscience in order to comply with some governmental mandate. This is a totaletarian garbage!

Physicians who for example conscientiously object to euthanasia should NOT be required to refer anyone for care. End of story. Physicians should NOT have to provide an effective referral plan for the procedure to which they object, be it abortion or euthanasia or "transgender" care. If a physician feels that a procedure causes harm, they should have the freedom to not make such a referral. Physicians should be able to communicate their own personal values or cultural values or religious values, provided they tell patients that they are giving personal, not medical advice. "Neutral values" are not neutral. Killing is not health care. MAID is not medical assistance in dying but rather state-sanctioned murder. Even asking patients if they want "MAID" is objectionable, since from the moment a person is forced to ask themselves whether NOW is the time to kill themselves, they are being told implicitly that it is a good idea to kill oneself (get killed) and their life has immediately been diminished unnaturally, since asking oneself such a question is neither necessary nor inevitable.

This is wrong to enforce this . The practices that are proposed to be required of all Doctors goes against human ethics and personal convictions and should not be enforced on those Doctors who disagree . It also has potential to cause many good doctors to leave s practice that is already struggling to get enough workers.

No, Doctors do not have to aid a person to get euthanasia or an abortion. Doctors can not be forced to refer a person wanting euthanasia or abortion. Doctors do not have to forced do do these life ending evil deeds no matter what. If a person wants euthanasia they can find a doctor who will aid them to get MAID. If a person wants to kill their child let them use their own abilities to find an abortion practitioner. Defund abortion. It is killing. Defund this evil of killing Albertans. If a person wants to kill their child let them pay for it. Don’t let it be used as birth control. If a person wants MAID than these poor people should be aided to choose life. When Doctors are life affirming give thanks to God that they haven’t all gone to the devil.

Keep it simple. Do not force anybody to do something against their will. History shows
that forcing people to act against their will can causes problem which benefits nobody.

I have an objection of conscience to Medical Assistance in Dying as it goes against my strongly held religious beliefs. One of God’s 10 Commandments is, “Thou shalt not kill!” Now this is transcribed from a Hebrew text which includes suicide. We have a duty to heal and help people, not to kill them. Why the push for a death cult all of a sudden in this country?

I think healthcare professionals shouldn't have to provide referrals if doing so would violate their conscience.

The conscience rights of the PHYSICIAN are those being discussed.

If, in the physician’s opinion, a patient is requesting something wrong, harmful, sinful or evil, such as assisted suicide or the killing of an innocent life, the physician should NOT be forced or coerced to participate in this wrong, harmful, sinful or evil act against their will and conscience.

Simply imagine any other act that you consider evil;’now rather than forcing someone else to commit the act, force them to sign a form and facilitate the act. You are merely moving them from actor to accomplice: both are morally culpable and would be prosecuted under our laws.

This is unacceptable.

No healthcare provider should be required to participate in a practice that violates their conscience or beliefs, whether directly or as referral. If healthcare provider chooses not to get involved in a patients situation that is there prerogative and should not be forced into it.

I am completely against forcing doctors and nurses to do anything against their conscience. I don’t trust any doctor who participated in any way in the murder of another human being and that includes doctor assisted suicide and abortion.

Congratulations, you continue dehumanize the physician and make a mockery of the concept of conscientious objection.

A physician must be free to recommend or make a case against a treatment, but this document forces them to promote what the College believes, not what they, as the professional, believe.

The changes to this document appear to address the concerns of control the College has regarding abortion, euthanasia, sexual operations, and COVID response. "You cannot deviate from what we believe" is what you are saying. It likely impacts far more, but those are the underlying cultural shifts since 2016.

What this document does is further restrict individual human rights, and as the CPSA is a single, monopolistic entity, there is no option, no freedom, to say "no". As such, I would like to recommend you trash this revision, find a conservative or libertarian to discuss this with for the next revision, and not the usual socialist party members, and come up with changes that protect the conscience rights of your members

I would not be comfortable with a physician who is not allowed to use their own conscience in providing medical advice for patient care.
It would make me wary of such doctors and their advice.
During the pandemic, a lot of trust in the medical establishment was eroded. This draft proposal is NOT helping to re-establish that broken trust.

I am totally opposed to forcing doctors who conscientiously object to abortion and assisted suicide to make referrals to other health care professionals who do provide these services.
Please respect the values and beliefs of all your doctors and pull back on these proposed draconian changes to your code of conduct!

I completely disagree with the proposed changes! If a person has a request for a certain type of care and the physician is unwilling to provide it or refer it based on his or her ethical and moral stance, then it should be up to the patient to find another doctor on their own. Doctors should be allowed the same rights and freedoms as the patient and should in no be forced to act outside of their conscience or personal standard of practice. If doctors do not feel they have the ability to provide care in a way that aligns with their moral standards I believe we will see a mass exodus of doctors and be left in an even more dire state here in Alberta.
I do NOT support the proposed changes!

What about their hypocritical oath?! I have read the objections of many weighing in on this matter and completely agree. I support the position of one of the doctors who said “I advocate for MAIL, medical assistance in living.”
By forcing doctors to act in opposition to their conscience, we’d be in grave danger of losing many excellent doctors who simply wouldn’t go along with this. In a time when doctors are in short supply, this would be a very short-sighted position to take. I implore you to not go ahead with this.

Physicians know, going into the profession, that life-and-death decisions will have to be made in their career. They know, going into the profession, that they will have patients who don't follow the life-enhancing care offered to them. Please don't add to their burden by effectively forcing them to enable death-decisions.

If a doctor is conscientiously objecting to helping a patient kill themselves, murder an unborn child, or mutilate or drug their body or child to pretend to be another sex, then they should not be required to seek out and refer to these services either. They should be able to tell a patient they conscientiously object, and the patient can find themselves another "doctor".

I believe that it is critical that all physicians be able to maintain the right to refuse a service and referral based on their moral conscience. To force anyone to go against conscience is a direct violation of our rights as free Canadians.
Many times there are options for service that a patient has not explored that will align with a physician's moral code and with their oath of practice. Physicians should always treat their patients with respect and dignity and look for ways to give them the best care they need. Often times a patient seeks care based on what they feel at the time and the resources they know about. A physician with a moral conscience will have other resources that may benefit the patient more. For example, often times a patient who request euthanasia does so because they have not been offered or cannot easily access the resources they need to thrive in life.

Healing should always be the goal.

Alberta doctors should have the right to conscientiously decide which medical practices they participate in including referring patients for procedures they conscientiously object to without judgement and career impacts. This update would change that and so I am requesting that no update be made to the standard of practice for conscientious objection.

I find this all amazing and deeply disturbing. Society is appalled by suicide but embraces assisted suicide. Alberta is in need of family doctors but their own society is considering standards that will deter a doctor, based on conscience, to practice here. Our charter of rights and freedoms seems to prefer the rights of some to the rights of others. How did we arrive at such a point? Doctors and nurses must be entitled to object on the basis of conscience…why should they not be entitled the due exercise of their conscientious beliefs? If the medical oath is to “do no harm” why is The College doing such harm to its own members by stripping them of their right to object and dictating how they must refer? Please stop and reconsider this proposal.

By taking away doctors rights to refuse to do abortions or maid you are effectively removing the rights of ALL Albertans. Some of us still want doctors who practice
With their conscious and morals and under the Hippocratic oath . You are systematically removing Doctors ability to give their best care to patients by hindering them with more rules and laws. It started during the Covid era. Doctors couldn’t speak without being punished. Now you propose this nasty amendment. Pretty soon some of us won’t even go to a doctor because all that will be left are the ones we don’t agree with. Who ever thot doctors would be forced to commit murder? Who would ever suggest such a thing??

Just like some Vets have the choice to not cut a puppy's tails off. The doctors should have the option to hang the sign "We do Not do abortions". People have the choice to find a doctor who will. And there will be Pro-abortion doctors out there as well.
Just like Trudeau had a choice to address the public peaceful rally but chose to trample people with horses and UN Police.

These "effective referral" clause here is unnessecary, poorly timed, and encroach unfairly upon the rights of our medical practitioners.
Unnessecary as we have medical care of all types available. It is not at all hard to go to a walk in clinic or specialized clinic to get a service if you are not able to get from your doctor. People can also seek out a new doctor if they find their doctor is not ethically in line with what they want.
Poorly timed because we are already in a medical staffing crisis. Some doctors who hold strongly to certain matters of conscience will quit their jobs if this is forced upon them. This will worsen the staffing crisis and cause us to lose skilled medical practitioners who will not be easy to replace. Some will be irreplacable.
It encroaches unfairly on a medical practitioner's rights. Freedom of conscience is a freedom which should not be cast aside lightly. Let us not play games. We know what issues this concerns. We do not have a swath of doctors refusing to refer for gallbladder surgery or to prescribe antibiotics. The principle issues this would concern would be referring for MAID and abortion. These are very serious issue for some doctors as they are ending a human life. It is not unreasonable for a doctor to percieve these as a contravention of both his job as one who seeks to save a preserve life and his conscience. Though doctors should be professional, they must not cease from being human as history has shown us the dark things which happen whem doctors lay aside any moral conviction and simply do the job they are told to do. The past century has been marked by horrific medical experimentation carried out by doctors who set aside their consciences to simply do their jobs.
If this change is made, the long term results of both much more severe staffing crisis and doctors resign or move to other provinces or countries where they still have this freedom and the evil of moral-less doctors will be on your heads.
Let our doctors act according to their consciences.

I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live -Deuteronomy 30:19

As most physicians entered their profession to improve and save life, not to end it, there will be a number who will leave their practices if forced to perform an act that violates their conscience. We cannot afford to lose more physicians by imposing this upon them.

Please remove the "effective referral" portion from this policy. Referring is done if a physician thinks something will be in the patient's best interests. It is akin to participating in the act. For the majority of physicians who will not participate in providing MAID, a referral forces them to act against their conscience. This is not simply a preference but a deeply held moral conviction. Our current system allows a patient to find a MAID provider without their objecting physician being forced to be involved. It respects the mutual freedoms of both parties. Let's keep it that way.

I see activists campaigning to make the "effective referral" piece mandatory for all physicians and pushing for censure of any objectors. This is not how a free, respectful society works. Nor will it build trust in the medical system by vulnerable patients.

The inclusion of "timely" access to referral elsewhere is problematic, given our current broken system involves protracted referral to treatment times, that has to do with factors outside of the physician's control. This needs to be re-worded, I think.
Conscientious objection is important to protect, as a physician who is in moral distress over pressure to comply will not function well and the patients in their care will also suffer. There should be room for conscientious objection in the currently evolving/complex issues of MAID and gender dysphoria/affirmation.

I object to the changes being proposed. No doctor should be forced to do anything their conscience objects to

Doctors job is to SAVE LIFES, not to murder lives

Such evil is absolutely unacceptable and must be stopped.

Maid kills people.

WE need to cure people not kill them.

Establish Palliative Care centres where people are care for in a respectable helpful manner

A close relative of mine is a surgeon -- not just a surgeon who aims to complete as many surgeries as possible in a day, leaving patient care to others, but a surgeon in a mission hospital in a remote region of Africa who does everything she can to save lives; who will sit by the bedside of a dying patient through the night to provide care and compassion; who will seek innovative ways of using what she can find in a country that doesn't have the medications and technologies available in Canada to perform procedures considered not possible; who finds herself at odds with healthcare professionals to whom time off or limiting hours of practice per day seem more important than the lives of patients; and who will be training third-world country doctors to be caring, compassionate surgeons. It saddens me to know that she will never be able to practice in Alberta if the Standards of Practice are amended as proposed, because she will never refer anyone to another physician if the intent of such a referral is to terminate a human life. Under the guise of providing "care", these amendments will result in the selection of physicians willing to terminate life rather than save it -- not the kind of physician to whom I want to entrust my life and health.

Healthcare in Alberta must support and reflect the right to life for all: ill, elderly and preform. Physicians must be allowed to provide an environment of nurture, not death.

One of the great things about Alberta is freedom to choose for everyone. Alberta patients have the freedom to choose if they want MAID or an abortion. Alberta doctors have the freedom to choose if they want to perform MAID or an abortion. It’s a doctor’s right to choose, and they should not be forced to go against their conscience. I think this could make Alberta doctors leave or give up their practice. We can’t afford to lose more doctors.

Abortion, assisted suicide and all that goes with it is murder! No one should be forced to assist in any of this!

People should not be forced to direct patients seeking out MAID to another doctor that will provide MAID. Doctors should not be carrying out MAID as it is unethical and murder. No one should be ever forced to go against their conscience in this regard even to the point of referral. If someone believes MAID is a crime against humanity why should they be forced to refer someone else to carry out that crime. This is deplorable standards and I earnestly hope this idea put aside as it doesn’t benefit society.

Alberta needs to be a leader in the present demoralization of Canada. It appears that the removal of anyone deemed unacceptable is at the forefront of those governing this country. We are blessed to have doctors that have beliefs and morals and truly follow "do no harm". To place those physicians in a position that would result in them leaving their chosen profession is unacceptable. Do not be a follower in what other provinces have chosen for their health practices. Lead the way back to what is good, right and true.

Please do not force Drs to go against their conscience to refer patients for MAID & other issues. Do doctors still take the oaths to help patients become healthy not kill them ?

After reading the updated practice standards it is apparent that contradictory language is used. A physician cannot give details that are against his/her conscience without having the patient question what they think. These would clearly be controversial care elements with high stakes outcomes.
Restricting their ability to discuss this with a patient in an honest and forthright way undermines the patient - physician relationship of trust and transparency not to mention the hippocratic oath that they are expected to adhere to.
There has been a plethora of information / advertising and media coverage on these controversial procedures so that the patient can easily access any one with a google search and self referral to such a clinic or program.
Asking physicians to become involved in any way when it is in conflict with their conscience is not ethical and undermines the profession. It should not be more than a statement like “I do not provide that service but my secretary will give you a pamphlet to direct your inquiry” or a similar statement that will not require an opinion or discussion thereby also protecting the physician from moral / personal stress. Patients have rights to chose but physicians also must have their rights and health protected. Forcing referral is not protecting their right of conscience or their mental health.

No doctor should be forced against their conscience to refer a patient to another doctor for MAID or abortion. Doctors take an oath to to no harm. A patient who is in distress needs care. We also need to consider that mental health issues are treatable. No doctor should be referring patients for MAID due to mental health issues

It is a scary situation when doctors who are supposed to heal and care also become participants in killing their patients. How can anyone trust their doctor if they are 'okay' with ending their lives as opposed to 'doing no harm'. We are living in scary times, especially in Canada in recent years it seems. If people want to end their lives or the life of a child in their womb, they can (sadly) find 'doctors' that will perform such 'services' without forcing the involvement of doctors who rightly object to it.
Bringing in this kind of change would soon make it so that the life-affirming doctors would leave or retire to avoid being forced into such a thing and tragically Alberta would be left with only doctors that are fine with seeing their patients being killed as opposed to healed or given palliative care to ease their passing. Scary thought.

Physicians should be entitled to conscientous objection in these circumstances. If patients have the opportunity to seek other options without a doctor's referral, there should be no requirement for the referral. There is no need to limit professionals' constitutional rights. We already have a shortage of doctors, which will only worsen with these proposed requirements.

I consider MAiD to be state sanctioned murder and I believe the majority of Albertans have the same opinion. So how can you coerce medical professionals to perform something against their consciences? This is just wrong.

Forcing doctors to follow any mandated procedure that is against their conscience should never be undertaken. This type of behaviour from an overseeing body is undermining the hard earned trust that many excellent doctors have spent their careers gaining. The idea that an unaccountable body should be able to direct the decisions of individual doctors regarding individual patients is absurd. Many people are losing confidence in the medical system as a whole and bringing in authoritative decrees does not instill confidence that the system is living up to "First do no harm". If the authoritative body cannot hold to the humanity of the Hippocratic Oath, perhaps they should resign their positions as they have lost touch with why the medical system exists in the first place.

Although all doctors should be required to stay non-judgemental in dealing with patient requests they object to, they should not be compelled to assist in anything they determine is harmful to the patient.

Patients regularly ask for help or treatments that doctors don't agree are right for the patient and the doctor will decline. For example during covid many people wanted to try ivermectin, but many doctors said no as they felt it was the wrong treatment. In the same way a doctor should be able to offer the solutions they think are best and if a patient wants second opinions they can seek them elsewhere.

This again is not saying the doctor can shame or lecture the patient into making a choice. The doctor should be required to remain non-judgemental in their tone and language, but they should be allowed to say if they think they requested services are not a good answer for the patient, in the same way that they would with any other service or prescription request.

There are too many things in our system labeled medical care that are actually doing harm to patients. Making a doctor “ensure timely access to” someone who is willing to proceed with an act that goes against what they believe is right, is very close to making the original doctor do the procedure themselves. What is protecting the patients with that wording? What is protecting the doctor’s conscious? Who will be the last line of defence if the doctors are forced to do this?
If there is no protection for the doctor to do what he or she believes is right, what kind of “caring” people will this demoralizing mandate bring in (or create) in our medical system?

I am glad to see that all of the other responses I have read speak to respecting every health practitioner's right of conscience. I sincerely hope you are listening to those voices. I don't understand why there is such a push in many places to turn the health care system into one like that of Nazi Germany. Most people who choose to enter the health care profession do so because they want to help improve the quality of people's lives. I believe that Health care professionals should be free to provide the best health care that they can give. I believe that the only regulations should be those to prevent willful abuse or flagrant malpractice.
As has been stated by others, if doctors are forced to do things that violate their conscience or go against preserving life, then health care in this province will suffer; we will lose the best doctors and attract those with questionable morality. Let's make Alberta a safe haven for those who value human life and Alberta will prosper.

Physicians MUST NOT be required to refer patients for treatment {including but not limited to abortion, MAID,etc} that they personally are morally opposed to. I strongly oppose this. It would be a detriment to our society. Don't chase away good doctors who want to provide and improve life and care for their patients as they took vows to do! Let them do their job and help people who need them and give them life and hope. To force doctors and surgeons to go against their morals and conscience and be required to refer patients for these treatments would go against their constitutional rights and freedoms. The wording and policy MUST NOT be changed and physicians and surgeons MUST NOT be forced to refer their patients for treatment they cannot morally endorse!

The various Canadian “ Ministries of Health”, with complete support from our Federal Government, have turned into Ministries of Death!
Under the guise of promoting so called “health and wellness”, we kill babies in the womb as a form of birth control. Abomination! Under the guise of promoting “mental health”, we would fine or imprison anyone accused of offering council to someone considering gender mutilation to deal with the fad known as gender dysphoria. Abomination! Now, under the guise of “compassion”, we would fire any medical practitioner who fails to refer someone to a eugenicist who will happily kill them! Abomination!
These practices, along with numerous other political endeavours and social experiments, will, and are, leading us as a society into a nightmarish dystopia which must be stopped.
This is madness!

you are asking doctors to go against their vow to do no harm why do you want to force them to kill or leave their practice? There is already a shortage of doctors? Are you willing to pay the ultimate price with your soul?

The goal of health care is to do no harm. Every time a person dies it has a systemic affect. By allowing the mentally ill and minors choice to die, we violate our own promise to do no harm. It has been my experience when a person chooses to die, they are usually beyond despair.

The proposed changes are anti-conscience. Potentially a new policy would violate many. Moral law has not changed. The suggestion by CPSA would enforce cpsa code. Literally you risk violation of individual practitioner's and patients conscience to edit what we all know to be truism.

Forcing doctors to make referrals that violate their conscious is a slippery slope. I much prefer that our medical practitioners be allowed and encouraged to support life. Palliative care is the humane alternative to 'assisted' death and is available to those in need.

I can't believe anyone should be forced to go against their pricipals & kill babies or people for any reason!! Surely there are enough Doctors to band together to not let this practice enforced. It is a sad world that engages people into these situations. Godis the one who makes these decisions

This is another example of woke ideological overreach forced on doctors of conscience who took an oath to do no harm. Have some courage to stand up against these policies that the current federal government has bludgeoned all of us with in the name of progressivism. This is absolutely an insane moral decline of our society.

Doctors should not be pressured to perform abortions / euthanasia! This especially should not be put into any form of code as it does through the "effective referral".

I do not agree that a doctor should be forced to participate (even on a referral basis) in harmful evils like MAID and abortion when their conscience tells them not to. As such the college should not pursue this initiative. In the last few years, health care in Canada has been in grave decline and has become totally untrustworthy due to harmful treatments being prescribed by edict and the obsession with promoting death. The CPSA has a lot of work to do and this is not that work.

I am opposed to this revision for Alberta doctors to have an "effective referral plan" for people wishing to access MAID or abortion or any other treatment/procedure that is not in their best interest. I have many friends and family who work in the healthcare profession and they are intelligent, caring and compassionate people who got into healthcare because they wanted to help people or MAIL (medical assistance in living) as opposed to referring a patient for MAID.

I worked in hospice care for 5 years and have always advocated that more resources be directed to hospice and palliative care. Pain at end of life is controllable! Many people are not aware of this!

And if we are talking about an 'effective referral system" then that same wording needs to be extended to all treatments/procedures, not just to MAID and abortion. Right now wait times for diagnostic procedures/surgeries/pain management clinics is soo ridiculously long that referral to anything in Alberta is certainly not "effective". Let's fix the brokenness of referral to life saving procedures/treatments before enforcing an "effective referral" to death care.

I'm afraid that my Mom, 94, who when she is at a low point will be offered MAID instead of being encouraged to get out, go for a walk or drink more water (all positive healthcare treatments). I am also afraid that my husband who has back pain and sciatic nerve pain will reach a point that he doesn't want to have to 'live with the pain' anymore while he waits 2 months to see a Spine/back pain specialist and another 12-18 months for surgery (if deemed an appropriate treatment).

Our government is actively enforcing and promoting a 'culture of death' and not listening to the people that they say they represent. I hope and pray that the CPSA will be more responsive to all Albertans, and not change its policies that are currently working to allow mutual freedoms to both doctors and patients. Taking away a doctor's freedom of conscience and forcing them to have an effective referral plan to death care, while at the same time not having an equally vibrant referral system to life care makes no sense.

I totally disagree with any standard of practice that forces Doctors to perform procedures that go against their conscience, cultural heritage or religion.
I feel that Maid , abortions etc are intrinsically evil and are leading our society into the abyss of an uncaring society that will offer death rather than healthcare! From what I’ve read we are already there in some provinces!

Forcing a doctor to make an “effective referral plan” is forcing them to participate in the evil.

Please allow doctors to have their own conscience and freedom to not participate in abortion and euthanasia. We value that our doctor values life of all kinds and that he will never want to get rid of us or our family members even if he thinks that our quality of life is less desirable.

I recently had a heart attack and am very grateful to the good doctors and paramedics without whom I might very well not be alive today.

That was in August. As my primary physician has moved away and nobody in the area is taking new patients I still have not seen a doctor for follow up as of today, over 4 months following my release from the hospital.

It has been pointed out that doctors who for reasons of conscience cannot take any part in the killing of their patients, are going to be forced to close their practice leaving us with even fewer doctors and exacerbating an already critical situation.

Combine this with the fact that there are many of us who pay for and use the healthcare system in Alberta who for reasons of conscience do not want services from a Doctor for ourselves or our family who would be OK with participating in the killing of one of us or who thinks that this is somehow a valid medical treatment!

By not allowing Doctors to practice according to their conscience you would also be removing the services of Alberta’s Doctors from taxpayers who need a Doctor that wants to heal them and for whom killing them is not an option.

I completely disagree with doctors or anyone in the medical field that would be forced to perform abortions, kill the elderly, disabled population, or may be forced to perform sex changes on the young and vulnerable!

I may be wrong, but it is my understanding that the vast majority of men and women who become doctors or other medical professionals do so in order to care for, protect and preserve human health and life, They do not do so in order to destroy or to promote the destruction of human life at the whim of government officials, their bureaucrats or even popular (that is, changeable) public opinion. Doctors, nurses and others in the medical professions go through many years of study, training and practice to be healthcare providers, not dealers in the cult of death.

