LEGALWATCH (6): A RIGHT TO BE ASSISTED IN SUICIDE?

See below for the outcome of the debate on Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill

Read a chilling article about the consequences of euthanasia laws in the Dutch experience

New bill to legalise assisted suicide

During the Autumn 2005 session of Parliament Lord Joffe introduced a Bill into the House of Lords that will legalise physician-assisted suicide (allowing patients to be helped to commit suicide as part of medical treatment but where the patient is ultimately the one who ends his own life). This move is likely to be widely regarded as a concession on Lord Joffe’s part in that his earlier Bill attempted to legalise full euthanasia (the intentional killing of a patient as part of their medical treatment). The text of the new bill is available on the UK Parliament website at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldbills/036/2006036.htm and it will receive its second reading (debate stage) on 12th May 2006.

Why should Christians oppose euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide?

It would be impossible to ensure that every request for euthanasia was truly voluntary. There is a serious danger that a right to be helped to die will become a duty to do so;
A system of legalised killing will always be open to abuse. This has been clearly seen in Holland where euthanasia has been legal for some years and where the authorities recognise that they now have a serious problem with “involuntary euthanasia”;
Euthanasia is about hopelessness and a fear of death and dying. There is an alternative on offer in the form of modern palliative care which reflects Christian values and helps dying people to make the most of their lives. The UK currently leads the world in the provision of hospice and palliative care.
True autonomy demands that euthanasia remains illegal.

Are the public truly in favour of a change in the law?

Proponents of a change in the law would have us believe that it is what society wants. However statistics such as those bandied around by journalists¹ and members of the voluntary euthanasia society² – indicating that public support for euthanasia is as high as 80% - are not to be trusted. The research review carried out for the House of Lords Select Committee on Assisted Dying recently concluded that research into public opinion that has been carried out is “limited in value and cannot be accepted at face value as an authentic account of opinion within the United Kingdom” due to the “complex and sensitive nature” of the subject matter³.

What do doctors really think?

Research has shown that despite the recent change of opinion by the British Medical Association, which many believe was only achieved by the use of highly unprofessional and undemocratic tactics⁴, that the majority of doctors in the UK do not want euthanasia to be legalised⁵. Indeed the Royal College of General Practitioners abandoned its neutral position at its Council meeting on 16 September and is now formally opposed to any change in the law to allow euthanasia⁶. Geriatricians were particularly opposed, one survey showing that 80% of them felt euthanasia could never be justified⁷.

Doctors are well aware that even the legalisation of physician-assisted suicide would have a profound effect on their relationships with patients. Legalising euthanasia would run entirely contrary to the principles of the Hippocratic Oath which commits them to preserving life. Modern advances in the care of the terminally ill have far reduced the likelihood of patients suffering uncontrolled physical pain or discomfort. Within the hospice movement legalised euthanasia is seen as capable of changing the ethos of hospice care for the worse and of eroding the relationship of trust between physicians, carers and patients⁸.

What is true autonomy?

If physician-assisted suicide were legal would it extend true autonomy to patients in their end of life decisions? Those who put this argument must recognise that if even one patient has his life ended as a result of pressures put on him by others as a result of a change in the law then this will represent a serious violation of the autonomy of that patient. And how could we ever create sufficient safeguards to ensure that this could never take place? The reason the 1994 House of Lords Select Committee unanimously rejected euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide was for this very reason. They could not see how it could be guaranteed that every request made by a patient was truly voluntary.

Many patients who request euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide have a “question behind the question”. This may be a physical, social or a spiritual question. With good medical care these question can be determined and often addressed to the extent that the request for euthanasia will go away. We are in danger of undermining patient autonomy more often than acceding to it if we allow euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide to be performed. For the tiny minority of patients who persist with their request, it must be refused for the sake of the autonomy of everyone else. These individual cases, although tragic, must not be allowed to prevail over what is best for society as a whole. Furthermore, the autonomy of the doctor must also be born in mind. Doctors with conscientious objections will find it difficult to avoid this issue in practice.

What about our politicians?

A poll in 2004 demonstrated that the majority were opposed to the principle of a Bill to legalise voluntary euthanasia⁹. However the pro-euthanasia groups are strong and influential and a great deal of momentum has been created by the recent Joffe Bill. It is essential that those who are opposed to the principle of euthanasia need to make their voices heard over the next few months.

So what can you do if you feel strongly about this issue?

You can PRAY for the continued protection of those in our society who are vulnerable, for wisdom for those making these decisions, and above all for the Lord’s will to be done in this;
You can WRITE to one or two peers at House of Lords, London, SW1A 0PW urging them to attend the debate on 12th May and to oppose the Bill. You can find a full list of members at
www.parliament.uk/directories/house_of_lords_information_office/alphabetical_list_of_members.cfm

and for how they should be addressed (!) see:
www.parliament.uk/directories/house_of_lords_information_office/address.cfm

You can find 14 example letters that you can adapt/ cut and paste from here:
www.carenotkilling.org.uk/?archive=type&id=29&by=1

UPDATE! UPDATE! UPDATE! UPDATE!

On Friday 12 May the House of Lords rejected Lord Joffe's Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill by 148 votes to 100. Some 90 members of the House of Lords spoke in the debate on the Bill, including many disabled peers and peers with medical and legal backgrounds. The majority of peers who spoke were against the proposed law. A link to Hansard and the debate is as follows:-
http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld199697/ldhansrd/pdvn/lds06/text/60512-01.htm#60512-01_head2

I thank God that this Bill, which we believe would have been the thin end of the wedge towards legalising euthanasia, was rejected.

RCH
15th May 2006

References

For example “The Bishops have no right to restrict our right to die” Polly Toynbee The Guardian, Friday October 14, 2005
See Margaret Branthwaite “Taking the final step: changing the law on euthanasia and physician assisted suicide” BMJ September 2005
Select Committee on Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill First Report Appendix 7: Public opinion on the legalisation of euthanasia: A research review carried out by Market Research Services, December 2004
See http://www.spiked-online.com/Articles/0000000CACE8.htm
“Survey on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide” prepared by ORB for “Right to Life”, Results from 986 interviews 26th March – 9th April 2003, p 4. 13% of doctors were undecided.
http://www.rcgp.org.uk/press/2005/0067.asp
United Kingdom geriatricians' attitudes to active voluntary euthanasia and physician-assisted death. 1999. D. Clark, G. Dickenson et al, Sheffield Institute for Studies on Ageing, Academic Palliative Medicine Unit, University of Sheffield; Dept of Sociology, University of Charleston, South Carolina. Postal questionnaire responses from 333 consultant geriatricians (from national total of 742).
Select Committee on Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill (supra)
Communicate Research Parliamentary Panel, September 2004, for Prolife Alliance. Web poll of 100 MPs broadly representative of the House of Commons in party terms demonstrated 79% opposition and only 21% support