‘There are still people beyond the reach of palliative care.’ Photo: by Marcello Leal on Unsplash
Death do us part? Molly Meacher, Anne Charvet, Eileen Aird and Terri Banks on assisted dying
‘Public support for assisted dying remains very high.’
In the past few years, major changes have been made around the world regarding assisted dying. It is the right time to revisit the subject.
In November 2019 the Friend published our article which supported a change in the law on assisted dying. The article followed a discussion at Meeting for Sufferings and preceded a conference on the subject organised by London Quakers.
The minute from Meeting for Sufferings encouraged Area Meetings to explore the issue, to which it hoped to return. The minute from the London Quakers conference concluded, ‘We agree that the present stance of the law seems unsatisfactory in many ways.’
The pandemic has focused attention elsewhere, but there are still terminally-ill people beyond the reach of palliative care. They know they may face intolerable suffering before they die. They want to have some control so that, when life becomes unbearable, they can choose the manner and timing of their death.
Public support for assisted dying (with robust safeguards)remains very high, at more than eighty per cent. This includes eighty-six per cent of disabled people. Legalising it would greatly improve end-of-life choices for patients, rather than them having to refuse treatment or food. Vulnerable groups would be better protected by assisted dying legislation with regulation and monitoring.
A growing number of countries are legalising safeguarded assisted dying. Today all Australian states have this right; they join ten states in the USA, including Oregon which has twenty-five years of evidence of safe practice. Emmanuel Macron announced recently that he wants France to legalise assisted dying. There are also developments in the British Isles – Scotland is on the way to reform, with a proposal lodged in its parliament following a public consultation (seventy-six per cent of respondents fully supported reform). Jersey and the Isle of Man are also discussing proposals.
Church leaders in the UK tend not to support assisted dying even though eighty per cent of religious people do. These leaders are not listening to the needs of their flocks. Historically, the same has been true in the medical profession, but the main organisations have now ended their opposition. The British Medical Association adopted a neutral position in 2021 and reaffirmed this stance this summer. Parliament has no effective procedure that would facilitate a bill, but pressure is mounting for political parties to include it in their manifestoes.
Quakers have played a major role in human rights campaigns, including the legalisation of same-sex marriage. There are many parallels with the campaign for assisted dying: once dying people have choice and more control, we will realise just how cruel it was to deny them that for so many years. Law change is possible, and we hope that Friends will be an important voice calling for reform.
Comments
Please quote the source of your statistics…
By john0708 on 27th October 2022 - 17:31
Please quote the scours of your statistics ....
By john0708 on 27th October 2022 - 17:34
This article is misinformation. Assisted dying has recently been through a process of discernment at Meeting for Sufferings, and it is not something which Quakers could support.
This is part of Meeting for sufferings minute 21/04/10, “There are strong feelings in all quarters, but it is clear that we have not reached a united view about possible changes to legislation.
We do not regard lack of unity as a weakness. Quakers as a religious body embrace diversity in what we believe individually but hold the space for opposing views; we can have conversations, answer questions of ourselves and of God, work through our contradictions and support each other in difficulty.”
Britain did try euthanasia in the form of the controversial and discredited Liverpool Care Pathway. It is offensive that these lobbyist should publish their divisive opinions in a Quaker journal.
By Gareth E on 31st October 2022 - 14:17
Please login to add a comment