Some few of them may have chosen to accept a misguided understanding of compassion based on the popular (that is, changeable) belief that some human lives are not worthy of care or protection and can therefore be eliminated. I am sorry for them and for their patients, for they have lost their calling and their dignity. They will have to deal with the consequences of their choice when their own ends come.

Those who choose to continue to uphold the proper high standard of "Do no harm" must not be compelled to fall into a temporary political and ideological line that undermines their deepest convictions about the sanctity of life. They must not be forced to provide death as a solution to health concerns and they must not be forced to refer patients to those who are willing to do so.

The very idea that government, public opinion or even the law (all of which are in fact changeable) could or would force doctors and other healthcare providers to go against their wills, beliefs, consciences or faiths, in order to embrace the death-cult whether directly or indirectly is abhorrent.

Please in the name of God and all that is good and honourable, do not do this.

There should be no abortions or euthanasia in Alberta period. Under no circumstances should physicians be compelled by law to participate or refer someone to have their baby killed through abortion or their own patients life killed by euthanasia. This action will clearly create a doctor shortage. Murderous and cowardly doctors will remain working and moral and upright doctors will quit or be fired.

When doctors went to medical school, the goalposts about abortion, euthanasia, and their freedom to choose were not where political and popular opinion have recently shifted them. But what do politics and popular opinion have to do with the right of a doctor to choose re his participation in ethical or medical matters? Even patients have the right to choose or refuse medical treatments. Do politicians and the populous now tell doctors how they should conduct their practices and do medical boards have to fall in line with the persuasion of any current government? This shows moral weakness on the part of medical boards. Doctors who have been unwilling to participate in abortions or euthanasia provide valuable care for hundreds or even thousands of people - but making them choose between their conscience and their hard-won profession will not increase the number of doctors who will participate in abortions but will only reduce the number of doctors available in the system as they will have to move to one of the many jurisdictions around the world that don't force them at act against their consciences. If you truly care about the number of patients who don't currently have a doctor, you would not add to the stress in the system by taking steps that will reduce the number of doctors. I admire doctors who have a conscience. What will the next government ask you to do? Will you just jump when they tell you to? Do you want to be the head or the tail? Nothing will change from the current situation if you just leave doctors alone who choose not to participate in a couple of controversial procedures. Using force doesn't make controversial procedures more acceptable it just takes away freedoms as well as constitutional rights. Work instead to encourage and attract doctors and ensure that the next-gen of medical students will not fall victim to the misuse of power by a current, non-medically trained government that wants to override the Hippocratic Oath as well as override the current global norms of medical practice which have been the norm and gold standard over centuries.

It is utterly wrong to force medical service providers to provide to or refer patients for services they believe in their conscience are wrong. It is a violation of freedom of belief, conscience, religion. It could reduce the number of clinicians available in the province.

Physicians should not be forced or pressured to refer any patient for any treatment or end of life procedure that goes against their morals, religion or conscience.

As a Christian and a very concerned albertan iam very upset with what I just read concerning Christian doctors in the near future being forced to perform abortions , murder seniors , the disabled ( euthanasia, ), this must be stopped

Palliative care has significantly improved over the years so that in the vast majority of cases patients nearing death can be reassured that they will be kept comfortable and pain free. In the odd case where a patient determined that they wanted to opt for MAID, I would have respected their decision in my previous life as a physician, even though I may not have agreed with it. I would not have wanted to participate in that process or to be forced to do so which is basically what the CPSA is trying to do under the new process it is proposing. We all want to live authentic lives. Yet the CPSA is planning to coerce some physicians in to be inauthentic and to do something that is intrinsically immoral to them under the guise of facilitating patient care.
As someone who worked on the Complaints and Review Committee for the CPSA for over 6 years, I currently find the ideology and lack of ethics of the CPSA to be appalling, and I would suggest that the Alberta Government significantly overhaul the right of the CPSA to maintain self regulation.

Stop pushing your agenda on everyone

As part of health care system, we study to do no harm to anyone and do the best we can to help everyone we care for.
So according to this oath and according to everything we learn throughout our health care classes, this is morally unacceptable and undeniably breaks the trust and confidence of a medical practitioner. Please let the doctors go with their moral obligation and what they were taught to do!

Having been an RN for nearly 40 years, I have been dismayed at the ommision of the Hypocratic Oath and the view that life is sacred. To forbid health care professionals from abstaining from participating
in life taking procedures is also a great evil in my opinion. Please ensure that all health care practitioners are afforded the right of conscience WRT such matters.

I do not believe that any healthcare professional including, but not limited to, doctors, should be forced to participate in any way in abortions, maid or transgendered therapies. Participation in these procedures also includes recommending other healthcare professionals who will perform these procedures. Doctors/medical staff who hold ethical or personal beliefs that performing or recommending these procedures would cause them to go against their beliefs should be able to decline. Albertans are informed that these procedures are available and they could also be informed via an Alberta Health website which clinics and which medical professionals they could go to, to get these procedures if they so choose.

I am NOT in support of the proposed changes by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta to the Standards of Practice that include the language of requiring doctors to agree to an "effective referral plan”. This would force doctors to go against their conscience rights if made to refer patients to procedures that would end life.

The College must realize that some doctors would leave their practice rather than agree to the proposed changes. As it is, there are fewer doctors than needed in our province. If this is made to pass, the consequences will be devastating.

Do not force our doctors to go against their conscience and refer people for abortion or MAID or any other ethically challenging issues.
Obviously this type of mandate may force doctors to leave our province and we are already seriously lacking sufficient numbers of doctors.

No doctor should be forced to abort babies or kill a person for any reason!! Their whole purpose is to save lives not destroy them!

Doctors should not be forced to provide services that they can not conscientiously do.
If I, the patient, disagree I should be able to find a doctor who better aligns with my ideas.(so we need more doctors than we have at present). Some doctors will not refer for abortion/euthanasia (do you even need a referral for that?); fine! Some will not prescribe narcotics because they have seen the harm. Some will not work on "sex change", because it is not in the best interest of the patient. Some might even not want to work on men, or on women, for religious reasons. So what? As long as it is not an emergency.
Don't push physicians out of the system when they do a lot of good work; there are so few already.
It is important to have a doctor who helps the patient, not someone who might say "Remember you can get MAID too" when I am in a dark hole when that is not what I want. Not in the best interest of the patient. We have to be able to trust our primary physician.

I completely disagree with this draft proposal to eliminate the phrase "effective referral" from the conscientious objection standard. Physicians and Health Care workers need to be free to care for their patients and clients according to their own morals and beliefs. If they are not free to do so, they will move elsewhere. We are already short doctors in an already broken Health Care system.

I say NO to mandatory referral by Physician for possible inclusion for MAID based on prognosis.

Please do not violate the constitution of rights and freedoms for those who have religious beliefs that go against their conscience, such as referring patients to those who perform abortions and those who are involved in euthanizing the elderly. Please do not violate their good consciences. They uphold the sanctity of life from the moment of conception until a person dies. We have a constitution that still protects people's religious beliefs, so please uphold it and respect their right not to participate and thus violate their conscience.

I've seen many patients who have suffered excessively due to not being provided a referral / appropriate information in a timely manner due to conscientious objection of their health care providers, so I'm pleased to see the additions to this standard. I've also seen patients who were told by healthcare providers that they will go to hell if they get MAID, that their physician will go to hell if they provide MAID, and that they should just pray instead of choosing MAID. All healthcare providers are entitled to their own beliefs, but there is no excuse to speak this way to patients (or colleagues). All healthcare providers should be able to choose whether or not they assess or provide MAID, but the autonomy and wellbeing of the patient needs to be the highest priority and clearly that has not been the case so far which is necessitating these changes to the standard.

I want to respect the medical profession which I have in the past, but lately feel like I'm struggling to trust the medical people. It seems there is such an UNNATURAL push to go in a direction of ending people's lives, such as MAID, abortions, etc. And this is even to those who may not be able to make reasonable decisions like the mentally ill. We should be doing all we can to analyze care and see what could be done to support life and improve it. This increasingly seems more like death care than sick care. How can physicians be expected to go against their consciences and the Hippocrates oath with these policies? This goes against any decency, moral or even ethical code. Just becasuse something is legal does not make it right. It even goes against faith in Almighty God. No, I am definitely and strongly, NOT for these revisions. That would be a very wrong direction.

I am against changes that force professionals to take actions that are against their sincerely held beliefs or religious convictions, including being forced to refer a patient for treatment that the professional deems to be harmful or unethical. This includes referring patients for killing of an individual, whether adult, youth, or pre-born.
I am also against the provision of Maid for youth, and am particularly against the provisions for youth to be given assistance in dying without their parents' knowledge and or consent.

I am opposed to Doctors being forced to participate in an abortion or a medically assisted suicide!
That is religious prejudice and completely against the oath that doctors take about preserving life!

I am personally deeply concerned about the proposed changes to the Conscientious Objection standard. The proposed changes basically remove the right to conscientious objection by forcing physicians who have a conscientious objection to become accomplices to procedures they have a conscientious objection to. Why was the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which is recognized and referred to in the unmodified version dispensed with in the revised version? Alberta is still one of the few provinces that truly allows physicians to act in accordance with their conscience. Where will doctors go if Alberta also restricts their conscience. Where will patients go who want a doctor with principles similar to their own? As citizens in a democracy we must respect the rights and freedoms of our fellow citizens and not force them to become accomplices to procedures that inevitably cause death.

Thank you for this opportunity to express my views on this subject
I do not think that doctors should be forced to refer any procedure which they have a constitutional right to object to. Example MAID, abortions etc.
I believe in life from conception to a natural death

Please ensure that a physician will be able to continue acting according to their conscience. There are many physicians who object to abortion and MAID because of deeply held convictions. There are also many patients who object. We live in a society where people have the freedom to access abortion services as well as MAID (though I wish it weren't so). A physician who chooses not to give a referral for an abortion or MAID cannot prevent the patient from accessing these services.

Do not force doctors to go against their Hippocratic oath, violate their conscience, and perform abortions or mercy killing. I stand against this nefarious edict.

It is simply illogical to claim to be protecting a health care worker's conscience while forcing them to act contrary to their conscience in referring patients to other professionals who will do what they consider unethical.

I don't think doctors and other medical staff should be forced to go against their conscience. I have an extreme example to relay here: a friend of mine years ago who worked as a young gynecologist in Germany was pressured to do abortions and it troubled him extremely, he ended up committing suicide. Doctors carry a heavy load meeting daily with patients who are suffering, or facing an untimely death and so on. We shouldn't put them under this kind of moral and psychological pressure/bind/strain. If a mother to be wants to take the life of her child, let her take the responsibility upon herself to find a doctor who agrees with her views. It might give her a little bit of time to change her mind and decide to save that child's life. The same goes for people who want to end their own life.
Please protect doctors and their mental health! Thank you.

I don't think doctors and other medical staff should be forced to go against their conscience. I have an extreme example to relay here: a friend of mine years ago who worked as a young gynecologist in Germany was pressured to do abortions and it troubled him extremely, he ended up committing suicide. Doctors carry a heavy load meeting daily with patients who are suffering, or facing an untimely death and so on. We shouldn't put them under this kind of moral and psychological pressure/bind/strain. If a mother to be wants to take the life of her child, let her take the responsibility upon herself to find a doctor who agrees with her views. It might give her a little bit of time to change her mind and decide to save that child's life. The same goes for people who want to end their own life.
Please protect doctors and their mental health! Thank you.

I really appreciate the opening statement of the preamble which states "CPSA recognizes that regulated members have the right to limit the health services they provide for reasons of conscience, cultural belief or religion." Unfortunately, some of the points in the body of the proposed standard contradict this statement.

Specifically, Section 1f uses the language "effective referral, " a process which makes the referring health care provider complicit in the action and thereby violates their conscience, as well as the principles of non-maleficience and beneficience. It should be replaced with a statement such as "proactively maintain a non-judgmental approach and be aware of the resources to provide for frequently requested services they are unwilling to provide."

Section 2c talks of adverse clinical outcomes related to delayed therapy. This section is not needed at all. MAID can be accessed in Alberta through self-referral, as can abortion. In my own practice, a lot of the delays for ordinary, non-controversial therapies are related to patient ambivalence. Other delays which have adverse clinical outcomes are secondary to lack of funding for medications, basic human necessities such as housing, and lack of availability of services such as psychiatric care & palliative care. Indeed, these systemic factors are actually not infrequently the basis for someone considering MAID and need to be addressed urgently.

Thank you for this opportunity to have input into the future of our profession and our province.

I do not think that forcing anyone to go against their conscience is right or democratic, wise or excusable. If doctors feel that a medical procedure will harm their patient in any way why should they be forced to refer that person to another who will end up harming them in the way the doctor hoped to avoid? It would be wrong to draw someone into doing anything that they feel is wrong, evil or harmful to their patient in any way. As well, this is a slippery slope and could lead to doctors being forced to do these very same precedures themselves.

I appreciate the CPSA Council’s work in guiding our profession, and have read the proposed changes to the Conscientious Objection Standard of Practice. The introduction of an “effective referral” is not acceptable to many physicians. For many an “effective referral” is seen as contrary to their conscience, cultural beliefs and/or religious traditions. I worry that the suggested change may cause many physicians to experience moral distress if they are trying to practice according to their personal convictions, yet are being compelled to do otherwise by CPSA Standards. I suspect that if the proposed change is approved, it will cause some physicians to retire early, change their scope of practice, or move to another jurisdiction to work. Given the current crisis in our healthcare system, I don’t think the proposed change is prudent. In addition I think our current system and standards does an excellent job in finding the balance between providing patient access to particular services and allowing a physician to practice according to their beliefs.

It is also hard to interpret how the proposed changes of “effective referral” would apply in cases of MAiD. The MAiD Standards of practice already specify what is required of a physician when a patient requests MAiD, and I have difficulty reconciling the proposed changes in this document with the MAiD standards of practice. I would suggest that Section 1.f. be reworded to remove the term “effective referral”.

Thank you for your time in reviewing this feedback, and I appreciate your thoughtful reflection moving forward.

A doctor or health professional should not be forced to refer a patient to someone to perform a "service", I.e. abortion euthanasia or MAID if this goes against his conscience, belief, or sworn decision to do no harm. To even request this of them is unconscionable.

I strongly oppose the proposed change to the CPSA's Standards of Practice which would require that a physician in Alberta maintain an "effective referral" plan. Such a requirement would require Alberta physicians to actively participate in morally dubious practices such as "MAID". As a result, it would put many physicians in the impossible position of either violating their consciences, or violating the CPSA's Standards of Practice and putting their careers at risk. Moreover, this change would run contrary to the assurance from the Supreme Court of Canada which assured physicians that nothing in its ruling (which confirmed the constitutionality of MAID) “…would compel physicians to provide assistance in dying.” This is precisely what the proposed change to the CPSA's Standards of Practice would do. I therefore strongly urge the CPSA not to adopt this change.

I just heard about this proposed change forcing doctors to commit what I consider murder of young potential Albertans, even if it is against their conscience. Some of us have a conscience that tells us to save life, not kill it. Whether it is for religious reasons or just higher standards no one in this democracy should have the right to force others to commit murder. This sounds like Hitler's regime when human rights are removed. I hope there are enough doctors on their Board to defeat this proposal. Or else I hope our government can step in and prevent such dictatorial action.

Doctors are not Automatons!
We are people, with a wide spectrum of moral, ethical and religious beliefs.
Doctors should not be forced to "effectively refer" for a procedure they disagree with
While society at large has seen a recent gradual deterioration in personal rights, there are certain lines that should not be crossed. There is enough access and availability within the system (Canada's already setting records) that there's no need for a doctor to "effectively refer" someone for MAID.

Here in lies the dilemma. The intersection of parallels. How can this be? Parallels by definition can never intersect, but this is what the CPSA is proposing. That the medical profession of doctors in Alberta, real people, that took an oath to do no harm, submit to DOING harm by being forced to maintain, and lets be honest here without all flowery words, a killers list. A list of people that will discredit the Hypocritic oath, and take a life for money. This line of life is now being crossed.
The preservation of life is rooted in the very core of what it is to be human. Has the CPSA even considered the detrimental affects on the health of physicians it claims to serve by wanting to impose a standard that goes against the core reason for becoming a physician?
If the CPSA so under values it own ethics, SHAME! It must not demand by force and intimidation, that other physicians do the same. The oath and the social morality it expounds too, is bigger than the college and in fact, the college has no authority to change or marginalize it or the effect of it.
Consider this. At one time, drugs were only administered by physicians, now kids in school peddle more. If doctors now have the license to kill, what will stop other groups from applying? All can be rationalized, like this proposal, all for the greater good? This is a pandora's box you must not open, just a FURTHER destruction of the medical systems integrity awaits on the other side.

I am an Alberta who strongly objects to you requiring doctors to make an effective referral. You are essentially asking them, in cases like abortion and MAID, to participate in what they believe to be a murder. This is Orwellian, and the idea of forcing people to commit what they believe to be murder goes against the very idea of a democracy. Also, many doctors will leave the province, and capable and compassionate people won't enter the medical profession. Doctors from other countries also will not want to practice here, leaving us in a more severe physician shortage than we already have. Having doctors who don't want to participate in murder is a good thing, and can give patients a higher level of trust in their doctor to help them and not just find a cheap solution, like death, to save the health care system money.

Sometimes these controversial procedures aren't in the best interest of the patient, just politically popular, and it's not a religious issue. However, from the document, I can see that doctors will be prevented from weighing in on their opinion, scared to speak their minds. For example, there are potential harms from drugs and surgeries for transgenderism, but medical professionals are already being told they can't talk about this. There are potential harms to women from abortion, but the medical profession is not encouraged to tell women about this. How is that empowering for women?These are not religious issues, but with this revision, doctors will be made to shut up about their concerns for fear of losing their licenses.

If this change "effective referral" to the CPSA's standards of practice is passed I expect an immediate challenge to the human rights court of appeal. No one should be forced to do something they believe to be harmful to another human being. From my reading more doctors are opposed to MAID, abortion and transgender surgery than are in favour of it. Why is the CPSA asking for this change?

Health practitioners should never have to participate in or refer someone for a procedure that the deem to harmful or goes against their deeply held beliefs. I believe most doctors want to help people live, not help them die or help them end the life of an unborn child. The wording must be very clear in its protection against forcing doctors to go against their fundamental values. What kind of a country would be if they could not stand for what they believe to be right and true?

I want to be able to go to my doctor and know that he/she is going to suggest what is best for me, not what he/she is being forced to tell me. I choose my doctor because we are starting out from the same premise that all life is valuable from conception to natural death. I want him/her to be able to make judgment calls on what is best for each individual patient not some lobby group or CPSA. He/she must be able to object because of his/her conscience.

Hello,
It is completely unacceptable to force anyone to do something against their morals, ethics and beliefs. Have we learned nothing during the covid chaos? In my opinion, the CPSA board members that voted for these changes, should be terminated. Why does the CPSA want to become a dictator like our liberal PM? CPSA board memebers, are you aware how unpolular being a dictator tyrant is? I predict class action lawsuit if this passes. The mere fact that this board wants to make these draconian changes indicates to me that they have lost their way. They cannot be trusted with our health. I've read enough horror stories regarding the abuse of the MAIDS program and murdering children in the name of "womans rights" is appalling. Shame on you!

Doctors and nurses must be free to act with their conscience.

Please respect religious freedom. Please choose life. Please obey God's commandments to not kill. Please allow doctors the rights freedom to practice medicine that truly helps, heals & respects the rights of the unborn, vunerable, elderly. Lord Jesus Christ soften hearts to choose You, truth, justice & life, & turn away from imposing death.

I would have thought that the medical overlords had learned something over past three years. Force and coercion is never acceptable over conscientious objections.

Conscientious Objection MUST be protected. We are loosing to many good doctors because of the poor decisions of the collage.

That these procedures that end human life are government sanctioned is abhorant to begin with, forcing those who morally object to them to refer or perform them is beyond reason.

The effective referral portion of this draft is very damaging to the rights of patients and doctors. It forces medical professionals to become judge, jury and executioner against their will. Regardless of your feelings on the disgusting maid and abortion policies, forcing doctors to do something against their conscience or faith and potentially end another humans life is a horrible policy.
We are already short on Healthcare professionals and this will just drive more away or cause unrest in the medical community

I feel that doctors should not be forced into going against their conscience in regards to providing medical aid for abortion and assisted suicide

How can you force a person to commit murder? You may not believe that God exists, but I do, and God has clearly told us that taking life will be punished. How can you force anyone to take a life?

Wether you take the life at any age, from conception onwards, you are committing murder.

You may be ok with that, but I am not.

I'd like to point out that anything called a "health service" must logically improve a person's health. Practices such as abortion and euthanasia only kill and destroy human life, therefore it is absurd for them to even fall under this title. No person should in fact be forced to be involved in the murder of another human being. This includes being forced to refer a person to someone else who will do the job. If someone wanted to murder their two-year old and another person helped them get in contact with someone who would do it, that person who was a link in the chain would be guilty of being an accomplice to the crime. You are all evil to begin with for even suggesting that killing babies and anyone else is a "health service."

I'd like to point out that anything called a "health service" must logically improve a person's health. Practices such as abortion and euthanasia only kill and destroy human life, therefore it is absurd for them to even fall under this title. No person should in fact be forced to be involved in the murder of another human being. This includes being forced to refer a person to someone else who will do the job. If someone wanted to murder their two-year old and another person helped them get in contact with someone who would do it, that person who was a link in the chain would be guilty of being an accomplice to the crime. You are all evil to begin with for even suggesting that killing babies and anyone else is a "health service."

Alberta has done a really good job up until now of permitting access to morally contested procedures without compelling physicians to be involved in referring for procedures that they find morally or professionally objectable. What's changed that this edict mandating effective referrals is now necessary? We have more information at our fingertips on accessing services now than we have had at any time previous, and a patient does not need a doctor's referral to access any morally contested procedure. So why make the doctor refer? Why make a physician complicit in something that he or she doesn't want to be involved in? Can't you live and let live?

Please don't mandate that physicians must provide effective referrals.

Doctors and health care professionals must have the right to express conscientious objections to practices including but not limited medical assistance in dying. It is dehumanizing to require those who are in a serving role that necessarily requires compassion to check their consciences at the door. Practitioners must be considered human beings with convictions, not merely tools for a purpose,

Doctors should never have to refer patients to a program they do not believe in--abortion or euthanasia. This is a clear violation of the doctor's freedom of religion and conscience. I also do not like the language of the debate. This debate should not be considered freedom of religion and conscience vs. safe and high-quality care. "Safe and high-quality care" is a lie. Abortion and euthanasia are murder and always result in the death of at least one human being. If there was a certain religion that prevented something like blood transfusions (which would be genuine safe and high-quality care to provide), then yes, I agree with the language of this debate. But abortion and euthanasia are neither safe as someone always dies, and it is not care, it is always an act of great selfishness.

Of course, abortion and euthanasia should never be allowed to be committed by a doctor in the first place as it is a clear violation of the Hippocratic Oath.

I strongly oppose forcing our dedicated doctors to participate in any way with these methods of population control, which are masked as helping patients. Had these methods been available a few years ago my sister who was palliative from cancer would have been presented with the unthinkable option instead of being as she is now... out snowboarding with her grandchildren. My niece's sweet foster children who bring us much joy would not exist had they been aborted or given up on because they were born prematurely. How can you even think of subjecting our overworked physicians and healthcare staff to such abhorrent regulations? I believe it is highly ill-advised considering the substantial shortage of doctors we are already experiencing.

First of all God gives us life and He takes it as He choses. Doctors take a Hippocratic Oath to preserve life to the best of their ability not take it.

