I can’t say I’m surprised, but I am disappointed. Dignity in Dying (formerly the Voluntary Euthanasia Society) has invested many hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of pounds behind well publicised personal stories and legal cases which have been very effective in persuading general opinion that dying is frequently nasty and that we should have the right to choose when and how to die. That organisation always resists using the term ‘suicide’, which is what they advocate, realising that it opens up the accusation of devaluing life. So I’m not surprised that MPs have after an impressive debate by a narrow majority eventually given way to the pressure. (My highlight speeches: Tom Tugenhadt (MP for Tonbridge, Con) and Preet Kaur Gill (MP for Edgbaston, Lab) speaking against, and lowlight: Kim Malthouse (MP for NWHampshire, Con) speaking for.)
So… along with many thousands of disabled and chronically ill people our worst fears have been realised. The House of Commons have narrowly voted through Kim Leadbeater’s Private Member’s Assisted Dying Bill (Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill). The majority of 23 means that had 12 voted the other way, it would have failed. I am disappointed. However in voting for assisted dying/suicide MPs have inadvertently added to our society’s fear of death, our reluctance to accept dying is as much a part of life as birth. In the words of Job, ‘The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away.’
Since having my particular rare and slow form of Motor Neurone Disease for 25 years, the idea of taking my own life has occurred to me and to some professionals. I have as a result thought long and hard about the subject. Personally, although utterly disabled and needing 24/7 hour care, I have no desire to shorten my life, but more generally I also believe that any legalising of causing or contributing to someone’s death is dangerous for society. The sanctity of life or right to life is a principle too important ever to be breached. Once one exception is allowed, you give permission to further breaches in the future. Contemporary examples abroad as well as European history teach us that despite all the initial limitations mission creep will happen. Other exceptions will be legalised on seemingly reasonable grounds, if for six months, why not for twelve, or 24? Why not for any length of “intolerable” suffering? Why not for those who are or consider themselves to be a “burden”? Why not for those who will be too disabled to contribute economically to society? There's not one jurisdiction abroad where the first narrow restrictions have not bit by bit been broadened.
One of the most important interventions before the vote was, in my view, that by the Royal College of Physicians and the Royal College of Psychiatrists a week ago expressing their reservations, including: “Vulnerable patients particularly those with remediable mental health or other unmet needs, are not adequately protected by the current bill.” It is very easy, and understandable, for people with long term disability or incurable illness (such as myself) to have severe depression and mood swings. I’m sorry that not enough MPs heeded the advice of the most involved professional bodies.
However I have a number of friends who disagree with me, often after personal experience of watching a loved one die. I sympathise and I suppose that I must be glad for them that the MPs have represented their wishes. And I would never condemn them if they decided to choose the route of assisted dying for themselves. I hope they won’t have to.
Meanwhile I trust that, when the Bill comes to the upper house, their Lordships will fulfil their function of revising it wisely and effectively. They certainly have relevant expertise, for example, judges, ethicists, and most relevantly in the field of palliative care - which is in danger of being squeezed following this bill. As Gordon Brown pertinently asked, “When only a small fraction of the population are expected to choose assisted dying, would it not be better to focus all our energies on improving all-round hospice care to reach everyone in need of end-of-life support?”
