An important issue concerning individual choice and medical ethics with compelling arguments on both sides will be debated in the House of Lords on Friday.
More than 130 Peers are slated to speak on the assisted dying bill, proposed by former Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer of Thoroton, which will give doctors the legal right to prescribe a lethal dose on asking by terminally ill people who are of sound mind but who have six months or less to live.
Friday’s discussion will be part of the second reading of Lord Falconer’s bill in the House of Lords. The first reading was held on June 5, 2014.
ADVERTISEMENT
The bill and its provisions have already kicked off a heated debate in the media between supporters and sceptics of the proposed law. The debate is fraught and divisive, with those groups who are vested in the issue — like the disability sector, doctors and the Church — internally split.
The intervention in the debate by 82-year-old retired Anglican archbishop and anti-apartheid fighter Desmond Tutu in last week’s Sunday Observer backing the right to assisted dying raised the substance and tempo of arguments on both sides.
Calling for a “mind-shift” in the debate, Archbishop Tutu stated: “I revere the sanctity of life — but not at any cost,” and recalled the “disgraceful” treatment of his friend and ally Nelson Mandela who was kept alive artificially in the last stages of his life, and even propped up for a photo shoot with politicians just before he died at 95.
ADVERTISEMENT
Another surprise endorsement of the bill came from the former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord (George) Carey, although the present Archbishop incumbent Justin Welby has distanced himself from that position.
However reasonable and humane the argument may sound for giving persons who are terminally ill the legal right to die with dignity, there are the real dangers of such a law being abused, disability groups point out.
The Disability Rights Commission (U.K.) is unanimous in its opposition to the passage of this bill.
The argument of disability activists is that in an unequal society with imperfect standards of care for the terminally ill, the seriously disabled, and the very aged, decisions on assisted death will be biased by extraneous circumstances.
A society in which severe disability “is typically perceived to be an inferior state of being... decisions regarding life-saving treatment are often made in an environment of ignorance and discriminatory attitudes towards and about disabled people,” argued Dr. Jane Campbell, chair of Social Care Institute for Excellence (SCIE) and commissioner, Disability Rights Commission before a parliamentary select committee on this issue.
“If I were to be denied my electric wheelchair, my adapted home, my accessible vehicle and my personal care assistants, I might conclude that my life was intolerable. With them I am able to enjoy a high-quality life,” she said.
And yet, Stephen Hawking has supported the bill, provided that it has “safeguards” in place.
The climate in which the bill is being debated is clearly different than it was in 2006 when a previous avatar of the bill was defeated in the House of Lords. The House of Lords debate will be a test of public opinion on this question of life and death.