I believe MAID is politically motivated with an ideology being enforced by a specific group of people. Human rights will be taken away from doctors who have moral/ethical values, professional ethical values and religious beliefs if the MAID policy is implemented. If doctors refuse to implement MAID (if implemented) their medical license can be revoked. I believe this is morally wrong to keep doctors who have moral/ethical values hostage to follow immoral values of the CPSA. The CPSA should implement policies on how to preserve the gift of life instead of taking it as well as taking steps to improve peoples health - emotional, physical and life style health. I disagree with Maid and abortion, taking someone's life is morally wrong; therefore, Conscience Rights must be preserved for all doctors.

While I appreciate the additional clarity of the new format and glossary, I am concerned about a couple of the new points in the Draft Standard:

Section 1.f. does not make it clear that providing informational resources without providing a referral to another regulated member is still a valid option.

Section 2.c. is too ambiguous. Again, “effective referral” lacks the same clarity I mentioned about section 1.f.. Additionally, if the regulated member directs the patient to an informational resource and the patient is “delayed” in accessing that resource, through no fault of the regulated member, it would not be clear from the draft wording that the regulated member complied with this standard of practice. It seems to me that section 2.c. does not add anything of value to this standard of practice that is not already covered by section 2.a. and section 2.b., so I think it should be removed.

If these concerns are not addressed, I can tell from some of the physician comments here that it may become difficult for me as a patient to find a doctor in Alberta I am comfortable entrusting with my care, given that there are procedures I, for reasons of conscience, cultural belief, or religion, do not want to have offered to me.

This sounds like something from NAZI Germany, 1984 or one of the communist countries from the 50's. Doctors who have taken the Hippocratic Oath should in no way have to participate in these dreadful acts. Only the Doctor Mengela's that choose to. The moral code of this country is taking a sharp decline. What is next forcing doctors to do sex change operation on pre schoolers? We already lost most of our respect in the medical industry during the COVID fiasco where so many sold their souls for the lie and extra money. The govt. needs to back off and quit making more and more dystopic laws, rules and regulations. They have overstepped their boundaries in every way. We only need basic services from govt we don't need them to run our lives. This is disgusting!! Whoever is trying to forward this should immediately loose their job. We don't need them.

I strongly stand against such an update to the CPSA Standards. Doctors must never be forced into position where they have to battle their conscience.

I am deeply troubled by the idea that any doctor would be forced to go against their conscience and participate in any way in such things as abortion or MAiD. Doctors are to "do no harm." Forcing doctors to violate their conscience by doing what they believe is harm, is wrong.

A dr should never be forced to go against their concience objection to any procedure. This is totally wrong. Do not take away their freedom of choice. Shameful

Doctors require full autonomy to practice their trade. Any outside interference could jeopardize the health of their patients. This will allow a hijacking of procedural methods by unsavory unethical corporations dictating thru health boards and college of physicians how doctors are to treat their patients in a case of a pandemic. We've already had experience the last 4 years how poorly that's turned out utilizing a untested mRNA-based poison to be used for emergency use only, which was to have FDA trials during use. The trials were stopped with corrupted data. Exactly a case why Doctors should be autonomous to all this corruption in our health advisory system! DO NO HARM! These big pharma companies do not have any statement in their quaterlies! Do most profit, with least litigation is their moto! Allow our Doctors to be autonomous, give them individual voices, stop suppression of their knowledge and years of experience!

If we don't uphold the first article in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the freedom of belief and expression of belief, we will become a dictatorship. Doctors must not be forced to participate in actions that they believe are morally wrong, that will harm their patients. "Effective referrals" are, in essence, participation in the act. If someone wants to buy a gun to commit a terrorist attack and I, knowing their intention, tell them where to get the gun, am I not guilty of participating in the act?

I oppose the change. The responsible doctor should stand firm on his decision and not to refer to other doctors who have a different option.

While patient rights may be important, it is not the only consideration because both patient and doctor are independent moral agents who must act together to bring about the patient’s death, even if the only involvement from the primary care physician is to refer to patient to a doctor willing to prescribe MAiD. The right to self-determination—to end his life by his own choice —that is claimed by the patient goes beyond what he does to his own body. The assertion of his right not only involves many other people, including doctors, nurses, other hospital staff, relatives, friends and others in the wider community, but also his singular action negatively affects many other people. In granting the right to MAiD, society as a whole allows one person to exert control over and supersede the acts and consciences of other autonomous individuals, and dissenting physicians in particular. Therefore, even if a society places a high value on personal rights, it must still balance the patient’s right to determine how he will die with the physician’s equal right to not assist in the patient’s death in any way and so reject the patient’s request for a referral because the physician has an equal right to refuse to be involved in the act.

Within the context of the Conscientious Objection standard put forward by the CPSA, participation through an “effective referral” must directly involve physicians in MAiD, even if the physician objects because the doctor truly believes that euthanasia is not in the patient’s best interests. It would be far better to allow the physician to provide the patient with the online resources that would allow the patient to select a physician whose values align with his/her own and so pursue MAiD and thereby entirely remove the physician who conscientiously objects from involvement in a referral.

Finally, from a legal standpoint, it has been argued that the right to conscience must be upheld in all situations. Violation of a person’s conscience is irreversible; once violated, a conscience cannot simply be restored. As law professor Lynne Wardle (2010: 7) writes, there is a “big difference whether the protection of rights of conscience is a matter of toleration, to be suspended or superseded when political or other circumstances warrant, or whether it is a fundamental, inalienable human right.” It is crucial to understand this difference because the implications are enormous: “if you demand that a man betray his conscience, you have eliminated the only moral basis for his fidelity to the rule of law, and have destroyed the moral foundation for democracy” (Wardle, 2010: 8). Violating a physician's conscience through enforcement of an "effective referral" standard will erode public trust in the health care system. Thus, the right to conscience should be firmly established and upheld for all people in general, and in the case of MAiD, for physicians and other health care workers in particular.

Reference:
Wardle, L. Protection of health-care providers’ rights of conscience in American law: present, past, and future. Ave Maria Law Review, 2010; 9 (1): 1–46.

The CPSA continues to show its authoritarian streak as was evident during Covid. The ethical Hippocratic oath “to first do no harm”, has long been forgotten by the CPSA.

The term "effective referral" in this policy should be removed. Imposing such a practice will remove physicians' freedom to object and undermine the utterly personal nature of provider-patient decision-making. Physicians have a duty to inform and make health-centred recommendations that help patients determine their best interests. Conscientious objection involves ethical judgment and does not hinder the necessary, albeit occasionally contentious, exchanges between providers and patients. In cases involving fair end-of-life treatment, a policy update that prioritizes open, two-way communication over "effective referral" might be pertinent.

A crisis in family medicine is present in Alberta, and to add "effective referral" will unfortunately give primary care physicians an additional reason to abandon their practice or transition away from general family medicine into more specialised areas. As a Canadian native who has been in Alberta for several years and whose family doctor relocated out of the province, I, like many others in Alberta, face the challenge of not having a culturally suitable primary care physician due to the family doctor shortage.

Implementing this policy change will alienate certain cohorts of our society (a form of exclusion rather than inclusion), and this standard will discourage patients from coming forward and providers from pursuing medical practice in Alberta.

I think it is reasonable to question whether the CPSA's motivation for these changes is to pressure doctors who do not share the woke views of the CPSA doctors and administrators into violating their consciences or to oppress and exclude those who will not act contrary to their consciences.
It is difficult to accept these changes are merely a misguided attempt to improve accessibility to services that some patients want. A proper identification of the important interests impacted by these changes, and a proper balancing of those interests, clearly reveals that the damage done to doctors, society, medial ethics, and the availability and delivery of quality care clearly outweighs whatever small, hypothetical increase in access to certain services may be realized, such access likely not being limited in the first place. To hyper-prioritize access to morally questionable services such as abortion and euthanasia and under-value the need to permit professionals to practice according to their conscience is playing politics, not improving the practice of medicine. the CPSA must stop pretending otherwise.
Patients and the public are best served when they can find professionals who share their values and the interactions are all candid and voluntary. Progressive-minded people can easily find health professionals who share their values. These changes amount to attempt to remove health professionals who share the values of conservative-minded patients, which is obviously not good regulation and amounts to nothing more than the abuse of power for the purposes of penalizing political opponents.
I make these comments not merely as an "Albertan", but as civil rights lawyer who regularly defends professionals from politically-motivated professional regulatory bodies who abuse their power to persecute professionals who express dissenting views and hold conservative values.

I think doctors should be free to live according to their consciences and not be forced to compromise their beliefs, cultural practices, or consciences. To make referral mandatory impedes the whole point of conscientious objection and is not fair to medical professionals.

I value being able to have a doctor who sticks to their principles, and that the current system is working fine. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of the profession or to sunnier destinations, making access even more difficult.

Leave the Drs alone

I value being able to have a doctor who sticks to their principles, and that the current system is working fine. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of the profession or to sunnier destinations, making access even more difficult.

Do NOT proceed with this change any further. There has already been way too much damage to our freedoms in this country. LET DOCTORS HAVE THEIR FREEDOM AND DO NOT OVERSTEP YOUR BOUNDS AND ERODE OUR RIGHTS!!!!!!!!!!!

Please leave our doctors alone, they are doing fine with the system we already have.

I believe that doctors should be allowed to have and standby their principles. A doctor who is forced to do something they believe is unethical has another added stress in an already demanding job.

Hello, I have recently heard about the proposed changes requiring doctors to refer patients for any procedure, including ones which they do not agree with or that would violate their conscience (such as Euthanasia). I strongly disagree with such requirements, and desire that my doctor not be forced to refer for procedures that he does not agree with or may believe harmful. I think that doctors should be able to exercise their conscience as they practice.

I believe that this would be a travesty of justice, where a doctor would have to go against his conscience...
Especially as 'above all, do no harm.

In particular, euthanasia, MAID, abortion, sex change operations, etc.

May the Lord grant you His wisdom in this matter.

I do not support, and would go so far as to say am in opposition to, the CPSA's consideration of a new policy that would require doctors to refer patients for every type of medical procedure. This will lead to many doctors being forced to participate in procedures which violate their core ethical beliefs, some of which, such as euthanasia, are controversial. Referring for a procedure is a form of participation, and this policy change could push many people out of the profession. We need these doctors. We need doctors who take these sorts of stands, who are thoughtful about the care they provide, and who are willing to be principled in their practices.

Physicians MUST be able to work within the parameters of THEIR OWN CONSCIENCE!! It is totally irresponsible for the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada to require physicians to perform duties for patients which they must go outside their own morality to do.

I realize our current government doesn’t understand what morality is but in thankful there are still some doctors who do.

It is paramount that doctors are able to make decisions within their personal values and moral beliefs. We have enough problems with doctor shortages today without causing them to choose to leave this province in order to stand by their personal values.
There are and will continue to be doctors that will have a variety of views so that patients will be able to obtain the health options of their choice.
Please take the time to thoroughly review these policies to ensure that all Albertans are able to access the medical care they need in a timely manner.

This is another way to completely control our doctors and all citizens. Our freedoms are slowly being taken away
and it will be a crime to think outside the box. Already people have been arrested for asking questions that the government does not want to answer. Pray for Canada!

We value and highly respect our doctors who stick their principals - who do what they know is right.

I fully believe that we should have rights to our own thoughts and beliefs. One should not have to go against ones own beliefs when performing their profession.
I believe that the CPSA should allow my Doctor be one that has the same values and to be seen by a doctor who sticks to their principles, and the current system is working fine. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of the profession or to sunnier destinations, making access even more difficult.

Alberta doctors must be allowed freedom of conscience and religion at all times!

Doctors took an oath to preserve life and do no harm. They have a right to fulfill their oaths to the best of their ability and belief. No doctor should be forced to participate in any practice that is contrary to their conscience and beliefs. I believe that this should apply to every medical professional including hospices that do not want to participate in medically assistance in dying.

It is not right that the College of Physicians in Alberta would force doctors to do something against their values and beliefs. Do NOT force them to be making referrals in the case of assisted suicide!!! That is so very, very wrong!!!

Do NOT force doctors to act against their own conscience

Conscience rights for doctors must be protected. I value being able to have a doctor who sticks to their principles, and that the current system is working fine. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of the profession or to sunnier destinations, making access even more difficult. It could also put the most vulnerable members of our communities at greater risk, possibly being forced into proceedures without their consent or knowledge.

The conscience rights of doctors should be protected. Forcing medical professionals to act against their moral principles undermines trust in the College of Physicians and the medical system as a whole.

Continue to allow doctors to act in line with their consciences while practicing medicine!

I appreciate a doctor who supports his own principles. The system in place is working fine. I don't want my doctor to be forced to go elsewhere because his conscience rights are not respected.

CPSA, I like having a doctor who sticks to their principles, and that the current system is working fine. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of the profession or to sunnier destinations, making access even more difficult.

You should not be dictating what doctors should be doing if they don't agree with certain procedures. We live In a free country not a dictatorship one. Leave well enough alone.

The current system is working, there is no need to force doctors to refer patients for procedures they disagree with. I want (and I think most Albertans want) a doctor who will stick to their principles. If doctors are forced to refer patients in violation of their principles, it is almost certain some doctors will quit further exasperating already difficult access.

Robert

The current system is working fine. No need to make changes

I don’t care what a doctor feels about a specific procedure. if you require it, they should be mandated to refer you to the specialist and or doctor that will do it. it’s not up to them to decide whether it should be done or not because of their own beliefs. They’re not doing the procedure so they better darn well referr the person that wants it.

I agree with this statemtn from Stephanie -
I would not feel comfortable knowing that my doctor must refer me against their conscience. I hope our medical system continues to welcome and include people from diverse backgrounds, values and perspectives. Please don’t make changes that will ostracize segments of our society and deter them from entering the medical profession

Doctors should be able to decide what treatments or procedures they recommend or refer patients to based on their conscientious beliefs. These decisions are between a doctor and patient and should not be interfered with. If CPSA takes this right away from doctors , we will continue to see more good doctors leave Alberta for places they can practice with less interference. The system prior to Covid worked better as it allowed doctors more freedom to tailor care to their individual patients rather than a one size fits all top down policy approach. Doctors need to maintain the right to practice as per their conscience.

Doctors have taken a hypocratical to care for people and to save their lives. Anything that opposes that and goes against their conscience as a doctor is wrong and they should not be forced to do anything against their will. So political government opinion can butt out and stay out.

Yikes! Forcing doctors to recommend options against their conscience is a great way to ruin the medical system. Professionals that are true to themselves will have to consider leaving the system. Patients will know that a doctor is advising something they don't really agree with and this will increase mistrust for the medical profession. A doctor must be allowed to practice based on their training and best judgement. How often in the past has a treatment been dropped because new evidence shows that it is dangerous, ineffective, or has unanticipated negative outcomes? How will you ever find out if everyone is forced against their conscience? A tyranny might do well if it has perfect access to all information, is not influenced by monied or political interests. How likely is that? Let doctors do what they think best. Trust their judgement and experience. That is the best way to achieve the best outcomes over time.

CPSA should not be forcing its members to compromise their convictions and refer patients for euthanasia procedures; procedures that promote death not healing. There is no need to force 100% compliance of the medical profession to euthanasia procedures.

Thank you,

No medical professional should have to refer or perform a procedure that they do not agree with. This would cause PTSD to the medical professional and eventually reduce the number of available professionals.
It would be easy enough to create a list of professionals who would participate in these procedures. Patients could contact them directly.

I highly respect those doctors who have a conscience against killing babies and killing others through assisted suicide. Thank God a few doctors stand up for what is right.

Please do not force doctors to refer patients for procedures that do not align with their conscience such as MAiD or abortion. The current system is working just fine. By making this a requirement, you will force many hardworking and much-needed doctors out of the province.
Thank you.

Thank you for working on a standard of excellence in the practice of conscientious objection
As a retired physician I am gravely concerned about the proposed changes.

When MAID was first proposed I was very concerned and a number of my colleagues and I physically went to the college to express our concern that as physicians we would be subject to making a “effective referral” when our conscience instructed us otherwise.

Physicians who have taken the Hypocritic Oath, which states “above all to do no harm”, makes me wonder how becoming part of this decision is even legitimate
What could be more harmful to the patient than to give a lethal injection resulting in death upon request?
Am I to be complicit in this by making an “effective referral”? The answer is yes if I make the referral.
There are many other options open to patients that do not require the physician

Physician’s do have a conscience which is God given to help in making moral decisions
Killing the conscience is harmful for not only the physician but society as well. How can I trust this physician? Will he be doubleminded and unstable in all that he does? I would prefer a physician as Robert Hauptman as stated so well that offers MAIL (Medical Assistance in Living)
I agree with my collogue Richard Pidde in that we will be accountable for our actions. That was the basis of the Nuremburg trials where physicians claimed to be doing what they had been instructed to do by government. There is a higher order that we must take into account

As the governing body for physicians please do not add the words “effective referral” and thus cause harm.

I value being able to have a doctor who sticks to their principles and who do not wish to refer patients for procedures that they disagree with. They should not be forced to refer patients for every type of medical procedure. The system is fine as is now.
Referring for a procedure is a form of participation, and this policy change could push many people out of the profession making access more difficult.

Doctors should not be required to refer patients for procedures that they do not agree with. This includes any kind of procedure for which they have an objection for any reason. Doctors should always be allowed freedom of conscience. Jiminy Cricket was right.

I don't believe that Doctors or other professionals should be forced to refer or perform procedures which are against their beliefs or conscience. We are supposed to be a free country and if they are forced to violate their conscience then they are no longer free. Doctors have taken an oath to heal and save lives, not destroy or end life.
Also, many professionals will leave the province for other places if this is forced upon them. We cannot afford this.

It is very important for me to have a doctor who sticks to their principles. Therefore I oppose any changes to regulations which force doctors to refer patients for procedures that the doctor opposes.

To whom it may concern,

I am an advocate for regular policy updates to improve patient care (as in your profession), or to improve engineering excellence (as in my profession). However, the Draft Standard of Practice on Conscientious Objection, as currently worded, seems to suggest a practitioner must be required to refer patients to medical procedures they themselves may not agree with, whether morally or otherwise. This is itself a moral standard and imposes a form of active participation in these medical procedures. Would it not be enough simply to require practitioners to refer patents to another practitioner, if necessary? Having a multiplicity of medical professionals, each with their own moral standards (rather than an imposed standard) would allow patients the freedom to select practitioners that best align with their individual needs. It would also prevent practitioners from vacating their practice simply because they have a particular guiding principle.

I urge you to reject or amend the current markup that requires doctors to refer patients for any medical procedure in which they have a moral objection.

Considerately,
Ian Swentek

Dr.'s must have conscience protection and not be forced to participate or refer patients for procedures that they deem as unethical. We already have a doctor shortage. This could push more doctors away from practicing in Alberta. This new policy would discriminate against some doctors.

I believe it is wrong to force physicians to refer patients to something that goes against the physician’s conscience. This violates the physician’s constitutional rights and it would be detrimental to an already struggling healthcare system. Patients can always find another physician but by making these changes the only option for a physician would be to go against his or her own beliefs or quit practicing. Any document that does that is not in the best interest of anyone. We will lose good, caring physicians if you push these proposed changes through.

Just stop this culture of death. I value being able to have a doctor who sticks to their principles, and that the current system is working fine. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of the profession or to sunnier destinations, making access even more difficult.

I am not in favor of forcing doctors to provide referrals for so-called medical services that violate their conscience.
I value being able to have a doctor who respects life and provides actual healthcare. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of the profession or to alternative destinations, making access even more difficult.

As an Albertan and Canadian citizen I find it very disconcerting that the issue of forcing a doctor to refer patients for medical procedures they are against is even up for debate. In any occupation or situation a person should NEVER be forced to go against their conscience. The dictionary describes conscience as an "inner feeling or voice viewed as acting as a guide to the rightness or wrongness of one's behavior." There are moments in our daily lives that decisions must be made and we are called upon to use our conscience wisely. This creates good will toward one another that benefits society as a whole. We are in need of doctors and I believe someone that feels strongly about their freedom to act according to their conscience but is forced to do otherwise will leave Alberta or look for a different occupation that won't make demands such as this. I would advise no one to go into a profession where they are forced to go against conscience.

I am an allied health professional....not a physician, but have a very strong ethical response to this proposal. A free society does not participate in coercion, period. Make no mistake, the inclusion of this language in the CPSA Standards of Practice, is exactly that....coercion. Unfortunately, however, this seed has already been planted in Canada over the last several years, and it looks like the ground is very fertile. If we, as Albertans, and members of the society at large, do not stand against the loss of our right to conscientiously object, it will not stop with the CPSA. This must not be allowed to happen. The concept of an "effective referral" is an aberration of the physician's rights and one step closer to broader societal surrender of all of our constitutionally protected freedoms. It's imperative that we all stand together against this thinly veiled attack.

Did I ever anticipate that I would have to have conversations with my children: Do not kill me. Or with my own family doctor: "Do not ever refer me me for euthanasia, for I hereby and forever more vow that I would never under any circumstances allow someone to kill me for any reason. Even if in a state of paranoia or delusion, if I ever 'consent' to euthanasia you will know that I am insane, as I would never ever consent to that. Please record this in the medial files you keep". If Canada gets any worse and goes down this road I am seriously considering moving to another country. Canada has become a dangerous country for the disabled, elderly, the sick, the unemployed and even for our beloved veterans. What a shame. Physicians do not allow this to happen.

I am very much opposed to doctors being required to refer patients for procedures that they do not agree with. This is just another way of taking away their rights & freedoms. Patients who wish a procedure that is against their physician’s beliefs are free to make appointments with another physician.

I am sorely disappointed in your profession which at one time was worthy honourable and honest. Now you are a bunch of grandfathered know it all goofs attempting to rise above your calling and trying to stick your nose in where it DOES NOT BELONG. Leave the doctors alone!!!!!

Doctors should be free to abide by there concience on all medical issues and work in the best interest of the patient. Please allow medical professionals the widest latitude in providing the best patient care in support of life. MAID has turned the medical profession into purveyors of death. I don't understand how the CPSA would deem this to be a necessary policy. What "need" or gap in care is this addressing? This policy makes no sense and is part of advancing the "culture of death" that is infiltrating Canadian society.

I want doctors to be able to continue to treat and refer according to their consciences. The current system is working fine. These proposed changes may push doctors out of Alberta and cause further delays to patient care.

We have to have doctors who can make moral legitimate decisions on our behalf. Liberals want us dead for their utopian society and forcing doctors to kill isn’t moral or ethical in any form.
We want laws to protect us not kill us. Time for all to stand against this dictator who legalized killing and pays 10 of millions to terrorism!

It is unethical to require doctors to refer patients for something that goes against their hypocritical oath. Doctors are to preserve life not promote unnatural death.

I disagree with any form of euthanasia so I definitely don’t feel that our doctors should have to compromise their religious beliefs for someone else’s political belief’s The provincial government has chased or scared away enough of our doctors we don’t need the federal government doing the same thing. Leave things alone!

Please respect a doctor's ability to make a decision based on their intellect and conscience.

If we are truly a democratic society, we must allow people to freely choose and never to force.

I urge you to continue to give medical doctors the freedom to choose which procedures they are willing to refer or perform. Do not enforce policy that would require doctors to refer patients for every type of medical procedure, even procedures like euthanasia that many doctors may not want to participate in. Referring for a procedure is a form of participation, and this policy change could push many people out of the profession. Do not enforce that policy. Thank you

My daughter is an ICU nurse in Edmonton. She is a young mom and has mentioned that she might like to work in Palliative Care, to improve her work/home life balance. She is Catholic. As a Palliative Care nurse, she might be required to assist at MAID, against her conscience.
My sister, 62 years, has struggled with Borderline Personality Disorder most of her life, and has been sectioned on several occasions due to psychosis. She has also attempted suicide at least 5 times over her adult life. If MAID for persons with psychiatric diagnoses becomes law, she will have to battle with that temptation. She is stable now, and enjoys a good relationship with her adult children. We have worked so hard to help her live. She needs help to live, not to die. Doctors should be allowed to chose life, not death, for their patients.
My father died of ALS. He filled out MAID forms before he died. He did not avail himself of that option. If he had he would not have had the natural, peaceful death he eventually succumbed to. He was also able to receive his last rites as a Catholic, having made peace with his God and family. His Doctor did not press my father to avail himself of MAID, although forms had been filled out. Please respect and support the religious basis for the conscientious objections for effective referrals.

I value being able to have a doctor who sticks to their principles, and the current system is working fine. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of the profession or to sunnier destinations, making access even more difficult. Please allow Doctors to follow their conscience and not be forced to refer patients to what is contrary to what they stand for. Thanks

It is abhorrent to think that medical professionals should be expected to violate their consciences in order to provide certain types of "care" for patients. No doctor should be forced to refer a patient seeking MAID or an abortion to someone who will perform that procedure. If patients insist on pursuing such options, they are free to do so through other means.
The lack of value for human life in this country is more than disturbing. When the government is determined to do away with citizens who present extra financial costs to the system, it should be opposed. Doctors should not be obligated to pollute their souls or betray their ethics. Taxpayers should not be forced to pay for such procedures.

I absolutely 100% agree that physicians should have conscience rights and not be subjected to pressure to conform to secular ideologies. Unequivocally.

Health Care is not rocket science. You can promote life, or you can promote death. I personally confronted the physician dealing with my late wife's condition before she passed away. I asked him "Do you get paid by the life or the death ? ". That should be a "no brainer", but not in this day and age. It was kind of like flipping a coin with the Devil in the details. Suicide is so rampant, that even the medical profession seems to want to get on board. Life is a challenge on a good day, and giving in is inevitable at some point, but I don't think premature exiting should be promoted, pushed or legislated. Death comes to everyone but life should be preserved, protected promoted and encouraged. Walk On !

Doctors must be free to refuse to any medical procedure that is in conflict with their beliefs!

Freedom is incredibly valuable. One only needs to look at the examples in history to see horrendous accounts of the abuses perpetrated against vulnerable individuals. As a Canadian citizen, it is my duty to raise both moral and ethical concerns with the proposed new policy that would require doctors to refer patients for medical "procedures" to which they have conscientious objection(s). A physician in Canada ought to be able to practice medicine without providing referrals for harmful "procedures", especially for those suffering from mental health issues, substance abuse or even post-partum depression. Under no circumstances should any individual be required to participate in an ethically reprehensible practice, such as euthanasia. Instead of providing a path to death, a physician, and the community, should offer support for life, healing, and a path to recovery. Murder is a criminal offence, no matter what sort of language is donned as a disguise. Please protect the value of human life and the integrity of the medical profession in Canada.

I thought Canada was always known as “Strong and Free”. Many people moved here after the war for freedom and our Country was founded on Religious freedoms. We need to stand up for our rights and freedoms. I work in Healthcare and I’m sure there are many Physicians who would participate in this so why force others who have their own convictions? The Medical field consists of so many Specialties and many of them would be available for this. Our Country needs to go back to respecting others and creating peace and unity, not division.

Doctors should never have to go against their own conscience, convictions or beliefs.

No medical professional should be forced to refer or promote a so called “procedure” that is contrary to their morality. Many people, myself included, are totally opposed to such atrocities as abortion and assisted suicide. Also, I would not want a physician that participates in any of the aforementioned treating me.

Thank you for the valuable work done by CPSA to ensure all Albertans receive a reliable standard of medical care when we need it so we can live well. I support freedom of conscience rights for our doctors to not make referrals which lead to harm, or death, or even encourage their patients to believe that ending life is a best choice. As an occasional patient in our health system, I need to know my doctor cares to help me and will refer me to professionals who will help and encourage me to get up and go again.
Practically, this protection of our hard working doctors will encourage physicians to stay here and provide their skills and expertise without having to consider moving to other places which offer freedom of conscience rights. And, making medical care access even more difficult to obtain. Thank you for letting me give input.

I support Conscience Rights for doctors! PLEASE ALLOW THEM TO MAKE THESE DECISIONS BY THEMSELVES how to properly care for patients that may be considering Euthanasia or abortion or trans surgeries and beyond. THE CURRENT SYSTEM IS WORKING FINE. Please allow them to work according to their principles and to interpret what "Do no Harm" means for them and their patients. Thank you.

This violates the oath doctors have taken to do no harm!! Bad idea!!!

Much of the wording is still troublesome. “ effective referral “ ( open to interpretation) using phrases like “ must not impede”? Again open to interpretation and therefore not protecting conscience rights.
There are so many pitfalls in our healthcare system and using words that could be misconstrued or twisted to suit etc not a good idea. Physicians should be able to use their conscience rights like everyone else and not be left open to recrimination because of “ wording”!

Physicians and all other medical practitioners are supposed to do whatever is viable and reasonable to protect the health and welfare of their patients. In my opinion it should be enshrined in law and professional standards that no one in the medical profession can be required to perform any procedure/treatment on a patient that is contrary to the medical practitioner's personal or professional ethics. Nor should any medical practitioner be required by law or professional standard to refer a patient to another medical practitioner to perform any procedure/treatment on a patient that is contrary to the would be referring medical practitioner's personal or professional ethics. Procedures that I believe my above stated position specifically applies to are as follows: 1) euthanasia or as it is euphemistically called M.A.i.D. 2) counselling minors to have sex change procedures 3) performing sex change procedures on a minor including hormone treatment and sex change surgery 4) abortion including prescribing or providing "morning after" pills. Also none of the above or related procedures should be performed on any patient who is mentally or emotionally incapable of fully understanding the consequences of the requested procedure(s).

I oppose and object to the proposal to force doctors to violate their conscience and refer their patients to a practitioner who will perform an assisted suicide.

Don't change a thing. I know we are headed for a communist Canada under the current liberal/NDP government but we don't these changes.

To force a Doctor to comply to some procedure that violates his conscience is inhuman. The College of Physicians and Surgeons is persecuting honest Doctors and rewarding the pharmaceutical stooges. Are doctors there to first do no harm or to kill? MAID is doctor assisted suicide.

Let the Doctors do what they are trained for and let them choose what service they will provide.
Dictatorship is not what we need in this country.

I value being able to have a doctor who sticks to their principles, and that the current system is working fine. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of the profession or to sunnier destinations, making access even more difficult. Leave them alone.

I'm in favor of allowing doctors the freedom to make referrals according to their conscience and personal beliefs.

I totally value being able to have a doctor who sticks to his or her principles. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with may force doctors out of the profession or to sunnier destinations, making access even more difficult. Please never force doctors to do or refer to procedures they disagree with.

I do not want to see our Doctors lose their profession or have to give up their own conscience. I pray that none of us ever have to relinquish our conscience. We all have a purpose for being born. And it’s not to be controlled. You were all voted in by the public and then you want to destroy all that our forefathers came to Canada for. Look at your own heritage and remember your parents and grandparents fought for freedom.
I’m thankful I don’t have to judge you in the end.

Yes! Let's run the medical system into the GROUND! Who came up with this corruption of conscience? Why don't we install gas chambers and give the police brown shirts so they can be better identified as NAZIS??? Why is the government trying SO HARD to become the ENEMY of the people? Kowtowing to the WEF (like their PLANDEMIC RESPONSE)? How much more wicked and evil does the "government" have to become? Murdering of children before and AFTER birth (like some places in the Biden banana republic)? Killing veterans because we can't get them medical assistance? Killing nurses and doctors because we had to inject them with the BIOWEAPON which has also killed 17 MILLION world wide? And that is why we have a pilot shortage (never mind having heart attacks and dying DURING a flight)?

Esteemed CPSA,
Please uphold the dignity of your profession and integrity of the Hippocratic oath by allowing your fellow medical colleagues to operate according to their informed consciences! We do not need nor want "yes men," who like AI programmed robots, are amoral and indifferent to ethical issues, to be the trusted guardians of our health.
Please do not require that physicians either participate in, nor refer to others, medical procedures that run contrary to their God-given sense of right and wrong.

I value honest medical people with integrity to
follow their consciences who live according to God ‘s will
Who are true believers of the hippocratic oath
first do no harm
These are the doctors I want to look after others

No person should be forced to go against their conscience. This paves the way to totalitarianism in our supposedly free country. I was forced out of my 39.5 year profession of nursing because of my conscience along with many many more health care professionals leaving Alberta desperately short. If this is enforced many more will leave, how can this even be a consideration

Physicians need to be able to practice within the bounds of the Hippocratic Oath and by their ethics and conscience. It is not right that an Albertan Doctor be required to refer a patient to another Doctor who will perform a procedure (for example MAiD or a gender reassignment surgery) if it is against their conscience and what they feel is best for the patient. Patients are more than able to search for a practitioner who will perform the procedure they are looking for, when their current practitioner does not feel comfortable performing or referring the patient. A patient's rights are not at all violated, but a Physician's conscience rights ARE violated by requiring that they refer out for a procedure they are not ethically comfortable with.
Please hold the line for physicians in the area of freedom of conscience. Thank you.

abortions should not be part of healthcare and no doctor who does not agree with this practice should be forced to perform killing a baby. Taxpayers funds should not pay for such a horrific procedure either that is 100% preventable!!! Anyone wanting this should pay top dollar by a doctor who has no morals.

To whom it concerns,

Please note that I value being able to have a doctor who sticks to their principles, and that the current system is working fine. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with could force doctors out of the profession or to sunnier destinations, making access even more difficult.

Thank you for requesting my feedback on this important matter. Why are we trying to 'fix' something that isn't broken? Our current system is working just fine. I want to know that my doctor can continue to make decisions because of his moral obligation to uphold the sanctity of human life and not be at risk because of objecting to the things that go against his conscience.

Please do not require physicians to do procedures or make referrals for procedures that are against their conscience. My thoughts are from both the point of view of the patient and the physician. As a patient I wish to have a doctor with a conscience that prevents him/her from killing patients even if that is their expressed wish. As a retired physician I would have found it impossible to work under a system that required me to refer for these procedures that are against my conscience.

Doctors should have the right to not refer patients for procedures where death is the desired outcome.

I think that conventional healthcare by definition does not include elective, medically assisted death. Doctors and other health care workers share our common right to refuse or avoid actions that are opposed by their personal or religious morals and values. This allows for any patient who is affected to seek and be assisted to find an alterative medical professional who does not have a moral or religious reason and is prepared to assist the patent to achieve their requests. CPSA needs to allow their membership these common rights.

I think Alberta doctors should retain their right to refuse to participate in practises they disagree with, specifically referring patients for MAiD/euthanasia.

I value having a doctor who sticks to their principles, and feel the current system is working fine in this regard. Forcing them to refer for procedures they disagree with, will force doctors out of the profession, making access even more difficult.

Please do not force doctors to be mandated to do some thing which my be against there conscience.

Please leave the Doctors conscience alone.

I am writing to voice support of “conscientious objection” for doctors. It is wrong to enforce a ruling that requires them to participate even indirectly in “maid” or abortion; against their personal beliefs. What has happened to “health” care? An increasing culture of death is already being pushed on the public. This will only do harm, create more insecurity and anxiety among patients in our already struggling system. These restrictions on doctors will also ensure that less of them will be practicing in our province. There needs to be a focus on support that offers hope, healing and dignity for everyone from conception until life’s natural end as decreed by Almighty God.

It is unethical to require doctors to violate their Hippocratic oath and their deeply held moral values to participate in the legalized murder involved in abortion and in MAID, euthanasia. Being required to refer patients to doctors willing to carry this out makes them an accomplice, effectively supporting the performance of these procedures. This is wrong. It is moral coercion being forced upon our doctors and will result in more physicians leaving Alberta because their ethical and moral freedom is not respected and safeguarded.

I do not support the changes in this draft standard to require physicians to refer patients for a procedure as in abortions, MAID or transitions that they personally may be morally or consciously opposed to. I believe physicians should be protected to act and refer patients for treatments within their beliefs and I believe this is in the best interest of doctors and their patients and if youth accompanied by their parents to ensure the wellbeing and respect of families and society as a whole. May God have Mercy on a society gone mad!

The CPSA has become a satanic organization with an agenda against Christian valves and is trying to force Christian doctors to choose between their faith and their profession. Those at the CPSA making these decisions will face God one day and the results of their decisions will be made by God not man.

I am appalled that the CPSA is turning into a group of Thugs.I guess you guys have no conscience and no sense of personal conscience. The true evil of your agenda is showing.Your a bunch of incompetent fools who are on a power trip. No wonder our health care is a mess.I stand with Doctors who want no part of your euthanasia ,abortion and Satanic gender alteration

Doctors have their own principals as to why they chose their profesion.

Why force them out, like they did with so many in the medical community, like they did with the forced mandates.

The system has worked prerty.well.
Leave it alone.

Doctors should have their conscience rights protected. They should never have to refer a patient for “care” (aka death by MAID, abortion, etc) against their conscience. I want to have a doctor with a conscience, not just someone providing what I demand despite what they think.

Currently we have an alarming shortage of Doctors in Canada. If Doctors are told they no longer have the freedom to practice or express their beliefs, religious or otherwise, this WILL result in Doctors leaving the country, or deciding not to immigrate to Canada. Those who have principles that they live by will be the first to go. This is NOT the result we are looking for, nor is it the country I would want to live in or represent.

Doctors need to be able to select life. By being forced to recommend an option that ends life goes against their basic training ss a doctor.

Doctors are supposed to save lives, not kill their patients. An effective referral for MAID or an ABORTION is forcing a doctor to being an accessory to the crime of murder.

Healthcare professionals should NOT be forced to violate their conscience and how they perceive the meaning of the Hippocratic oath which many of them have taken by forcing them to refer patients for abortions, euthanasia, and other controversial practices which they as doctors do not see as in the best interests of their patients, and should never be required by law or those who claim such authority to carry out this evil.

I believe the CPSA system is working fine and don’t need to change. I wanna see as an Albertan that doctors in our province faithful to their values and not forced to act contrary to it.

It is absolutely wrong to force or coerce anyone to do things that go against their personal values beliefs or religious rights.

Do not force physicians to refer or be involved with anything they disagree with. Conscience rights are sacred and should not be taken away.

I strongly support the right of a physician or other health care professional to exercise their freedom of conscience when asked to provide care that they believe would not be in the best interests of the patient. And they should not be forced to refer the patient to another source for care they believe would be detrimental. I value very highly all physicians who have strong moral principles, and believe we should support them, not force them out of the profession or out of the province!

Conscience rights for any individual are paramount in a democratic society. This is especially important with regard to professional associations making dubious claims that MAY NOT reflect the deeply held beliefs of individual members. In essence conscience rights are being displaced by political opinions which have no place in ethical codes.

The system works fine. The College not so well.
Let the Physicians do what they feel is best. If I need a second opinion I will seek it.
The College showed its’ true colours during COVID and it is the one that needs review and amendment.

Why would you want to go to a doctor that has to be morally conflicted into prescribing a treatment that they see as wrong for their patient? You go to a doctor that can possibly fix that which is causing your concern. Doctors, and all other medical professionals, should have the freedom to work within their moral convictions.

If you, the members of the College of Physicians and Surgeons Alberta, force doctors or others to disregard their consciences to keep their jobs, you don’t deserve to keep yours. Period.

We do NOT agree that the CPSA require a doctor to perform o procedure that ie is conflict with them morally and ethically.

I am opposed to doctors having to refer every type of medical procedure.

I do not think that doctors or other professionals in Alberta or Canada should be forced to refer to any procedure which are not usually medically necessary / voluntary or for which they have a constitutional right to object to or object to based on conscience. Examples MAID, abortions etc. Requiring professionals to violate their conscience or their constitutional rights is a bad idea for a lot of reasons. Patients who wish to ask for controversial services can simply ask other staff for assistance or organizations can post information in public areas as to where they can get services rather than forcing staff to violate either their constitutional rights or their conscience. We want professionals to pay attention to the conscience rather than ignore or suppress it.

Thank you Garrett for asking me for my opinion. I whole heartly am against MAID which is a immoral act against human life the dignity of each life that God has given us I do not believe that a doctor or other persons can make this descion on one's life in a moral and conscience manner. We do not have the right to kill or do harm to any person.and to put any doctor in a position that will go against one's conscience to do no har. especially when people's are living in a capacity that can be treated or given the means to live thier life worth living or cannot make this descion on there own in a mental or physical manner. This is suicide and murder plain and simple which goes against the God given life we were created to have all rights under God No one has the right to make this descion under any circumstance to make this descion on behalf of another human life .have we lost our moral compass as a human race. Mentally challenged people cannot make this descion nor should we do this to children and babies that I see MAID is planning to add to this murderous act .this is a act of conscience and who in there right mind would agree to do this .without examining in there mind that they are doing the right and moral thing to take one's life. We all answer to God at our end whether we believe or not.there are options to help with pain and suffering and we should excersise all options to help preserve one's life. We have technology now that can help people and we need a Gov't that makes life worth living rather then put people in suffering to not want to live .we should never be intertaining this program for MAID nobody on earth has the right to choose who lives or dies or who is worthy to live on this planet. No doctor should be forced to make this descion and no government should have the right to pass such a inconceivable and heartless act into law .May God have Mercy on All Our Souls

I want my doctor to be a person of integrity, thus do not make him/her violate their principles, or be required to leave the profession. In my opinion this new change by the CFSA, to force physicians against their will, would be malfeasance of the highest order.

In this information age a person can easily find some doctor who will do the deed.

All doctors are humans, not machines, and therefore must act and advise based on their conscience otherwise they will not be treated in accordance with their nature, a violation of the most fundamental right.

I highly value being able to have a doctor who sticks to their principles. The current system is working fine and I believe that the considered changes would only give ethical doctors another reason to leave Alberta.

I prefer my doctor's to be ethical unlike the politicians or people pushing this agenda. Stop the stupidity already!

I think the notion of forcing physicians to refer patients for treatments counter to the physician's conscience is absolutely horrific. It is an indefensible intrusion in the doctor/patient relationship, and, as far as I'm concerned, the College has absolutely no business undertaking such regulation of this sacred relationship. To say nothing of the relationship of the human being with themselves.
Isn't being a doctor challenging enough, especially right now, without them having to contend with this kind of threat from their own College? Shameful. Stop trying to impress the Feds. It's a terrible look.

Please leave things as they are. Nothing is broken so nothing needs fixing!

Doctors and health care practicioners should be given the freedom of conscience and the option to decline practices they find morally disturbing or distressful. Doctors and other health providers should not be expected to provide referrals for parctices that oppose their conscience. Doctors and health care practicioners should be encouraged to promote health and life. I am very concerned by the direction that we see society is going. I am a minister of the Gospel and I need to be able to support the spiritual needs of the people of faith, who hold dear the values and beliefs of the Bible. The spiritual side is a part of who people are, and they must have freedom to live by their consciences.

I believe doctors should be free to choose whether to perform any treatment or not. I do think they are obligated to ensure patients are aware of all available treatments even if they don’t approve of them. They can also voice their reasons for disapproval such as technical or conscience reasons. . They should not be obligated to refer. They should provide the AHS health help line number. The patient could pursue it from there.

Please do not force doctors to refer patients for procedures that they are not in agreement with. There is already a shortage of family doctors in our province, and this will force many more out. I appreciate having family doctors who will stick by their principles, faith and/or their morals. We also appreciate having hospitals under the leadership of Covenant Health. To date, those wishing to access procedures that go against a family, doctors, preferences, beliefs, and morality have been able to do so. Please do not further fragment a system that is already under enough pressure.

I believe doctors should have the right to opt out of referring people to other specialist for any reason. If a patient wants things like gender reassignment or euthanasia, there should be a place on the provincial web site to direct people to the medical professionals available, in our province for these procedures. No one should be forced to do anything against their believes, even doctors.

The proposal to require referrals is an egregious violation of the freedom of conscience, Doctors should not be required to participate in any way with procedures they have a strong moral disagreement with.

The Charter of Rights and freedoms enshrines first, as a fundamental freedom before any other right the freedom of conscience. It must be respected.

The persons that want procedures their doctors object to ethically have access to those procedures without involving their doctor. Do not mess with what is not broken.

I am a young father, and soon to be father of a second child. My wife during our first pregnancy had a very difficult time in our northern community because our town county only had three physicians on staff to serve a population of 10,000 people. We had to drive, almost 3 hours to a city in order to give birth to our first born. Making it mandatory to have doctors prescribe procedures that are against their principles will force doctors to head south. Our town already struggles to keep doctors in our town and I personally know of three doctors who have moved out of our town to Australia. Please don't make it harder to keep doctors in our town because of a new policy. The old policy where doctors can choose what to prescribe to certain patients has been working fine and does not need to change. Doctors care about their patience and care about the life they support more than any politicians will ever know.

Doctors have a right to choose not to refer patients to euthanasia .
Its not right to force anybody to do anything against there faith

As a retired medical professional I feel it is of utmost importance that medical personnel are given the right to practice within their belief system.
I worked for most of my career in Long Term Care so experienced end of life situations with both patients and their families. I know I would not have been able to continue practicing if I had been forced to be complicit in for example, MAID.
Our medical professionals and system are already stretched providing care for Alberta residents. There are personnel for whom this would not pose a dilemma, and MAID or other like requests however contrary to ‘ first do no harm’ could be accommodated without anyone being forced to comply with a policy.
Personal beliefs should be respected and honoured rather than the physician being forced to compromise or leave the profession.
Thank you for allowing me to share my thoughts and feelings gleaned from a very long nursing career.

“Practice two things in your dealings with disease: either help or do not harm the patient" is believed to have originated with the 19th-century English surgeon Thomas Inman. We must be careful to not use doublespeak to make acceptable what was unthinkable not so very long ago. Those suffering physically or mentally are not helped by assisted suicide - they are harmed. Pregnant women and their babies are not helped by abortion - they are harmed, most definitely the baby. In either case, physicians should not have to give counsel or provide a service that violates their conscience.

I am sharing my feedback because I am very concerned on how our health care system is going in Canada (more specifically the province of Alberta). It is in a great state of crisis.

There is definitely a shortage of doctors. Have you done the research to ask why this is occurring? It is my personal opinion that there is too much interference and dictatorship coming from the College of Physicians and Surgeons, provincial and federal governments and the pharmaceutical companies. These governing bodies are interfering by not allowing an individual’s doctor to strictly and confidentially deal with their patients. Doctors are suppose to be there for the people and the health of the people.

Can you ensure that medical decisions remain in the hands of patients and their trusted health care providers, free from undue influence or suppression?

First and foremost, whatever happened to the doctor patient relationship? My doctor knows me best and I am in tune with my own body. Why are there outsiders telling doctors and the citizens of Canada (Alberta) what is required and needed for their own body? Do we really need all these outside individuals that know absolutely nothing about you providing a one size fits all?

Secondly, my medical professional should maintain my medical privacy and my right to conscientious medical care providing he/she is practicing medicine that keeps their patient healthy.

In addition, pharmaceuticals and/or medical procedures are not always the answer. The practicing of alternative medicine is never mentioned. May I ask why? As of today’s date, I have not read and/or heard of any suffering from side effects taking vitamins and minerals; eating healthy; and exercise. However, when pharmaceutical drugs are prescribed there are many side effects.

It would be a blessing if the College of Physician and Surgeons would promote and support alternative medicine so that there would be more healthier people without needing pharmaceuticals that are addicting and destroying the vital organs in human beings.

In closing, I value doctors that can stick to their principles; have their ultimate goal in keeping patients healthy; provide confidently to each individual that they treat. Sincerely hope that the doctors of today and the College of Physicians and Surgeons can still remember their promises of the "Hippocrates Oath" and the four pillars...one of the pillars are: "first, do no harm" (or "primum non nocere,"

I believe that Albertans are well served by medical professionals who abide by the dictates of their consciences. More stringent regulations will compromise this, and force doctors to either violate their consciences or remove themselves from a system where it's already difficult to find a physician. I strongly encourage you not to compromise the conscience rights of our much needed doctors any further.

A doctor should be able to follow his conscience at all times. He should not have to participate in things that go against his conscience.

Our freedoms are being stripped away in every area. Do not undermine the free will and conscience of our Doctors. The fruit of doing so will only bring ill effects to us and society!

I am not in favor of doctors being forced by regulations to go against their conscience in treating patients. I believe in, greatly value and WANT a doctor who operates out of their principals. No doctor should be required to refer patients for procedures that would violate a doctor’s conscience, particularly in regards to a so-called ‘procedure’ like MAID or other euthanasia-types. Forcing doctors to make decisions that go against their conscience is not only wrong, but is only setting up our already strained medical system to lose more doctors who choose to leave Canada to practice in countries with less government interference; in the end it is Albertans who suffer.

To whom it may concern,
I am an Albertan who values life. I value being able to have a physician who would NOT refer me to end my life or another person's life against their conscience.

Please do not force doctors to go against their own conscience and/or beliefs!
Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of the profession or to sunnier destinations, making access even more difficult to have a family physician. The current system is working fine.

As others have said - the name is Alberta Health Services and should not be Alberta Death Services.

Absolutely in sane, NO democracy!!! NO one has the right to take a LIFE. This is hierarchy and has to stopped now.

One of the aspects that I -as an emigrant from Europe in the 70's- admire in Canada is the polarity of opinions and the respect of everyone' s perspective.
To oblige doctors to act against their principles will force them to go to neighbouring countries where their freedom is respected .

No medical professional should be forced to go against their conscience or religious beliefs, especially if it involves the taking of a human life. Either inside or outside of the womb. Being forced to refer a patient for this type of service is forcing them to participate in an action they believe is wrong.

The value of being able to have a doctor who sticks to their principles, the current system seems to be working as is. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of the profession or may force a move to other destinations that are sensitive to patient care. Patients also will tend to look for alternative care.

Has money has taken over medical care?

Doctors took the hippocratic oath that as an individual they would care for each patient as he or she required to the best of their ability. Referring a patient is only is required when special equipment is required or specialized training. I do not agree with the policy the College of Physicians and Surgeons is trying to implement because it takes away the rights of doctors to treat their patient as he or she deems necessary. This policy will destroy the intimacy and trust required between the patient and their physician.
I disagree with this policy because it is dictatorial and destructive and takes away from the rights of doctors and patients.

I am totally against any medical professional, including Dr’s nurses, or any other health care professional from being forced to provide services, or refer patients for services, that are contrary to their personal beliefs. My fear is that we currently have a shortage of these honoured professionals, and many hold personal views on issues, for and against providing these services, and I fear many will either leave the profession, or choose other careers, to avoid going against their personal beliefs.
I knew the day would come, when people were going to be forced to choose between their personal beliefs, to accommodate ONE viewpoint of society, and it is so wrong to force anyone, to do something they are against. We cannot force a single view on all of society by using laws, or policies, What kind of society would we be if we did that? Where would it end? This is just one more slippery slope, of many, that we MUST avoid. In a civilized society, people are able to think for themselves. We are not robots to be programmed by the “flavour” of the day, to appease a certain section of society, or government of the day. History has showed, time and time again, when certain people, or persons, with a single viewpoint, things did not end well for large sections of society. We must allow people the right to their viewpoints, whether we agree with them or not. How many times have we looked back at history, and regretted the decision’s of those in power, and wish we had never been involved, or fought for the very people who are now generationally victimized because nobody stood up to those making the decisions? Let’s not repeat these atrocities, only to have to apologize for the sins of others. We value our health care professionals, and I for one don’t want to see a Dr. that I know was forced to go against their conscience, to keep their job, or appease the views of a few.

I hope that our doctors will not need to make a choice that is contrary to what their conscience allows. I wouldn’t want to be forced into doing something that I felt was immoral and against my personal values. That doesn’t make a free country. I also don’t want Alberta to lose more doctors and especially those who place the sanctity of life high on their priorities.

It is an affront to righteousness that for the last three years the CoPS has shown itself to have limited ethics and conscience by preventing doctors to provide early treatment for covid without having to send a patient to emergency gasping for breath or to persecute doctors for writing mask or vaccine exemptions when proper vaccine consent was not possible. The CoPS has inserted itself into doctor/patient confidentiality/decision making, where it dose not belong. How many people died as a result of these intrusions?
I reject that the present CoPS (a business) has any moral authority to insert itself into any doctor/patient relationship based on its policies that so easily changed to fit the corporate/government narrative. Is it laughable that an organization that has shown little conscience now pretends to dictate it to others? They have demonstrated a lack of character, foresight and intellectual ability to see future consequences as demonstrated by the last three years, so no you should not be making these changes but should resign.
Take stock and consider the slope that has steepened by pushing the present government policies.

Please let physicians practise according to their conscience and remove language compelling them to refer patients to services they object to. Should patients wish non-life giving services they will seek them out. Allow Doctors to retain their principles and live by the Hippocratic oath. You have already violated their professionalism and destroyed positive patient outcomes by restricting life giving treatments that they are allowed to prescribe. If you implement this policy you will drive more good Doctors out of the province to less regulated environments - making good health care even more difficult to access than it is now. Please make their work life less regulated - not more!

If the expected number of conscientious objectors is high enough that it threatens patient access to a certain highly controversial service and an update to the standard is needed to bypass a doctor’s conscience or remove conscientious doctors altogether, maybe there needs to be a reassessment of the ethical and moral basis for the services themselves. I’m sure the rate of conscientious objections was historically very low until death became a form of healthcare. If I was depressed and no longer valued my life, one doctor’s conscientious objection to killing me maybe enough to change my outlook. If no doctor objected, that would only reinforce that my life is worthless and expedite my death. Should we not target a reduction in abortion and MAID numbers in Canada, instead of finding more ways to facilitate an increase? Shouldn’t we focus on solving the issues that drive people to these terrible decisions? When someone’s about to jump off a bridge, do we try to talk them down or will we now simply push them? Leave the standard as it is, it’s a standard for a reason. A change like this is not progress, it’s regression and not helpful to patients or fair to the doctors.

I believe everyone has a right to uphold their personal principles. I value being able to have a doctor who sticks to their principles, and the current system is working fine. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of the profession or to sunnier destinations, making access even more difficult. Making doctors go against their values is just wrong.

Please allow our doctors the freedom to act according to their conscience. You're going to lose good people if you continue to push forward with this . Our system is already strained to the breaking point.

I do not support the changes in this draft standard to require physicians to refer patients for treatments that they personally might be morally or consciously opposed to. I, and the majority of people, want a doctor who values the sanctity of life and believes in Medical Assistance in Living NOT dying.
Also, forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force more doctors out of the profession or to other destinations. Doctors are already in short supply in Alberta and this would make access even more difficult.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects the rights and freedoms of all Canadian individuals. Individuals are given the ability to challenge government actions that they feel are in violation of their personal rights and freedoms. Canadians, are first and foremost Canadians, and separate and distinct from the actual professions in which they engage.
Additionally, a physician could be sued by the family of a patient with mental health issues if the family believe the physician assisted their relative in committing suicide by engaging in "effective referral", and that this action was not in the patient's best long term interest. This is yet another impediment for physicians to remain in family medicine.
Please remove the term, "effective referral".

I do not feel comfortable attending doctors who on the one hand, suggest procedures to end my life such as euthanasia or maid, and on the other hand, who are acting against or outside their professional ethics. I being able to have a doctor who sticks to their principles, and wonder, what is wrong with the current system that you are considering this?. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of the profession or to sunnier destinations, and will also cause many Canadians to flee Canada in search of truly humane doctors abroad

I totally disagree with forcing any Dr to have to give a referral to a client for any procedure/ surgery,/ or treatment that is against their Faith or conscience, such as MAID, Abortions, or gender altering surgeries !! I feel the Alberta College of Physicians is overstepping their boundaries , not only on this issue but also on the way they controlled Dr throughout the Covid pandemic!! In my opinion they need to be dismantled!

I value being able to have a doctor who sticks to their principles, and that the current system is working fine. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of the profession or to sunnier destinations, making access even more difficult.

Our daughter experienced a period of extreme depression and anxiety for a variety of reasons including the loss of a job. During this time, if her physician to whom she entrusted her physical, mental, and emotional health was required to 'effectively refer' her to Maid she would have died. She needed to trust that her doctor saw her life as valuable. She began her healing through a psychologist. At that vulnerable time she needed a doctor for life not a doctor for death.
There are other ways to access Maid than through physicians, who should not be compelled to compromise their consciences by providing these services, especially when it is in their patient's best interests to access other medical resources.
"Effective referral" is simply a way of requiring professional doctors to take on the role of Doctor Death. Their Hippocratic Oath states that they will not administer a poison or suggest such a course,
"Effective referral" needs to be removed from the current standard. Please do not , under any circumstances, extend Bill C-7 of Maid eligibility to Canadians whose sole eligibility arises from mental illness. This is a slippery slope we are going down.

I object to the College forcing doctors to conform to policies which go against their professional ethics. Lest we never forget the COVID horror which removed informed consent forcing doctors to innoculate themselves in order to keep their jobs and to force the jabs on their patients. Now we have stage two.... Total control of the captives who went along with it all save for a few.

I disagree with the policy CPSA is considering that would require doctors to refer patients for every type of medical procedure, even “procedures” like euthanasia that many doctors may not want to participate in.

Referring for a procedure is a form of participation, and this policy change could push many people out of the profession.

I value doctors being able to refer or not according to their conscience. The system is currently working fine. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of the profession or out of Alberta, making access to physicians increasingly more difficult.

Please reconsider moving forward with this policy.

Forcing medical personnel to act against their consciences would most definitely be a step (or a few of them) backward. They did that in places like the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany. I value being able to have a doctor who sticks to his/her principles, and I believe fully that the current system is working fine. We need to not only let, but expect, them to work according to their personal principles.

I want my doctors to stand on the traditional principles of the Hippocratic Oath. Doctors should be all about healing and preserving life, not taking life in abortions or euthanasia.

Stop trying to control the personal consciences and the faith of Alberta physicians. This is none of your business and you should be sued if you pursue this any further.

While forcing our physicians to act against their consciences may sound as though it's in the best interest of their patients, I am afraid it will make our struggling health care system even more over burdened. The moral distress this sort of legislation puts on our objecting physicians has proven to be enough to push many of them into leaving their workplace or practice entirely.
I also would not be as confident in my physician should I know that he could not operate according to his conscience. I want diversity in both thought and values to be something we maintain and promote in our medical profession.

My understanding is that every physician is sworn to uphold the well-being of every patient. His or her understanding of the well-being and safety of every patient cannot be dictated by government or bureaucratic protocol, but by his or her understanding of the patient and his or her conscience. To impose referrals that would violate his or her conviction of what is best for the patience is fundamentally a violation of the oath our physicians take. This must not in any way be imposed upon them by government or medical bureaucracy. This idea of government and bureaucratic imposition is the type of criminal violation that our medical personal were and are subjected to through many protocols imposed upon them in the treatment of sickness such as COVID-19. The result is a catastrophe of the population not being clearly informed and guided by their physicians. Instead, our physicians are muzzled and coerced by threat of losing their jobs to abstain from counselling and treating their patients with what they considered best for their well-being.

I am totally against forcing doctors to refer for every procedure! That is wrong.

Physicians and health care workers in Alberta should not be forced to participate in abortions or in medical assisted suicide against their conscience. This violates the hypocratic oath that health care workers swore to uphold.
This is not the Alberta that I know and want to stand for.
The wording needs to be extremely clear in upholding physician rights to refuse patient requests when it goes against their conscience.

I am distressed to hear that the CPSA is considering of making changes to their Standards of Practice impacting the conscience rights of doctors. I value a doctor who stands by his/her principles. Forcing them to refer for procedures they disagree with will also force them out of their profession. Our health care system is in dire need of more physicians not less which I fear would be the result of such a policy.
I fully support conscience rights for doctors and hope the CPSA would do the admirable thing for its members.

“ I want a doctor that has a conscience and not one that is forced to go against what he
believes is right for his patients.
Doctors are to help healing , not to assist in helping patients die before their natural
death.”
We already have lost so many Doctors in Alberta. Do not force conscience issues on
our Doctors.

I value being able to have a doctor who sticks to their principles, and that the current system is working fine. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of the profession or to sunnier destinations, making access even more difficult.

Lets get real, shall we? What has happened to the sanctity of human life? It bogles the mind to think we are even debating this!?
The feedback given by the majority of the medical professionals in this form says it all. Who should know better than they? They are the ones 'living it'.
To be a conscientious objector means you would have to have a conscience, correct? Or have we now abandoned our abilities to negotiate right from wrong, good from evil? These should not be tough questions.
So...where do we go from here? How about: common sense and decency.

Your doctor should be someone you trust. How can you trust someone who is required to refer something against their conscience? This policy would directly undermine the trust in the patient-doctor relationship.

From the Hippocratic oath:
"I will follow that system of regimen which, according to my ability and judgment, I consider for the benefit of my patients, and abstain from whatever is deleterious and mischievous."

Please continue to allow doctors the right to use their conscience. If a patient doesn’t like their doctor’s care they can find another doctor that is a better fit for them.

If you succeed in removing the conscience from the practice of medicine you will be left with doctors who have a dulled conscience or no conscience at all and that would lead to a very sad state for the healthcare system and patient care.

I want my doctor to have a conscience and use it!

The Medical Profeasion is held in very high esteem and expected to upholding high ethical standards. The sanctity of life is a protection that Medical Professionals in good conscience seek to protect, not end it.

As a lot of Doctors, practicing and retired have opined, the Medical Practise should offer hope not terminate it hence not disagreement with this ammendments against good conscience however slim chances may be. Doctors should not be forced to refer anyone for MAID or the likes when it clearly goes against their own conscience

Trudeau doesn't want palliative care as it is too expensive compared to MAIDS and any way he can succor people into killing themselves saves him big money on his medical insurance. Those with a conscience are suppose to have freedom to exercise what God has revealed to them. Trudeau has no conscience!!!

Physicians should not be required to refer patients for treatments that they are morally or consciously opposed to. Physicians should be protected to act and refer patients for treatments according to their beliefs, which is in the best interest of doctors and their parents.

I don't want doctors to be forced to do any procedures that they object to doing, they should also be free to give out "vaccination" exemptions without scrutiny and be allowed to prescribe alternative drugs for treating man made diseases like covid19 or any disorder.

Keep the politicians out of the medical field, they are making such a mess

I do not think that doctors should be forced to refer any procedure which they have a constitutional right to object to. Doctors should have the right to follow their conscience without penalty.

Doctors should have the freedom to do what is right without the pressure from the COLLEGE. Vaccination for Covid is an example, they should be free to express their intellectual VIEWS. Also, Doctor should be free not to do abortion or not administer euthanasia.

I have mental illnesses which are now completely under control. If MAiD had been available to me 10 or 20 years ago I would probably not be here today. That would have been tragic. The only thing that might have saved me is a doctor invoking conscience rights.

Please don’t mess with doctors conscience rights. Let doctors stick to their principles and do what they determine is best for their patients. Thank you.

Please protect doctors' rights to conscientious objection and remove this new wording of "effective referral".

According to psychiatry.org, 80% to 90% of depressed people eventually respond well to treatment with support from doctors, psychologists and others. Do you really think that you should allow MAID for mentally ill people who don't feel that there is hope and don't understand that it will take time and support to get better? Doctors should be giving hope and health care for their patients not a dead end MAID solution. I hope that there will be an investment in figuring out a different solution and not forcing doctors to refer against their conscience in protecting the vulnerable.

Alberta nurses and doctors have been attacked by the herds of vindictive lawyers who control the Alberta medical industry by being forced to loose their careers because they object to the series of injections mandated by medical boards. Alberta has lost many medical professionals already because of managements ignorance. Alberta will loose even more doctors if this immoral and repugnant policy is enacted. The college of physicians and surgeons has already betrayed Alberta's population, and now propose a further destructive action to undermine Alberta doctors. Do your job which is to SUPPORT doctors and patients, your job is NOT to further the betrayal of doctors ethics. The medical health industry has become seriously tarnished through "refusing" to face truth and fact through the last 4 yeas, so this twisted proposal will only expand the distrust. DO NOT pursue this proposal!

I value being able to have a doctor who sticks to their principles, and I feel the current system is working fine. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of the profession or to sunnier destinations, making access to physicians even more difficult.

NEVER should a physician be put in a position of being required to perform or to make an effective referral for moral actions which violate their profoundly-held
beliefs, values.and conscience. To do so would result in a physician's
retiring, moving out of province or family doctors pursuing another area of medicine.
There can be very little trust between a patient and their physician in the case that their doctor can refer for or facilitate their patient's death = MURDER! Greedy children could push for their parent's euthanasia or MAiD.
A few years ago, my husband and I were searching for a family physician. I asked this doctor how he felt about euthanasia. His reply was that euthanasia may be acceptable. That was our last visit to see him. I don't want anyone to encourage my death or suicide. I would have no trust in a physician who might decide to kill me.
When our daughter was young, I sought a pediatrician who would never refer her for an abortion. A few years ago, a 13 year old Albertan girl had an abortion without her parents' knowledge or consent. Her parents lost their grandchild! 😭 😱

KEEP and PROTECT Albertan physicians' conscience rights.

The term “effective referral” that was added to the draft policy is not acceptable. In Alberta we already have a solid framework for patients to access services they are looking for without requiring an “effective referral.”
MAID itself is objectionable to many Albertans, including me. It targets the vulnerable when they are at their lowest. Rather than alternative treatments that have resulted in good success for others, they are offered the option of death. Adding the requirement that medical practitioners must provide "effective referrals" for a "treatment" that is not a treatment at all will result in patients not being offered opportunities for other treatments, and will compel medical practitioners to act in a way that is contrary to their beliefs and their rights.

As stated under CPSA Goverance, Health Professions Act-"Medicine and other health professions are regulated in Alberta to ensure all health practitioners consistently provide safe, competent care." If "effective referral" is added, there will be no more safe, competent care in Alberta.
CPSA doesn't want to build a strong health care system for Albertans but wants to build a death care system by forcing doctors to participate in the evil of abortion or euthanasia. Human life is sacred and protecting it is of utmost importance to God.

The Supreme Court of Canada, in its original ruling on MAID, stated that physicians would not be compelled to provide assistance in dying--but the addition of "effective referral" to the Standard would do just that. I admire men and women of integrity who take a stand for what they believe in. In this case, it is the sanctity of life. When they are compelled to refer, without delay, to a practitioner who participates in MAID, not only are their conscience rights being being violated, but patients are not encouraged or given opportunities to evaluate alternatives to MAID. When depressed people or the mentally ill are at their lowest, MAID probably seems more attractive than fighting their way back. But many people have, and our lives have been enriched by them and by the physicians who treated them. Those are the physicians I want treating me when I'm ill. I have seen MAID in action, and I have seen the trauma of the people who were left behind. An effective referral not only violates the rights of the physician; it affects the loved ones who would have been only too happy to see their son, daughter, husband, wife, or child receive treatment--if only that treatment option had been offered and explained to them.

Doctors, like all other citizens should not be forced to act against their personal conscience. Doctors go into medicine to care for sick people and help them regain their health. Forcing doctors to refer patients for procedures that may result in the loss of life ( such as abortion or euthanasia) or body mutilation will force doctors to leave their medical practice and go elsewhere or perhaps change professions. We already have a critical shortage of doctors in this province. Please give them the support they need to practice their profession in a way that promotes life and health.

Doctors should be free to follow their conscience. If they are not comfortable referring in certain circumstances then they should not have to.

I don't want doctors being forced into doing or accepting procedures they don't beleive in.
I am Pro Life and hate abortions and Maid.

Unfair to doctors to make them choose between their conscience and their livelihood.

Doctors should have the right to stick to their values and principles, regarding life and death. They should not be forced to participate in Suicide if it goes against their principles.

Let the living live. Let doctors HELP their patients, not condemn them and kill otherwise health people.
Doctor need to be able to help and treat their patients, not threatened or coerced into causing harm.

I believe that doctors must keep the right to make their own conscience decisions on the types of procedures they perform. It is absolutely crucial that our consciences are not ruled by law, thereby removing the freedom to make our own conscience decisions.
This then goes without saying, that a doctor who consciencely can't perform a medical procedure, for instance to commit murder by means of abortion or euthanasia, also must not then be forced to have to give a referral to a doctor who will perform this procedure. This would make the doctor an accomplice to the crime which goes against his moral principal and conscience.

I am against Doctors being forced to refer patients for procedures that are against their conscience.

Leave the Doctors medical opinion alone. I want my doctor to decide for me based on his opinion not on what the college says you folks are 2 controlling step back

It’s extremely important to me that doctors be allowed follow their conscience regarding certain medical procedures. There are many avenues that patients can access if they want procedures done that would violate a doctors conscience rights. We are putting the medical profession at risk of loosing doctors by forcing them to refer patients for procedures they disagree with. Please don’t make any changes that would jeopardize the profession that is currently working fine

Doctors should not need to refer a patient for a procedure they do not agree with. Thanks, Dave.

Dr.'s should be able to choose in accordance with their ethical values what procedures they will participate in for a patient. If a procedure goes against their values they should be able to refuse the procedure and the patient can seek another Dr. who will either do what they want or they can change their thinking of why they think they want it in the first place. There are becoming far too many medical procedures now that have too many grey lines of ethical value and principle. Dr's should not have to give up their ethical values, or compromise their principles in order to continue a career they chose, in many cases a personal choice so they can give care and help to people in medical need.

We have a right to freedom of conscience. If our doctors aren’t allowed to say no or say yes, we have grievously violated everyone’s freedom. For my freedom is their freedom and vice versa. If doctors are compelled/ forced to participate in unethical and against their belief activities then we cross the boundaries of right and wrong. We do a disservice and a horrible legacy for everyone.

I am opposed to forcing any medical practitioner to do anything that is in contravention of their conscience. I agree with a doctor's statement that says "the reality is every person will stand before God and give an account of their actions. There is a reason everyone’s conscience knows this is wrong. God made us with an inner moral compass. Some choose to disregard it and will certainly face judgement."

I value doctors who can stick to their ethical and moral principles. I think Alberta doctors should continue to self regulate. If this changes I fear we will lose more doctors if this privilege changes and the health care crisis will worsen.

As an Albertan & Canadian I am completely against this policy initiative.
I know it’s so hard to watch a loved one suffer and die but euthanasia is not the answer, and steering people in that direction or making it mandatory for our doctors to advise on this is criminal.

I don't think doctors should be forced to tell their patients about other options when they are thinking of having maid or thinking of an abortion. They should be able to object because that is what they believe.

I believe that people are allowed to have there own views and opinions. If a doctor does not feel something is right, they should not refer to something against there own opinion.

Doctors should not be forced to do a procedure that is against their morals. Since when were hospitals used to kill patients.

I would not be comfortable knowing that my doctor has to provide resources that go against their moral beliefs and conscience. They should be able to give other options for their patients rather than abortion or MAiD. I would prefer a doctor that has good morals and they can firmly apply to their morals to their work than have to bend them to be able to keep their job. Medical workers have enough mental stress from their job and adding this into the mix can not help the situation. They come home after a long and sometimes difficult shift. They have a difficult job to begin with, so why should it be made more difficult? They shouldn't have to deal with the stress of an unsettled conscience and stretching their moral beliefs to their limit by providing resources for Abortion and MAiD.
There are other solutions.

I disagree with this new draft. All people have value from their conception to natural death. It is wrong to murder those who have mental illnesses and disabilities, etc. All people, no matter who they are, have value because of the sacrifice that Christ made for us on the cross. Nobody has the right to snuff out the life that God has graciously given His children. Also, doctors should never have to go against their conscious to please the evil in this world. If this goes through, we'll have a lot of doctors leaving and moving elsewhere, which would be very big problem. I am very against this new draft.

I do not think that doctors should be able to refer people against their own conscience for a few reasons. Firstly, especially in the case of mental health concerns, people may not be in their right mind to seek out MAID or an abortion. We know that mental health issues can skew ones ability to make knowledgeable choices, and thus it would be uncaring to condone such a drastic decision as murder when they are in such a state. Secondly, not only would this make many doctors leave their profession, it would also deter new doctors from coming to the practice. Finally, many patients themselves would feel uncomfortable with the idea that if they are in a state of distress, their health care provider is required to refer them to someone who can murder either them or their children.

I disagree with the new draft. I believe that it is harmful because "Doctor Referrals" are done if a physician thinks something will be in the patient's best interests. Our current system allows a patient to find a MAiD - or abortion - provider without their objecting physician being forced to be involved. Forcing a doctor to make an “effective referral plan” is forcing them to participate in the evil of abortion or euthanasia. It is harmful to both the patients and their doctors.

Doctors should not be forced to go against the values and beliefs that they believe in.

I believe that this goes against the doctors conscious and morals. This is forcing them to be active members in helping people with abortion, which I and many others believe involve killing your child. These "doctor referrals" believe that it is in the patients best interests to be referred to abortions or maid kits depending on what their mental health is like at that time. What most people need is someone to talk to and not be directed to something that will end lives.

Doctors take an oath to do no harm, forcing them to participate in a system that they believe is harmful to their patient goes against this.

We have a God given conscience that tells us it is wrong to kill. Like MAID and abortion is a decay of human morality. God has given us life and we need to value the life that has been given to us. The doctor's role in our society is to
be part of the healing process. To care for their patients and to protect life. Any law that will force our doctors to do the opposite should not pass and should be thrown in the garbage as what it is.
Thank you for allowing me to be part of this survey.

I value being able to have a doctor who sticks to their principles and who is allowed to stick to their principles; the current system is working fine. It is an inherently evil system that tries to force someone to act against their conscience. I encourage you not to be that type of system. The powers that be have recently driven away many health professionals by those powers insisting they have the right to dictate conscience. It is one of the reasons our health system has such a dearth of all types of professional health workers today. Please don't make it worse than it already is. My own GP gave up his practice last year (not even close to retirement age yet), and an alarming number of my friends have had theirs leave too. So now we are scrambling to find another GP somewhere.

Section 2.D

"promote their own morals, cultural or religious beliefs when interacting with
patients, in accordance with the Boundary Violations: Personal standard of
practice"

1. woke-progressive is a religion (humans pretending to be god)
2. secular humanism is a religion (humans pretending to be god)
3. Marxist-Socialist-CT-CRT-DEI is a religion (humans pretending to be god)
Note: non of the above ideologies are neutral

Why then is this college coercing others to follow the preferred religion of some of the leaders, even if they are a majority? Why does section 2.D not apply to the college itself? Why are other religious beliefs not protected as they should be in a real democracy?

People are allowed to have religious beliefs and should be allowed to hold them and follow them. Good leaders should be able to find a work around that doesn't force doctors to do things that go against their beliefs (i.e. abortion, assisted suicide, trans surgeries or any trans affirming care). This includes the "effective referral" section. By the way, what ever happened to "do no harm?"

Note: humans pretending to be god = the Fall, Genesis 3

I value being able to have a doctor who sticks to their principles, and that the current system is working fine. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of the profession or to sunnier destinations, making access even more difficult. Leave Doctors alone let them make decisions for themselves with their patients without interference. It’s said that Canada is becoming a socialists country.

What is "care"? And what is "harm"? Our definitions have been shifting closer to "care" and "harm" meaning whatever the patient declares them to mean. If a patient comes into a doctor's office asking the doctor to cut his healthy left arm off, what should a doctor who objects do? The patient is adamant that cutting off his arm would be "caring" and letting his arm remain would be very "harmful". If a doctor cannot in good conscience conduct the procedure, should that doctor then refer the patient to someone who can and will remove his arm?

If you view doctors as transactional creatures that simply do what you want in exchange for money, then you might be tempted to answer yes. But that would make a doctor no better than your neighbourhood drug dealer. Doctors are historically respected, not only because of their education, but because they conform themselves to a higher standard, the highest being a Biblical standard but if that's too much then at least a standard that conforms to tried and tested notions of anthropology that are shown to support a well-functioning society.

The proposed amendments are purported to support patient care, but any good definition of patient care must assume that human life has inherent value which supercedes assigned value judgements like quality of life. IMHO, the amendment writers want doctors to be forced to refer MAID and abortions because the writers like MAID and abortions, not because of a blanket commitment to patient care, whatever that may be as defined by the patient. The day that arm removal becomes a popular idea among the medical elite, it will come to be regarded as "patient care" as well.

MAiD, is a controversial policy & should NOT/NEVER be forced on our Doctors. Doctors must be allowed to live up to their conscience & their own beliefs. The sanctity of life must be first & foremost protected. Promoting death at any level is wrong!

Our Country and Province are in dire straits as far as practicing Physicians. It is inconceivable to me that by forcing Physicians to go against their moral and Hippocratic oath in the matter of MAID and abortion practices. It is against their rights as Humans and their freedoms in Canada…
I ask that you allow the physicians who choose not to participate in MAID or abortion practices be allowed to practice as they deem fit for themselves and their patients. We are on a slippery slope towards anything BUT democracy when hard working, God fearing people are forced against their will and moral beliefs.
Thank you.

Please don't force doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with. It kills the very thing doctors are trained to do. Which is to treat patients to the best of they're skills and judgment. Let them be free to do so.

Stick to your oath. Don't harm. Save life. Don't take funding or bribes from Pharma. Challenge and speak out against the Government narratives pushing harm on the citizens.

At a time when there is a shortage of doctors in Canada, please do not alienate those with deep convictions and morals that are different that the "main stream" morals. Extremely competent doctors might leave the profession and other smart, caring young people will not enter medicine. I want to be able to trust my doctor to provide me with his/her sincere recommendations ... not a doctor that simply reiterates the views required by society.

I am totally opposed to doctors being forced to ⁰compromise their faith by having to refer patients to doctor assisted suicide or to get an abortion. It is forcing them to make tough decisions to go against their conscience and no one should have to do that. We will lose many doctors.

Doctors should not be forced into doing anything against their belief for the best care of their patients. People have to be able to trust the Doctor they go to and when government has the right to make individuals do things against their conscience it will cause the best doctors to go to other countries that allow the doctors the freedoms that we all deserve to have.

I do not want doctors to be forced to refer patients against their conscience. This would undermine the patient / doctor trust and confidence, particularly if doctors are required to refer for what in their conscience, is not best treatment.

Freedom is vital. Freedom for an individual to determine what they are comfortable with is important. Please allow doctors to object to a treatment and maintain their conscience.

The Christian Medical and Dental Association is made up of over 1,600 Christian doctors from across Canada. We have almost 300 members in Alberta.

For the past eight years, our members have been very concerned about their ability to continue to practice due to the introduction of Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) in Canada. The introduction of the term “effective referral”, first in Ontario and now in the Model Practice Standard, has been very problematic for physicians. For Catholics, Orthodox Jews, and Evangelicals, the provision of a formal referral is morally equivalent to actually performing the act of euthanasia itself. This concern has been shared by doctors of other faiths, those with no particular faith who practice Hippocratic medicine, or simply oppose MAiD from a humanist perspective. It has led to early retirements, changes in practice focus, and moves to other provinces.

As you can well imagine our doctors have concerns about reconciling MAiD with their ethical and moral responsibilities to their patients. The problems with MAiD have become apparent over time – including the controversial rapid expansion to include patients with disabilities who are not in danger of death and the planned expansion to patients whose only presenting illness is mental health related. There have been documented cases across Canada where patients have chosen MAiD because of lack of services and support. Our members want to be able to counsel patients who are suffering and advocate for them to receive the best care to relieve that suffering. We are very concerned about vulnerable patients who may “fall through the cracks” in our current system and end up choosing MAiD because they feel they have no other options.

While our members cannot in good conscience provide an “effective referral”, they can direct patients to a resource with accurate information about all available medical options in response to a patient request. We do so based on the obligations required by the College. We do this reluctantly, but objectively as a professional requirement.

We are asking the Alberta College not to use the term “effective referral” in your revisions of your policy on Conscientious Objection, for the following reasons:

1. Ontario’s position has been further developed and elaborated upon. While we are still disappointed by the use of “effective referral” in their policy, we were pleased when the Ontario College revised its Advice to the Profession: Human Rights in the Provision of Health Services earlier this year to allow members to simply provide the patient with contact information for a non-objecting, available, and accessible physician, other health-care professional, or agency in certain circumstances.

2. Other key provinces are not using the term “effective referral”, including BC, SK, MB, and NL. We are waiting for updated policies from NB, PEI, and NS. By not using the term “effective referral”, these policies open the door to the patient gaining access without it causing moral distress or moral injury to the physician.

3. The term “effective referral” will be misunderstood in medical education and in medicine generally as a formal referral. This will result in a lack of respect for human rights and diversity when physicians are judged to be shirking their responsibility by colleagues when they do not provide a formal referral. It will also serve to deter people who could be accepted to medical school from ever applying because they feel they will be forced to act against their moral and ethical compass.

4. The ethics of MAiD have not been decided. Justice Lynn Smith in the very first Carter decision said that there was no medical consensus on the ethics of MAiD in Canada. While it is legal, there is no consensus whether it is ethical across the board or in particular cases. How can the regulator require a referral to a service that many members consider unethical?

Concerning the obligation to provide information as detailed in the policy at 1.b., we are seeking clarification as to whether there is an expectation that information be proactively provided about controversial procedures prior to a patient request. We are concerned that providing information to a patient regarding abortion or MAiD without a precipitating patient concern or inquiry may alarm the patient or unduly influence their decision-making. This is of particular concern if the proposed expansion of MAiD for patients whose primary condition is mental illness is implemented, as the obligation to provide information will interfere with the normal practice of psychiatry for patients experiencing suicidal ideation.

We have provided a more detailed submission via email.

To the CPSA: It is of utmost importance to us to have a doctor who sticks to their principles, and we are totally fine with the current system. To force doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of our health care which will make access even more difficult. We need more doctors, not less.

Freedom of Conscience Rights (Conscientious Objection) in Alberta is critical.
Who wants a Doctor with no moral conscience?
"...lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil."
The Medical Profession should acknowledge and help to protect the sanctity of human life from conception. A person's DNA is the same from beginning to death.
Unfortunately, a few people do not seem to recognize or accept this scientific fact.
Every unborn baby, newborn baby, child, teenager and adult age matters.
Honest health care matters too.
The Freedom of Conscience Rights helps to protect Doctors of good will from being coerced into wrong doing.
Therefore, the Freedom of Conscience Rights for Doctors is imperative.
The Freedom of Conscience Rights in Alberta is vital to good health.

I need a doctor who is free to take his knowledge, experience and opinion and give me his calculated advise. He has the very specific training that I haven’t been able to study.

Doctors need freedom to exercise and carry out procedures they deem positive in the shared goal of my health. My doctor and I are a team.

I chose that particular doctor.

Having a doctor who stands up for the values they believe in is vital. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force them out of their profession or have them leave this province for work elsewhere further adding to our health care crisis.

As someone who struggled with severe suicidal ideation, depression, anxiety, stress, self-hatred, and a myriad of other mental health issues. I wanted assisted suicide by 18, I struggled with my will to live, being stronger than the hell scape that was my life; forcing me to try to kill myself… I despised my life, and was ashamed; at how I was too weak to just kill myself. I over the course of 10 years, wasted at least one hundred thousand dollars, of the healthcare systems money and hundreds of hours from doctors, nurses, psychologists and psychiatrists… It could have been devoted to people who needed life saving care. If this change for the policy passes. I would have qualified for assisted suicide.
At 34, I have no more depression, suicidal ideation, severe stress or anxiety. I counsel those who are struggling with suicidal depression. I can and have helped those with PTSD and C-PTSD, as I’ve walk these roads. I have a career as a miner, give to charity, and am trying to repay all the kindness and love I was shown, through my 2 decades of hell. Forcing doctors to do the logical thing, and remove an eyesore from society; may be logical… But we as Albertans, should not fall to hopeless sociopathic ideologies. We should look for that straight and narrow path, that leads to an ever brighter future.

The current system works just fine! Please quit forcing these things on the public and the doctors. I appreciate my doctor, because she stands up for her patients, and her oath she made when she became a doctor! She has her own personal convictions, and things work well, for both of us. Let doctors do their job, let them take care of their patients without interfering!!!

Why would you force doctors to act against their principles?
That is absolutely insane! A doctor with principles should be honoured and revered.

The CPSA's proposed changes to its standards of practice forces doctors to go against their values and beliefs, making them go against their conscience. There is three main reasons that I think this is a bad idea. One, our current system allows patients to find a maid or abortion provider without their objecting physician being involved. Second, many people want their doctors values to align with theirs and who will decline to offer certain procedures. Finally, this change might result in a shortage of Doctors because of many quitting due to being unable to maintain the things they value and believe.

This bill strips doctors of their right to have their own morals and/ or ethics. No democratic government has the authority to strip an individual of their morals or ethics.
Agency to think and act according to our own beliefs and thoughts is God given.
Ethics are personal and groups can not oblige anyone to perform actions against one’s own personal code. Governments per se can not demand all group members perform anything in a free society. All sanctioned groups under such a government can not have the right to usurp or twist that right.

I believe that all medical staff must have the right on what they do with their medical abilities.

The Doctors should not have to do anything against their conscience. Whether that be issues dealing with abortion, MAID, or any other things like theses issues. They should be able to tell a patient their thoughts and suggest counsellors or therapy to help the person get through the struggles they are facing.

I think doctors should not be forced against there moral values

I believe that doctors, physicians, and surgeons should have the right to turn down those looking for MAID, an abortion, or other things that may go against their conscience without having to recommend them to others willing to do the process.

doctors should not be forced against their moral values

I believe that this form needs to be abolished. To make it mandatory for doctors of all sorts to do something against their moral values is wrong and they should have the right to refuse offering those services and to not be involved with those cases whatsoever. It should be illegal to make it mandatory for physicians and doctors to prescribe things that are against their moral values.

I think that doctors should not be forced to do something against God's word. I think that this should not be allowed stand doctors should not go against their moral values or conscience

I believe that doctors and any medical workers should have the opportunity to decided that they do not have to administer these things if they believe them immoral or against their good conscience. After all, when doctors are certified they must take an oath to never harm or cause damage to a patients life.

I believe that it is not fair to make Doctors that have moral beliefs kill life away of a creation of God, rather than protecting the valuable life that has meaning. Doctors should not have to recommend death. Doctors are supposed to be saving lives.

As a Christian I believe that physicians and doctors should have the right to refuse doing those services and to refuse referring them. Doctors should not have to do something that will weigh on their conscience and goes against their moral values. instead of referring people who struggle to someone who will murder them, we should be referring them to someone who can help them, such as a counselor.

I feel that that the doctors should not have to choose against their conscience. These doctors have rights and freedoms given to them in the constitution. The CPSA doesn't realize that the people that need help don't normally know what they're getting into.

I believe that Doctors and Physicians should have the right to only give their patients advice that will be better for them, not referrals that could bring them harm. It should be illegal to force doctors to go against their beliefs.

To change the rules that force physician's against their moral values is wrong. They should not be forced to do something they want to object to. We need to provide people with assistance in living, not dying.

I have serious reservations about any action that forces an individual to act against their consciences and dearly held beliefs about the sanctity of life. I believe it is unconscionable to ask someone to violate their own consciences for the sake of implementing a death dealing strategy and terming it 'healthcare.' Do no harm...to either the patient, or the healthcare provider should be the standard set in all instances.

Dear Sir/Madame,

The more restrictions you put on Alberta doctors, the more doctors will leave the province. And this at a time when there is a huge shortage. Please allow doctors to retain their objection to policy they can not in good conscience support.

This isn't only the smart thing to do, it is the right thing to do. Leave them alone!

Flabbergasted by your lack of sense,

John Greeve

I am opposed to doctors not having their conscience rights.

Forcing doctors to act against their consciences and refer for euthanasia, assisted suicide, abortion, contraceptive sterilization, contraception, transgender surgery, etc., all of which are a violation of human dignity, is an act of violence, itself.

There may be very influential medical professionals (in this province, and elsewher) who say the Hippocratic Oath does not apply to us today as it reflected the “knowledge and culture of the day” and is based on “outdated science,” but this is not true: killing and mutilation are not medicine. And as most people know, the Nazis rejected the Hippocratic Oath.

And what of the psychological effects when one acts against one’s conscience? Xavier Simmons (2023) in “Why Conscience Matters: A Theory of Conscience and Its Relevance to Conscientious Objection in Medicine” discusses the psychological effects of those who act against their conscience:

“Here we arrive at a bedrock insight concerning the moral harm arising when one acts against one’s conscience. Acting against conscience does not only lead to emotional distress. The moral psychological reality is more profound than this. Agents also experience a weakened sense or total loss of meaning and identity when they transgress their deepest commitments.”

Do not force doctors to act violate their conscience.

And thank you to the courageous doctors in this comment forum who are opposed to the CPSA's efforts to force doctors to violate their consciences.

Work cited

Symons X. Why Conscience Matters: A Theory of Conscience and Its Relevance to Conscientious Objection in Medicine. Res Publica. 2023; 29(1):1-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11158-022-09555-2 Epub 2022 Jun 24. PMID: 35789952; PMCID: PMC9244116.

Glad the term "effective referral", will be removed. Conscientious Objectors should not be responsible to make sure that services are provided to patients that violate their Hippocratic Oath and conscience. If health care providers are forced to violate their consciences you will quickly have a shrinking health care force and our province will not be able to effectively provide health care.

Instructing a physician to provide an effective referral is violating the rights of physicians to act in accordance with their conscience. It involves their indirect participation in procedures that are morally repugnant to them, It compels them to give up their basic human right to freedom of moral choice and makes them agents of the government.
No one should HAVE to participate in the taking of a human life, whether someone is asking them to kill their preborn child, or asking to be killed themselves. You are asking our doctors to cross a line and do a job that most people would be horrified to do. It is not surprising that a country that has open season on babies up to the moment of birth (no law against abortion at all) is now going down the road of highest rates of medically assisted deaths in the world.

Doctors, nurses or any citizen should have the freedom from compulsion to act in any way that offends their freedom of conscience. To require this of medical practitioners would result in a broad spectrum of our society to leave the medical profession in order to keep a clear conscience.

I greatly value being able to have a doctor who sticks to their principles. Freedom of conscience, and the ability to stand for what we believe in, are basic tenets in the Charter of Rights. Individuals seeking certain treatments, if their Dr will not refer, have the choices and the ability to seek out treatments from other doctors who align with their values. The current system is working fine, and I feel that forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of the profession or to sunnier destinations, making access even more difficult. Do not force doctors to provide referrals. Keep Freedoms of Choice available for both doctors and patients alike. Patients can always choose to find a doctor that aligns with their values, as long as doctors can choose to refer and keep their values intact while doing so. It's far better to have more doctors with varied values, than no doctors available at all.

I do not think that any doctor should be forced to refer any procedure to which they have a right to object to. I don’t believe that is constitutional. If they have a personal, or religious reason not to support things like MAID, abortions etc., their stance should be acknowledged and supported.

I am a nurse and I feel that by requiring a referral from those that object you effectively negate them from objecting.

Please take this clause out of the conscientious objection draft so that people can practice within their own ethical beliefs

Health care professionals are under the Hippocratic oath to do no harm and preserve life. How can I trust my health care professional if they are no longer under that oath? We have seen irreparable harm done to the trust and confidence of the public in our health care professionals in the last three years because it seemed they were more bound to "protocol procedures" and rhetoric instead of being able to have honest conversations with their clients to lay out all the risk to benefit factors in various procedures. Will I ever be able to fully trust a health care professional has my child's or my elderly parents' best interests in mind if THEY happen to have a different belief system about what is beneficial? And when we are talking about MAID or hormone therapy, how does one assess that the person is really of sound mind at that moment? At what age can a CHILD really make those decisions when they need parental supervision/permission for things like school field trips? How can one be permitted when others are not?

I'm also concerned that with a health care system already seriously broken, you will be forcing many professionals to leave because they do not want to deal with this coercion. Why not allow people of a certain persuasion/belief system to practice privately and those that agree with their views can be their clients?

I value being able to have a doctor who sticks to their principles, and that the current system is working fine.

Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with could and will force doctors out of the profession or to move to more favorable destinations for their own moral principals making access even more difficult for the people of Alberta.

I would ask you to use fairness and wisdom for all medical personal as you contemplate and rethink these decisions.
Thank you,

Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will cause doctors to leave the profession or move to different areas of the country where they are able to work according to their conscience. We already have a doctor shortage. If you force this on them, the shortage will become worse and access will be even more difficult.

I value being able to have a doctor who sticks to her principles. The current system is working fine.

Healthcare in Alberta will severely decline if we start to move in this direction.

Doctors should not have to violate their conscience and refer for procedures that they disagree with like abortion and euthanasia.

People will not want to pursue a medical career if they are forced to go against their own moral beliefs.

Albertans have the freedom to find the doctor that best fits their family.

We do not agree with CPSA considering of a new policy that would require doctors to refer patients for every type of medical procedure, even so-called procedures like euthanasia that many doctors may not want to participate in. Euthanasia is written in the criminal code as 'homicide'. Referring a patient to a procedure such as the MAiD program is a form of participation, not care and violates core beliefs of the profession. Many doctors do not want to be forced into participation to a procedure such as 'homicide'. Doctors should absolutely be able to practise their profession with conscience with life giving care.

We value being able to have a doctor who sticks to their principles and the oath that their actions as a doctor should not harm a patient. The current system is working fine. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of the profession or to other destinations, making access to a doctor even more difficult.

To whom it may concern
Please let doctors follow their conscious and not be forced to preform any procedures that they do not want to.
Do not change the rules that currently stand. Thank you,
Sarah Gariepy

Sadly, if this legislation to force doctors to kill (or assist in killing) pre-born children and vulnerable patients goes through, you will lose your best and most compassionate medical professionals. These people really care for the whole patient — physically, mentally, emotionally, spiritually —as has been the tradition for decades. With a new mandate forcing a particular course of ”treatment”, you create medical Technicians, rather than caring, compassionate, patient advocators.
The Hypocratic Oath calls physicians to ‘do no harm’ to their patients. How can a patient trust a doctor who might just suggest that they end their life. Patients need to know that a doctor is on their side, encouraging them in their best and fullest life (not death).
I have a 90 year old mother, who recently broke her shoulder. She had a few dismal weeks when she reasonably struggled with the question of whether or not to ask for assisted suicide. Fortunately, there was enough family around her to encourage her in her recovery. She is doing well and right back to her regular life. I fear that had she privately mentioned assisted suicide to her doctor in those recovery weeks, we would not have her here with us today.
I know many physicians who will not be coerced into being complicit in killing their patients. They just care too much! But, you will lose them from the profession, and it will be a sad day indeed.

As a patient with a disabling chronic illness for two decades, I know what it means to choose death as a way out of misery. However, non-conventional options exist to manage symptoms and eventually heal from these illnesses. I have witnessed these in the lives of many people, including myself. Most of the time, a person who is suffering from a debilitating chronic illness cannot think clearly because of pain or brain issues. Penalizing a doctor just because he/she followed his/her good judgment and conscience is unjust and a disservice to the community.

I find it unconscionable that doctors are being forced/regulated to do procedures that are against their morals and values. When did the hippocratic oath, to do no harm get changed to value the new woke agenda values, including killing patients? Those that are forcing this upon doctors and those doctors that exercise these henous crimes will be judged by a higher judge who will not show mercy.

I do not agree that Dr's should have to refer patients for procedures that are against their moral and ethical beliefs and principles. As an RN I was asked to participate in a client receiving MAID. Because of my Christian beliefs I would not participate. I was not forced by anyone and my decision was respected. It was my choice . All Dr's should have the same choice to decline to refer. There are too many people playing God these days.

I value being able to have a doctor who sticks to their principles. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of the profession or to sunnier destinations, making access even more difficult. Please uphold the Hippocratic oath to "do no harm." Violating ones conscience to "do harm" makes for a hardened heart and less care and caring. A doctor who violates their conscience cannot be trusted.

I don’t think Drs should push politics from their offices on Maid or abortion or any other highly political agenda. They have a right to be Canadian first as well. I am worried that the state our Cdn Medical system is in to force Drs to do things against their conscience and that of their patients. Shame on Government.

Thank you for the opportunity to have input into this draft. I am personally very concerned about the mandatory effective referrals, forcing physicians to promote MAID and abortion. Let's go back to the Hippocratic oath to help and not harm a patient; abstaining from all intentional wrong-doing and harm. Life is sacred. Pre-mature death is equal to harm. Stop forcing physicians to promote an agenda that they disagree with. There is a lot at stake when the freedoms of our physicians (and soon parents) are restricted on this slippery proposed path of MAID in Canada. Do NOT force the promoting of "death care"!

Regarding proposed changes: Please remove the "effective referral" portion from this policy.
How can physicians be bound to refer a patient to care, procedures, etc. that are contrary to the physician's understanding of what would benefit the patient? Is that not hypocrisy? If a physician who doesn't believe it is correct/ethical to offer MAiD (putting someone else to death) how can that physician refer the patient to someone else to be put to death, and not be complict? Aside from being against the Hippocratic Oath to Do NO Harm, it is against the law of the Lord God, creator of mankind, to cause death in a Medical Practice. It is also morally wrong to request/demand any physician to refer a patient for a procedure the physician believes is wrong. Please support Physicians' Conscience Rights in Alberta. We need to keep our conscientious Doctors!

I would like to add my voice to the long list concerned Albertans who have expressed opposition to the proposed effective referral. Many have expressed the same concerns I have. Freedom of conscience and religion are fundamental freedoms, under the charter of rights and freedoms. Doctors should be able to pursue their profession without violating their conscience. Patients should be able to choose a doctor who they feel will make ethical decisions, and not offer or pressure them to make choices they oppose. I urge you to listen to the voice of reason, I see in the comments from Albertans.

It is wrong to impose upon doctors, or anyone, to act against their God-given conscience to willfully harm/kill or refer a person to someone else to be harmed/killed by MAID, gender change, abortion, forced vaccination, etc..
There will be a day of judgement for all!

I am a retired R.N. I second the concerns of physicians Matt McIsaac, Rebecca Genuis, Richard Pidde and others. My own primary care physician closed his Alberta practice in 2020 and returned to South Africa. I personally know another family doctor who moved to the U.S.A. because of better working conditions there. I have worked/volunteered hundreds of hours caring for patients, clients, friends and relatives, both in the care and support of people with dementia and people with a terminal prognosis. Here are my concern/comments:
• People are often thankful for treatment that prolongs their life (giving them precious time to enjoy or say good-bye to their friends and relatives)
• People reach a point where they do not wish to have their dying process prolonged. They by no means want euthanasia, but they do not want procedures such as tube feeding, suctioning, or resuscitation.
• “Euthanasia is NOT a death with dignity. It is perhaps the most severe expression of alienation and aloneness. There’s nothing dignified … No decision to end your life is ever, ever private …” --Quotes from Joni Eareckson Tada

I object to the direction taken in the proposed standard of practice for conscientious objection.
If I was a doctor, and invested so much of my life toward this worthy pursuit to help humanity when they are in times of greatest need, I would be devastated and terribly frustrated to be forced to facilitate a patient receiving a medical treatment option that I know is not best for the patient and hold to be morally wrong. In terms of hockey, which Canadians understand, it is like giving an assist to the opposing team that results in a goal. But now the game is good versus evil. The result is life and death sometimes! This document will force professionals to be complicit in murder! This is a heavy burden to place on the conscience of anyone, but this document will mandate it!!
I say no. We need people of principle and moral strength in our hospitals and clinics. They are the people who are invested in health care because they care and not because of political agendas or personal gain. They will work harder and not just put in time. I wish for a doctor whose values align with my own, for then there is greater trust and understanding. Especially with an eye to the government’s plans to extend MAiD to those with mental illness, this is the WRONG direction to take!! If I were your committee, I would improve the conscientious standards of doctors given our current climate of abortion and MAiD and gender transitioning. Do you want to hold on to doctors or lose them! Do you want to attract new doctors or push them away? The future of the availability of doctors in our province (I just lost mine!) would be damaged by this proposed document. This will harm many more people than a few who don’t get a referral for an ethically questionable service. In a time when our medical system is struggling to get people timely care with an MRI or cancer treatment, this is not a document for retaining doctors. ‘Timely” is a vague word that is hard to achieve in our current hospital situation.
Perhaps you (the one who gets to read these letters - thank you!) don’t agree with my moral position, but in our province, there are many who do. I ask that our perspective also be represented in the doctors who serve in Alberta. Perhaps you can at least agree that diversity of thought is important in a free country. Government (or medical institutions) should never be muzzling debate and personal opinions - freedom of conscientious and speech must be maintained and fought for, or freedom dies. Citizens who understand freedom will be respectful of this.
Thank you for the opportunity to read this proposed document and offer feedback.

I believe there is a need for a clear and unambiguous statement on the responsibilities of clinicians with respect to patients end of life desires and their reproductive health needs. Neither the present statement nor the proposed statement provide clear and unambiguous guidance on the right to conscious for clinicians.
The Canadian Association of MAiD Assessors and Providers (CAMAP) have prepared Nine Key Messages that outlines how to respect a clinician’s right to conscious. Court cases have established that clinicians cannot abandon patients who request help in accessing MAiD. It is established that there is a duty to refer when a clinician has a conscientious objection. Patients cannot be abandoned.
Below are the Nine Key Messages of CAMAP that provide a clear statement on the responsibilities of clinicians.
1. High-quality palliative care should be available to all patients who desire it at the end of life.
CAMAP strongly supports the development, extension and proper funding of excellent palliative
care services in all communities across Canada. This includes ensuring support for all clinicians
who provide these services for their patients.
2. All clinicians participating in MAiD work should be knowledgeable about palliative care
options and other potential supports available to the patient. All clinicians who provide end of
life care, including palliative care clinicians, should be knowledgeable about MAiD and the
resources available in their locality for patients seeking information about and/or referral for
MAID.
3. Respect for patient autonomy should be the foundation of all end of life care; there should be a
clear understanding of and respect for the patient’s goals of care. Should a patient choose to
pursue MAiD they should be supported in their decision. All medical care, including palliative
care if involved, should be continued.
4. MAiD should be included as an option in all end of life goals of care conversations with
potentially eligible patients.
5. For patients wishing to pursue MAiD, CAMAP strongly supports full access to all MAiD
services regardless of geography, facility or institution.
6. All health care providers who wish to participate in MAiD should have access to training and
be respected, permitted and supported in the work of assisted dying.
7. All health care providers who do not wish to participate in MAiD should be respected and
supported in their decision.
8. Conscience-based objection should not impair patient care. If a clinician objects to MAiD on
the basis of conscience and is unwilling to carry out a MAiD assessment, CAMAP strongly
supports the professional requirement of an effective referral to a clinician known to provide
MAiD or to a local or provincial MAiD coordination service.
9. Recognizing the primacy of patient-centred care and outcomes, CAMAP acknowledges and
appreciates the value of inter-professional teams and especially encourages the integration of
palliative care and MAiD

I support conscience rights for doctors in Alberta. “ Our current system allows a patient to find a MAID provider without their objecting physician being forced to be involved.”

This is ridiculous. Doctors should not be forced to promote any form of medicine or procedure that goes against their personal standards or morals. Shame on the CPSA for having such a low opinion on human life and all doctors who understand their hypocratic oath.

I am very concerned that the wording of this document may mandate that a physician violate his/her own conscience in referring a patient for a procedure to which the physician holds an objection on a moral, ethical, cultural or faith basis. I am a retired RN. In my experience, physicians did not have to refer patients for services to which they objected however, patients were provided with the necessary information to seek out those services, should they wish to do so. Respecting the patient’s right to access services should not require violation of the physician’s right to have their personal perspective respected as well.

Dear Respected Health Workers. As a Recreation Therapist myself, let us hold true to maintaining and sustaining everyone’s life - from conception til natural death. Depression can cloud many choices and we should look at helping in this area and focus our attention and resources on positive outcomes and supports. Every life is valuable and to be protected!

I am opposed to any regulation that forces doctors to act against their conscience. Doctors have a right to exercise their best judgment in caring for a patient and freedom of conscience is an absolute necessity for their clinical decision making. Considering MAiD, euthanasia, and abortion as healthcare is a disgrace to our society as it is promoting and facilitating a culture of death, not life.

I would like doctors to have the ability and right, to sticks to their principles.
Please do not introduce this ‘referral system’ that would force doctors to refer their patients for a procedure that violates their principles.

The existing rules are sufficient to protect patients' right to access services. An "effective referral" will violate the Charter right to freedom of conscience for Alberta doctors. As the federal government continues to consider widened eligibility for euthanasia and assisted suicide to Canadians' suffering from conditions like depression, the need to protect doctors' conscience rights has only grown. When the Supreme Court decision first came down on Euthanasia a majority of Canadian doctors objected to providing "care" that they felt violated their Hippocratic Oath. While the number of doctors who object may no longer be an outright majority, it is undoubtedly a significant minority. As criteria for assisted dying has expanded, many doctors who might not have objected to its use in cases where the patient's death was undoubtedly imminent might now have objections in cases where death is not foreseeable. The current standards strike the right balance - the proposed standard is too much, particularly given the federal government's expansion of eligibility for assisted suicide/euthanasia.

We need doctors! Forcing doctors to refer for procedures that go against their conscience is completely wrong. We will lose doctors and we cannot afford that.

I am a Registered Nurse in Alberta, and I just want to thank you for removing "effective referral" from the draft standard. I encourage you to maintain a physician's right to provide the best medical advice he or she believes in, whether or not the patient disagrees with that advice. Freedom of conscience and religion are fundamental freedoms in Canada, and doctors should not be forced to violate either by "effectively referring", which is essentially acting as an accomplice. I also want the freedom to choose a doctor that I know won't violate his or her conscience.

To quote the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in Canada section 2 a) "Freedom of conscience and religion" and section 2 b) "Freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression . . . "
Why does the college of physicians and surgeons want to force medical practitioners to act against their conscience and act in contradiction of their beliefs and opinions? The Charter of Rights and Freedoms was written to protect Canadians and true democracy from the exact thing you are proposing. Lack of freedoms is something that happens in a dictatorship state. Is that what Canada has become?

Thank you for inviting feedback regarding the proposed amendments to the Conscientious Objection standard.
I am in full agreement that the CPSA has: "Based on initial feedback received, the term ‘effective referral’ will be removed from the Conscientious Objection standard." Most of the points that I would make have already been provided by others in the comments that I have reviewed. I would like to add the following. There is the concept of moral injury to those who are coerced to participate in actions that violate their conscience. This has been well documented in the Moral Injury Project 2014. This involved military ethics. I do not believe it is a stretch to say that health care professionals (also being humans) would not be similarly adversely affected if they were compelled to act against their conscience. See Hanna 2005 which documented the adverse psychological effects on nurses who were compelled to participate against their conscience in elective abortions. To compel a health care practitioner to participate in an action that violates their conscience is to do violence to that practitioner. I believe that the referral method (for abortion and MAID)currently in place is a reasonable compromise between patient rights and the practitioners' right to exercise their clinical and moral judgment. Thank you.

I don't believe that any physician should be forced to refer their patients for either abortion nor assisted suicide procedures if they feel conflicted in doing so. Regarding abortion - I personally don't agree with using taxpayers dollars to terminate a pregnancy. Nor do I think a physician who morally or ethically disagrees, should be compelled to do something that is contrary to their beliefs. I have personally witnessed conversations in an abortion clinic, where staff were discussing clients who used their facilities on a frequent basis, as a means of 'birth control'. This is disgusting & I have since stopped doing any work for that facility due to my own moral convictions.
Assisted suicide is a slippery slope. While I feel bad for people who suffer daily with debilitating illness', I don't think it is right to end their lives. I believe only God has that right. Now they are looking to expand it into people suffering from mental illness & that is very scary. Governments would be incentivized to encourage this procedure because it ultimately saves them money in the long-term care & treatment of those afflicted with these conditions. It can be expanded to cover a multitude of conditions for all the wrong reasons, including the aforementioned financial reasons, population control, people born with Downs Syndrome or other handicaps. People - including law makers - will be held accountable for their actions in the end. You would be wise to consider that carefully before you make your decision.

We, as adults are responsible for ourselves. If a doctor has the moral conscience to preserve life, that individual should be raised up and praised. Because of self-responsibility, the patient should locate for themselves another doctor to care out the immoral deed. If their emotional state is compromised in any way that they need the assistance then clearly, CLEARLY, they cannot be in a state to make a decision such as abort or euthanize!
I believe we should adopt Florida's set out rules in regard to such. But if immoral, selfish people want to corrupt themselves, I suppose that's there individual right as a sovereign human being. These individuals need love and guidance, not a legal right to carry out a murder

There is not a shortage of doctors providing abortion or Maid services. This appears to be a way of limiting personal choice and ethical decision-making. Physicians need to be able to practice thoughtfully and ethically.

Here's the thing, the trust of the public in the medical profession is at an all time low. People are upset that the principle of "do no harm" has been ditched by the medical profession. Health Care used to be about preserving life, saving lives, instead all sorts of medical procedures today are geared towards ending lives, e.g. abortion, euthanasia (MAID). Other medical procedures, like sex affirming surgeries performed on minors are utterly barbaric and destroy the body of the child in an irreversible way. The notion that a male can become a female or a female can become a male is abhorrent, certainly no veterinarian doctor thinks that about animal, and neither should any physician think this is possible among humans. You folks can do whatever you want, at this point I am not sure your reputation can get any lower. I know most doctors do not perform any of the procedures (abortion, euthanasia, sex affirming surgeries)I just mentioned, and would never engage in unethical medicine practices like the examples I provided. Please leave those doctors alone, they should never be forced to disclose to patients medical proceedings like abortion, euthanasia, or sex affirming surgeries, let alone refer patients to practitioners that engage in such unethical medical practice, which I would call medical malpractice that unfortunately the College of Physicians approves of.

I would Not want my doctor to have to act against her conscience. We need to support our doctors to do what they know to do best without worrying about losing their job. I am afraid that this will only increase our doctor shortages as they will need to go elsewhere to freely practice.

I believe it is a disgrace to force medical personnel to participate in practices that is against their beliefs. We cater to all those who want their voices heard, those who insist they their individual rights are first and foremost, yet we do not respect those with opposing views or beliefs. How is it that a government policy can force someone to do something strictly against their beliefs and the teachings of their faith? This is insane. It saddens me that this is the state of our society. What does freedom even mean? People chant freedom of choice. But for who? Freedom somehow is perceived as "I am right therefore you are wrong" mentality with no thought for the common good.
Then again what is the common good of our people of our society?

Those with traditional views are essentially slaves to the perceived idealistic choices of others. We must follow the master or be ridiculed, striped of our jobs, our privacy, our human rights and our beliefs. Sound familiar. Think back through history. As a society have we not learned anything.

I do NOT support the changes in this draft standard to require physicians to refer patients for treatments that they are morally or consciously opposed. This also would be completely against their constitutional right to freedom of religion. Physicians are to first do no harm -and what could be more harmful than taking a life. God help us that these questions are even being entertained in our country. "But you treat with contempt the living God who holds your entire life from birth to death in His hand" Daniel 5:23

This is in direct violation to an individual's freedom of thought. All it takes is one dictatorial individual to push us back to WWII Germany with forced executions of the disabled by the German SS (documented atrocities of the second world war). These actions will destroy the ability of health providers to give patients unbiased care to the best of their ability and will create a health system without sympathy or empathy. Shame on the bureaucrats who would even propose this travesty.

The new proposal states that "doctors must “proactively maintain an effective referral plan for the frequently requested services they are unwilling to provide.” This change compels professionals to participate in practices and procedures that goes against their conscience and must be reversed!

Participation through an effective referral would directly involve practitioners in MAID and/or abortion to which many practitioners are opposed - both personally and professionally. This is a violation of practitioner's conscience that cannot be compelled.

Conscience is not merely about a practitioner's personal preference, it's their judgement about what's in the patient's best interest. Patients and practitioners disagree on a regular basis on a large number of issues and these usually do not come to conflict but are usually resolved in professional and friendly ways. The same can be said about disagreements between practitioners. It is a terrible thought that new policies would aim to violate that.

This isn't just a matter of practitioners, either. Patients want access to providers whose values fit with their own. This includes a large number of patients who want to be served by providers who decline offering procedures like abortion and MAID. For this significant population to be served requires a diverse medical system with a variety of different providers with different opinions.

Many continue to call for safe spaces where their practitioners see their life as worth living and would not agree to end their life when they at a low point. Many want assurance that they will not be pressured to end their life or the life of their baby. A practitioner's office must remain a safe space where both patient and practitioner can be and feel protected.

I implore you to reverse this policy change and continue to protect conscience rights in Alberta.

Regulatory boards cannot be given the authority to force doctors to compromise their ethics. This is a direct violation of the Hippocratic oath. I have no respect for people who force others to violate their beliefs.

I don't think doctors should be forced to violate their own personal beliefs. This will open the flood gates to all kinds of unwarranted complaints. I feel that this will also encourage doctors to move to a more friendly region that does not force them to violate their belief system. We are already having issues finding qualified doctors for Alberta, actions such as this would make many look elsewhere to practice medicine. I feel many doctors that are close to retirement will just also shut down their practices in Alberta and be done with the whole sector. I feel this move is a knee jerk reaction to many of the demands coming from the federal government which is based more on ideology than actual facts. The CPSA may be opening a pandora's box here in my opinion if they go through with these changes.

Please keep all Charter references in the regulations visible and in the text not the footnotes.
The rights of the doctors to NOT be involved in referring a patient to treatments that violate their conscience are vital to freedom of worship, which is guaranteed for all citizens of this country. Doctor’s rights to their conscientious objection must be protected!
They should never be forced to be part of a referral process for treatment they have a moral or religious objection too. That is making them complicit in another persons choices to which they are guaranteed by our Charter to have the freedom to say no to.
A patients rights do not outweigh a doctors rights. They are equal. An Alberta referral phone number line, like the one we currently have can be staffed and run by people who do not have moral, religious objections for the treatments being requested. The patients can get the information and referrals they would like without forcing a physician to be involved in the referral process. There is no need to involve a doctor in this process who morally wants to opt out. That must be respected and protected!

What happened to "do not harm" and the Hippocratic oath. I value being able to have a doctor who shares the same principles as I; doctors that value life and have a true call to help their patients. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of the profession and leave patients without the right of choice.

To make an "effective referral" to a procedure to which you are already a conscientious objector is to be forced to disregard your conscientious objection in the first place. I do not support forcing any physician to make an "effective referral" to any procedure to which they conscientiously object.
It seems a relatively simple thing to provide patients with a list of physicians who will provide a given service and those who will not. The patient can then make a choice with which they are comfortable.

Medical professionals should not be regulated to provide a referral service to MAiD even if requested by the patient. Medical professionals should have the same right to stand by their core values as anyone else in a free society and should not be forced to support an ideology which infers that prescribing death is a form of compassion for the patient. If a patient wants referral to MAiD providers, set up a 24/7 telephone number.

Are you people out of your minds. Leave it the way it is. Let the medical professionals do their jobs and have a say all around. This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. The system in place has worked very well, stop screwing things up.

Please do not make these problematic changes to the provisions for conscientious objection. Diversity is strength and this includes diversity of opinion. There are many circumstances when a Doctor and patient might not agree or when the Doctor and government might not agree. These provisions protect the Doctor so that she/he can use his best judgement in patient care. This also protects patients.

Do not force doctors into violating their consciences by making them do referrals for those “medical procedures” which they do not agree with. They need to protect life, not take it.

The audacity of your organization to even consider imposing this change is astounding to me. We need good doctors to stay in Alberta and to be able to conscientiously object to items that go against their beliefs, in this case the intentional (or complicit) killing of other human beings who are under their care. The proposed changes are in complete opposition to the Hippocratic oath – first do no harm – and need to be removed.

Doctors should have the freedom to think for themselves intellectually and medically not be controlled by the college or any so-called organizations that are on the side of pharmaceutical companies! Medical profession should be a helping profession, not just greedy for money organization!

Some doctors are ready to commit euthanasia. However, if a patient asks for a medication to save them that are not in the books those patients are refused. Why? Professional doctors should know clearly that one meditation is not good for everyone. It is through trial and error now the doctors usually find out which medication works for each patient. Covid vaccine should never have been forced on anyone! Doctors, please work for the patients and not for greedy drug companies, and government organizations!

There are lots of doctors that support this proposed idea. Don't try to force doctors to abondon their values and religious beliefs when going their job to for the sake of a few who want this idea. Religious freedom is a fundamental right whoever you are.

No one has the right to take someone’s life. Although the current system needs improvement as well. Look what happened with covid.

Re; change in CPSA's Standards.
The CPSA's Standards of Practice SHOULD ALLOW doctors to practice IF they do NOT WANT TO KILL; do not want to do abortions, etc. and not want to do assisted suicide, etc.
Killing is killing (abortions) and assisted suicide is suicide, etc. Human killing should NOT be done!!
Live and let live (humans).

(Please display my feedback; I have used no profane language). Thank-you!

Freedom of conscience should be a right for all medical professionals. Please respect that freedom for Alberta’s heath professionals!

I strongly disagree with forcing doctors, nurses, other health care workers to refer for any procedure that is against their conscience. Eliminate "effective referral" from the new Standard of Practice. Health care workers pledge to "do no harm" & that should include "do not refer to harm". Patients want doctors & nurses who will "fight" for their life not give up on them & promote euthanasia or abortion. We already have a shortage of doctors & nurses. Forcing them to go against their conscience will encourage them to practice somewhere else or leave the profession. This is not acceptable!

I oppose the proposal to make it compulsory that a Dr. must support the termination of life; either that of an unborn or any adult because of age related or mental health conditions.
We need more Drs. and limiting the Dr. to such a narrow mindset is very dangerous.
Alberta has a very diverse population and is in need of a diversity in health care providers.
Thank you

Physicians should not be forced into practices or to provide procedures that are against their conscience.
Doctors are to provide health CARE and save lives not provide medically assisted suicide and abortions that end lives. Both of these life-ending procedures also affect many others who live with the after effects.

Our health care is already in trouble. We don't have enough doctors and we will most likely loss more if these policies are forced on them.

I want a principled doctor who will provide health care through all the stages of my life, including my declining years.

The BIBLE : GOD calls The Unborn "An Child"
" They take Ownership that is not Theirs of "Unborn-Child",
then Murder (abortion) the Human-Life "
Of Fed:/Prov: College of Physicians / Doctors that
implement Legislation , forced or not that is Violation
against Unborn -Child or Doctors as opposed ,
Violation of the Charter & Charter-Rights
and God's Edict

Please do not force physicians to provide referrals for MAiD if they are conscientious objectors. Part of their job is to "do no harm," and forcing them to assist in killing will only drive badly-needed doctors out of the system. Instead, society should look for ways to provide compassionate care for those dying. I quit my job to help provide palliative care for both my parents in their home when they contracted cancer. They appreciated the aid and love provided, and I was grateful to have those special times with them. We can do better.

As an Alberta citizen, I am deeply troubled and concerned about the CPSA’s proposed update to their Standards of Practice.. I feel that this proposal totally goes against what I believe is the fundamental reason why people wish to become medical practitioners; which is to heal others and save lives. Here in Alberta where we are experiencing an extreme shortage of doctors; I feel that the proposed updates would only worsen the situation by putting pressure on doctors to practice in such a manner that would attack their conscientious beliefs. Isn’t the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms supposed to protect an individual’s freedom of conscience? I feel that these proposed updates will pose a threat to the sanctity of human life; as it will become easier to end life; instead of fighting to preserve it. As a society; we need to place a much higher priority on preserving and protecting all human life, and providing the resources needed to accomplish this goal. Also, being a senior citizen, I am deeply concerned about what the future of healthcare will look like for all seniors if our healthcare system continues down this proposed path.

I would encourage revisions to the draft Standard of Practice:
Section 1.f. could be revised as “Proactively maintain a non-judgmental approach and be aware of resources to provide for frequently requested services they are unwilling to provide.”

Section 2.c. should be removed due to lack of clarity.
- Specifically, “diverse clinical outcomes” and “delayed” are not objectively defined and are open to wide subjective interpretation.
- "Delayed" is not clearly defined either and in many ways the seeking of care is
dependent on what the patient decides to do after visiting a provider.
- Many psychiatrists have warned that it will be extremely difficult for physicians to discern which patients are making a fully informed, consensual decision to pursue MAID and which are not.

It needs to be clearly stated, whether in this policy or for the understanding of the draft
standard committee, that a member who declines to provide a service (e.g. MAID) or a
referral for the same (while still providing resources) is doing so because they believe it
is in the best interest of the patients. Their care of the patient compels them down this
path. A sober second thought on the part of a provider who wants to provide a variety of
different perspectives may allow a patient to see their concerns from a new or different
angle and can be a source of support for that patient.

While this standard emphasizes the right of a physician, it also needs to consider the fact
that many patients want providers whose values fit with theirs, and a large group of
patients want to be served by providers who decline to offer certain procedures like
MAID. Finding the right physician fit requires a diverse medical system with a variety of
different providers with different opinions.

Thank you.

Every physician should have the ability to refuse referring or participating in this barbaric procedure. They have sworn to do no harm and this endangers the life of both the infant and the mother. It denies the sanctity of life and the stage of development of the growing infant. I object strongly to forcing physicians to participate in any way .

Hello.

As the manager of a senior's care home in the province of Alberta, I am deeply saddened to see the newest draft of 'Standards of Practice' from CPSA. Our physicians in Alberta a committed to providing high quality care. They are committed to doing no harm. There is no room left for conscientious objections, in the proposed standards. This is very dangerous. A physician may have differing cultural views than others; but forcing them to provide an "effective referral" for what they believe to be harm to a person, or murder of the person, is very wrong. Please remove this wording from the standards.

Thanks!
Paul V.

I feel it's important that we give health practitioners the conscientious objection to perform a procedure that goes against their own beliefs, but I do not feel that extends to referring to another practitioner who will provide the patient with their required health care. Both patient and doctor needs must be met.

I am deeply concerned about your efforts to reduce the ability of physicians of conscience to decline to provide "effective referrals" for certain immoral and unethical services that neither they nor I consider medicine. The first obligation of doctors has always been to do no harm. Efforts from the College to force physicians to harm their patients, e.g., by providing effective referrals for them to be euthanized, undermine that key principle.

Moreover, forcing physicians of conscience to betray themselves or leave the profession will further reduce public trust in the medical community, especially among the most vulnerable. For example, how would members of religious minorities be able to trust a community that had explicitly sought to exclude them?

Finally, this effort will harm the College's efforts to create a stable, diverse, and representative group of doctors to serve the public. Many doctors will not be able to abide by this policy, including members of underrepresented groups. Will they have to face a choice between betraying their consciences and leaving the profession or the province? And if they are forced out, who will serve the patients they leave behind?

This "effective referral" provision is unnecessary, divisive, and risks major harm to the medical profession in the province of Alberta. It should be removed.

This is exactly why government does not belong in our healthcare system. I want to know that my doctor is free to advise and refer her patients with her conscience and not be told how to do a job that she already does very well. Losing doctors is the last thing this Province needs!

Doctors who follow the Hippocratic oath pledge that they “will not give a lethal drug to anyone if I am asked, nor will I advise such a plan; and similarly, I will not give a woman a pessary to cause an abortion.” Making an “effective referral” is to advise and go along with such a plan.
This wrong to impose this referral plan.I object to it and ask that this be stopped.

Freedom of conscience should be a right for all medical professionals. Please respect that freedom for Alberta’s heath professionals!

I would oppose the change to no longer allow physicians the right to exercise freedom of conscience when treating or referring patients. Doctors need to be able to stand by their own beliefs and convictions without fear of penalty or they will choose to go somewhere where they are free to do so. Alberta is already facing a shortage of physicians and we need to do everything we can to encourage them to stay and practice here. Allowing freedom of conscience will provide and environment that more physicians will feel free to practice in.

Quote: "[doctors must] proactively maintain an effective referral plan for the frequently requested services they are unwilling to provide ... must not... expose patients to adverse clinical outcomes due to a delayed effective referral.”

A doctor should never not have to make referrals that go against his/her conscience.

Thank you,
Nico

"Patient centered care, does not prioritize the morals, values, or beliefs of the physician. Birth control, abortion, and medically assisted death, are legal choices that PATIENTS have every right to expect assistance and support in accessing from their publicly funded health care professional.
I worry about patients in rural parts of our province that will have no one to support THEIR choices, if Dr's right to object is put before patient's right to access legally supported medical options. "

People need to be able to practice according their conscience. Just because something is legal or accepted by much of society, doesn’t make it moral or ethical. People need to be able to practice according to their moral values.

I value being able to have my doctor who sticks to their values, principles and morales.
Our current system is just fine! Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with
will force them out of their profession, or even out of town, to better destinations, making
access even more difficult!
LEAVE IT AS IT IS!!!

I feel this is against a doctor's conscience rights, for many do support the hippocratic oath. Plus, myself for one, do not want a doctor who supports euthanasia. The system in place is working fine. We will lose doctors, if they are forced against their beliefs, to refer patients to other doctors for euthanasia, etc.

I am aware that the College of Physicians and Surgeons in Alberta are thinking of requiring doctors to refer patients for every type of medical procedure, even so-called procedures like euthanasia or abortion that many doctors may not want to participate in. Referring for a procedure is a form of participation, and this policy change could push many people out of the profession. When there is such an acute shortage of medical providers, I personally know of at least 2 medical interns that decided to change professions as they foresaw that they would be forced to compromise their conscience decisions. Patients would still be able to get a second opinion by seeing another dr. I value being able to have a doctor who sticks to their principles. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of the profession, or move away, making access even more difficult.

This is inhumane, unacceptable. It violates Hippocrate oath.

Give doctors the freedom to choose referrals for abortion and assisted suicide according to their conscience.

I want to be served by healthcare providers who decline to offer certain procedures like MAID and abortion. I have the right to choose my doctor based on my values and beliefs. I want a doctor who is not forced to participate in MAID or Abortion through an "effective referral". I want my doctor to be free to make their own conscientious healthcare decisions based on what they believe is the best treatment for me, the patient.
I know many others who feel the same.

Abortion and the maid program are both acts of murder. Doctors took an oath to do no harm. Protect us from conception until natural death.

Doctors are there to save lives not kill. What is happened to our society but if you look back 50 years, there were no one asking the doctors to help with their suicide. We should be finding solutions to help patients with terrible problems and horrible illnesses instead of looking for a quick fix to kill them.
I believe the real problem is spiritual. People have lost hope as they have thrown the Bible in the garbage can and are attracting a lot of evil spirits into your society unless you believe that Jesus was a liar because he cast the lot of demons. (Jesus said that many problems are demonic not just physical)
We who are from the eastern world maybe not as smart intellectually compared to the Western people, but we see a lot more spiritual issues than the western people and are not able to solve because they are unseen problems.
”You know of Jesus of Nazareth, how God anointed Him with the Holy Spirit and with power, and how He went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with Him.“
‭‭Acts‬ ‭10‬:‭38‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Coming from a long family history of medical doctors and recently through my husband's terminal brain cancer journey, has given me a strong opinion to protect our medical profession from the pressure to succumb to the unfolding Maid program agenda, the falsely named Alberta Health Care option. Medically assisted suicide as purposely remasked by the less offensive Canadian Maid term ,has eroded our medical doctor's " Hippocratic oath of doing No Harm to his patient. Instead of promoting and offering the wellness of Medical Care Life Giving options with his referrals, a doctor could be forced to be co signers in the irreversible death option. Is this called" Progressive Medicare " where our doctors could lose their professional status and years of extensive medical training merely by their moral conscience of protecting the life of his patient. Could this respected Hippocratic Oath of No Harm respected in our Canadian Medical University Programs now be considered obsolete?? Why ,what are we gaining in this drastic swing of the medical view of degrading the value of human life?
I'm speaking on behalf of my father and grandfather who both served in the medical profession for over 40 years in Alberta,after graduating from McGill University Medical Program. My grandfather served several years as a young Canadian Medical Doctor in a France WW1 field hospital . My father also served a Canadian Medical Officer in WW2 and later as a surgeon at the Calgary General and Rockyview Hospital. . He did hundreds of referrals for his patients when needed and guarded his profession of oath of No Harm patient medical care . Would his 12 + years of medical surgical training and 40 years of medical service be tossed out as a consequence of his refusal to sign over a patient for
this proposed assisted suicide . I think my Dad and grandfather would be shocked and appalled by this barbaric unethical proposal of effective referrals . What new medical students would need to reconsider coming into a profession that didn't respect their values and conscience of protecting life and possibly lose their rights to practice medicine?
Would we have to carefully choose our doctors based on their moral stance on promoting our heath care options upon any of our future health challenges?
My husband had a terminal diagnosis of brain cancer in 2015 and survived 2 brain surgeries ,chemo,and radiation to hopefully give him more life time with our family.
He had excellent caring palliative care in Calgary til his natural death in 2018 with supportive doctors at the Foothills Hospital and Tom Baker. Thankfully the doctors were not forced by law to suggest he consider the assisted suicide option, because his life was not worth living or he would think he was a burden on our family or our health care system. Are we forcing our doctors serving in special care hospitals,mentally ill patient wards,long term care and veterans facilities to make unethical decisions to encourage their patients to just end their lives early, rather than ensuring they have the supportive medical caring options . Support our medical professionals by respecting their conscience moral values to protect human life and ensure no harm comes to their patients under their responsibility of care.
Protect their many years of dedication to medical training and financial commitmen from being jeopardized by a trending drastic moral switch of values where human life may be no longer be considered sacred. Stop this effective referral proposal now before many more lives are lost when effective care options could have prevented a patient's assisted suicide and a doctor's conscience has not been compromised.
Margaret

No Doctor should be in any way coerced into violating his/her conscience by being forced to refer for abortion or MAID or other Treatments. This would lead to great injustices, fewer (and not more) options for patient care, good doctors choosing to or being disciplined to leave districts under such regulations. It would harm rather than help trust and communication between Doctors and patients. Patients should be able to have a frank talk with a Doctor where he stands and hear his reasoning for or against options. I personally appreciate an honest Doctor whatever his position may be. Please do not handcuff our Medical professionals!

I don't understand why the college hierarchy would consider such an assault on the freedom of doctors. I also don't understand, if there are any so called doctors on the board of CPSA, how they could promote such a barbaric thought.
Sincerely,
John Parker

I am very concerned that the inserting of "Effective Referral" into the policy of discussion, will have a devastating impact on Alberta's health care. Alberta is experiencing a shortage of doctors and other health care providers. Imposing a moral dilemma with " effective referral" is unacceptable. Do not put our health care workers in a position where they have to choose career over moral/religious beliefs. Our province needs everyone of our doctors and health care workers. This policy could send them packing.

Keep it simple, remove the term “effective referral” Medical professionals must not be forced to take any action that is contrary to their beliefs, conscience or the Hippocratic Oath they each have taken.

Doctors should be able to engage with patients the way they see fit without political influence from the college. For example, when I turned 60 my doctor said she had a "legal obligation" to offer me statins. Where does that legal obligation come from? It should not exist. Now I'm 69 and she again offered statins and again I told her I will never take them so she put "noncompliant" on my electronic record. Non compliant with what? I am totally compliant with my right to refuse. Regarding covid-iocy, doctors were forced to tell their patients to get the experimental shot or lose their license. Bottom line is, unless doctors have autonomy, patients have to be stoic and fight for their right to make their own choices with the data provided to them. I no longer trust doctors because their right to make conscientious decisions has been stripped away by the college.

There is a time to be born and a time to die in Gods time not man’s time.
It is sinful and egregious that medical personnel and politicians are playing God. What happened to the doctors oath of “do no harm”.

I think that referring people to something you feel is unhealthy ,unethical and is against a doctor’s oath to do no harm ,is morally wrong.Maid , abortion etc promotes a culture of death and only adds to the despondency reflected in creating suicidal rates to horrible high rate now present in our society . What happened to ,caring about people and helping them in their difficulties ,offering an attitude to promote life rather than death.
As a former RN of a career that spanned 45 years,I quit 3 years ago because I did not agree with pushed demands I could not agree with.We are struggling to with staff shortages in health care this will only cause the loss of more Physicians who have ethical moral standards.

We have read through the comments below and are in full agreement with Mr. Pidde and others concerning our God -given responsibility to support life. Why, on one hand is someone sentenced to life in prison for murdering another, and on the other hand forced to take a life either by assisted suicide or by abortion. A doctor spends years of intense studies to achieve the position to be able to provide medical care that everyone needs at some point in life. He does not spend all that time studying just to find out that it's now his “responsibility" to help murder some one. No one needs this kind of pressure put on them. After all, he takes an oath to care for the well-being of his patients and provide the help needed for life, not an oath to take that life. We need so many more medical professionals to help with all healthcare needs, and this does not give the support and encouragement that they need to stay the course. It is understandable that they would not want to practice here if this is what they must deal with.

On another note, we as a society are missing a very important point. Because we are made in God’s image, our responsibility is to have compassion for our fellow brothers and sisters. When a person is hurting or in the final stages of his life, whether old or young, there is a Godly principle we need to exercise by showing compassion, giving support, comfort, care, and encouragement as shown in Galatians 5:22-23. As we give this kind of support to another person, not only can we learn these principles on a personal basis but we also allow a person to die with dignity and honor. This also helps each one of us become selfless individuals. Keeping in mind, we will all be there one day (death).

In God’s sight, taking another person’s life is a grave sin. Each of us must one day stand before Jesus Christ and render an account for our behavior.

I believe the ethos behind "Conscientious Objection" is to strongly encourage physicians to 'maintain neutrality' while providing care.
However, in so doing, this Standard of Practice is no longer neutral. This standard is instructing physicians to set aside their own worldview in favour of the 'neutral world view'. This essentially mandates physicians (through Section 2) to do the following:
1) give information about procedures/treatments that conflict with worldview/beliefs
2) mitigate adverse clinical outcomes that are 'due to a delayed effective referral'
3) never promote or express morals or beliefs
Yet this Standard of Practice begins with the explicit statement that "members have the right to limit the health services they provide for reasons of conscience cultural belief or religion"

This review is directly tied to Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD), so to examine section 2 with the lends of MAiD:
1) How can I conscientiously object to the killing of another human being, when I must give information about MAiD if requested by the patient?
2) How can I conscientiously object to the killing of another human being, when I must 'mitigate adverse clinical outcomes' and refer to the MAiD program if requested by the patient? (previous CPSA recommendations regarding MAiD instruct physicians to refer "without delay")
3) By adopting the CPSA standard, I am asked to promote the CPSA moral and belief of neutrality/secular humanism and drop my deeply held convictions

Another way to examine this "Conscientious Objection" - How does this standard apply to recent situations, where patients were mandated to take a medical treatment, forced to isolate or be locked down? If a patient was to decline a medical treatment or not comply with lockdowns - how did the CPSA respond to physicians who imposed their beliefs on the patients (that they should take a medical treatment and should stay locked down while asymptomatic)?

I believe in the sanctity of life and that abortions should only be an option if the mother and child cannot complete the birthing process without loss of life. Euthanasia is out completely God created life and only He has the right to determine when that live ends. Physicians should not be mandated to do either of these procedures if it violates their truth and values. Mandating or forcing someone to go against their own personal beliefs can cause mental health issues, physicians quitting because they are not willing to go against the Hippocratic Oath, that they swore to uphold. Younger physicians can and will suffer mental health issues also unless they decide to have a heart of stone. Look at the veterans of war who suffer PSTD and other mental health issues because of their exposure to violence, death and sometimes torture. Let Dr's report to a local governing board who should set some boundaries but not write it into law.

Please remove the "effective referral" portion from this policy and ensure it or similar discriminatory and subjective language stays out of any future changes. Physicians should not be forced to refer patients for "treatment" that goes against their conscience, such as assisted suicide.

Physicians already have the right of conscientious objection to medical practises that conflict with their personal religious or ethical standards. That should not change. However, they have a duty NOT to abandon the patient. Patient rights and autonomy must be respected. Since you are removing "effective referral", the standard must include, "in the case of MAID, the patient must be informed of the Care Coordination Service at Alberta Health Services who can assist the patient navigate the process of applying for and implementing MAID. In the case of other procedures, referral to the appropriate agency must be made." I am not familiar with other agencies.
The option of referring the patient directly to another physician who does participate in providing the procedure should remain.
Physicians who object to a procedure on the grounds of conscientious objection should nevertheless be knowledgeable about that procedure so they can provide information to the patient who needs the information to make an informed decision. The standard includes the following: "established conventional medical options". I suggest: "medical options", deleting "established conventional" as unnecessary.
The standard rightly says the physician must continue to provide care to the patient in the meantime.
Section 1 f. states the physician must maintain a "referral plan.......". Does that mean she/he must decide what they are going to do when they are asked about a procedure to which they have a conscientious objection? And that he/she needs to update the plan when new information is available?
I urge you to aim for clarity in the wording of the standard. You have made a good start by removing much of the unnecessary verbiage, especially in the preamble.

I don't think doctors have to go against their hippocratic oath to do no harm. I don't think they should be forced to refer any procedure which they have a constitutional right to object to for example abortions, MAiD ec.

I am strictly opposed to making doctors do referrals that go against their religious beliefs or conscience. All these changes that people want to make without any knowledge of the many outcomes that could happen as a result. We tend to be very short sighted as people.

Canadian people of diverse faith, ethnic and values backgrounds should all have access to doctors with congruent values available to serve them in the medical profession. Forcing anyone, including medical professionals, to violate their consciences in order to practice in a healing profession is just wrong. Requiring physicians and nurse practitioners to refer patients for MAiD when it is ethically repugnant to them and makes them feel like an accessory to murder will cause them emotional and psychological harm, and many will make the anguished decision to leave the health profession or go elsewhere, greatly exacerbating our current severe lack of doctors. This is so unnecessary and counter productive! Anyone who wants assistance in dying and who does not have a family doctor happy to assist or refer them can click on this link: maidcco@phsa.ca or call this number: 1-844-851-MAID (6243) for unhindered access. It is literally a 5 second google search. There is zero need to force Albertan doctors to either violate their conscience or leave the profession, adding their patients to the long list waiting for some kind of coherent access to medical care.

I value being able to have a doctor who sticks to their principles. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of the profession, making access even more difficult.

I completely disagree with physicians being required to make an “effective referral” for MAiD (assisted suicide), abortion (infanticide), or any other controversial and fatal decision. Physicians in Alberta have acted in the best interests of their patients because they’ve been able to exercise freedom of conscience in these areas. The CPSA is making a grave and irreparable error if it persists in forcing physicians to make “effectual referrals”. I trust my doctor to act in my best interest and protect my own life and, if I am pregnant, the life of my unborn child, rather than promoting an irreversible and fatal decision, that most people don’t actually want. When I think of my doctor or all physicians, I think of the mantra “do no harm”. Referring someone to be killed is the exact opposite of this. We will see an exodus of more physicians in a province that already doesn’t have enough physicians available.

Every person should be able to follow their voice of conscience, whether they are a professional or a lay-person. Making it more difficult for a person to follow their own heart's truth would be another way of eroding our rights as human beings. I am a conscientious objector to any changes that make certain procedures mandatory for a Dr. to condone.

Will be interesting how Catholic who believe if you commit suicide it would cost lots of money to buy you out of purgatory. Then mainstream Protestants teach that you will burn forever and ever in hell. Not sure what they will think of those willing to assist in helping some one commit suicide. this will be very hard on families forced into accepting decisions their loved ones make, the funeral homes will have to deal with alot of people emotional truama.

I don’t want my doctors muzzled.

My grandmother was euthanized without her knowledge or consent (in W Berlin in1982) and my father only found out when he told the doctor he planned to bring her to Canada. They had done it because she had no more direct relatives living nearby so they thought no one would care and the state could save money by not having to take care of her. My fear is that Canada is quickly getting to the same place and MAID has been first legalized and then expanded to save the Canadian government money and pander to those who think the world is overpopulated and who don’t value everyone’s life.

I have no problem with doctors being asked to give actual health care to help people no matter their own beliefs, but I do not consider MAID to be “health care” in any sense, since it’s purpose is only to end the person’s life. I for one want doctors who would be willing to try to help their patients any other way, including dissuading them from committing suicide, instead of being forced to aid I. It. There are plenty of doctors willing to refer for or provide MAID. You do not need to force doctors to do something they think is wrong.

Forcing doctors to participate in promoting MAID and abortions is evil!
Life is sacred and God will not hold those guitless who participate in the murder of the unborn, elderly or those who are in a bad mental state and wanting to end their life. This is just so wrong.
Do not force doctors to go against theri conscience, who know what is right.

I support Conscience Rights for doctors. I value being able to have a doctor that sticks to their principles. The current system is working fine. Forcing doctors to refer for procedures they disagree with will force doctors out of the profession or at the very least seek out another province or country. I don't believe the CPSA needs reminding of the shortage of doctors we are experiencing in Alberta.

Physicians and other health care providers should NOT be coerced or mandated to refer patients for procedures that violate their consciences or are contrary to their personal beliefs.
I am curious that the CPSA is soliciting opinion from regular Albertans at this time as I am unaware of a precedent, although I could be wrong.
During the Covid years, I would have appreciated being able to have a voice and to advocate, as I have here, that physicians be allowed to treat and advise their patients according to their own knowledge, research and experience, including trying treatments that could help and would not harm. The CPSA, however, was instrumental in banning and prohibiting these reasonable actions. Credible, diligent, physicians and other scientists were discredited, censored and suspended by the CPSA.
It's past time now for all agencies such as the CPSA; all who colluded with government, public health, media and others in promoting the seemingly 'prescribed' Covid narrative, to stop and change course. It's time to admit errors, to investigate excess deaths and disability, autoimmune conditions, 'turbo' cancers, heart incidents. and clots... to issue a stop order for future Covid MRNA shots beginning with children.

Thank you to all the Albertans who support my freedom as a doctor to conscientiously object and are asking the CPSA to remove the "effective referral" clause from the new draft. I am a Family Physician who has moved to Alberta from another province in part due to a sense that here the CPSA has more respect for my conscience than other Colleges. I have faced College disciplinary action in my previous province for declining to refer a patient for a procedure that would cause death and it does NOT help one's mental health to have one's professional regulatory body challenge one's deeply held convictions one thought where protected by the Charter. I can personally attest to the truth of what so many of you have already said - If we don't protect Physicians' rights to not be involved in a procedure they consider to be murder (I consider a referral to be tantamount to accessory to murder), we will lose Physicians to jurisdictions where they feel safe to follow their conscience in "first doing no harm". I feel extreme anxiety each time a patient asks me to refer them for MAiD or an abortion. By extending MAiD to those suffering mental anguish, many more "Doc, please can you help me die" requests will challenge our already burnt out medical community. Keep us doctors safe to follow our consciences without fear of consequences from the College so we can serve Albertans well FOR LIFE, not death.

Doctors should not be forced to do anything against their conscience, ethics and moral standards.

In whose hand is the life of every living thing, And the breath of all mankind?

When people take control of density above the universal rule that gave them life; this is just wrong (pure evil). Beyond the scandalous government, suffering, mental illness (spiritual deficit) and politics. This is unethical. I oppose strongly. Was life freely given to you? How can a committee, board member, physician or counsel dictate authority over such a gift? Assisted suicide (murder) is not the answer.