Thank you for contacting me about assisted dying and the Parliamentary Reception with Prue Leith on 23rd May.
I remain concerned about this issue and follow it as closely as possible.
My views on this issue have not changed. I will continue to follow developments carefully, and I know that the Ministers responsible for this policy area will do likewise.
I have stated my views on proposals to change the law before and am happy to restate them and to make them clear in public and in the House:
There is no doubt in my mind that all those who engage with this issue are driven by the desire to alleviate the suffering of others - the differences are over how this might best be achieved.
My own view remains what it has been for some time namely that I accept that there are imperfections in and problems with the current law, but I think that these can be dealt with sensitively and sensibly without having a new law that decriminalises or legalises assisted dying. The present situation allows for considerable discretion on the part of law enforcement agencies, of which they make considerable use, while affording a powerful measure of protection as and when needed. I know we will agree that the lives of the terminally ill and the frail are of equal value to anyone else’s and that they deserve equal protection under the criminal law.
I have a number of concerns about some of the proposals to change the law:
Given the progress made in so many areas of medical care and research, it seems to me realistic to suggest that better terminal care and palliative care service development are what is needed rather than assisted dying. Bearing in mind the increasing awareness of mental health issues in all areas of life, I have no doubt that more work will and needs to be done too on the emotional and mental health support that people with life-limiting illnesses need.
I believe the fundamental assumption of any society must be that each person's life shall be afforded equal protection and that we should do what we can to prevent or alleviate the situations that make life intolerable; I worry that moves towards decriminalising assisted dying would have the unintended consequence of weakening this assumption. The progress made by the NHS in developing the scale and quality of palliative care services must be stepped up.
A vital part of such care, of course, is the alleviation of pain. In many cases, sadly, such is the quantity and strength of the pain relief needed that it is itself a cause of death. Obviously, it is right that this is legal since the objective is to relieve suffering. Moreover, such procedures are more amenable to accountability and investigation than procedures involving assisted dying which can involve a host of complex issues regarding states of mind and family dynamics as well as the medical data.
A further anxiety is that people who are vulnerable for all sorts of reasons might perceive themselves to be a ‘burden’ to others and this becomes the main factor in their requesting assisted dying. Indeed, a number of surveys gives substance to this concern with, for example, an Age Scotland survey finding that 36% of Scottish over-50s felt they were a 'burden' to others and 51% felt 'undervalued'; and the Canadian Government itself found that 34% of of those who died under the country's MAID policy (Medical Assistance in Dying) had stated that they feared themselves to be a 'burden' to others. This article examines the issue further: https://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2017/09/being-a-burden-a-illegiti….
I have concerns too about developments in those jurisdictions where assisted dying has been legalised. In both Canada and Belgium the reasons for which assisted dying can be carried out have expanded to the point at which, in Canada, those with chronic conditions but not terminally ill can be included and, in Belgium, a PTSD sufferer received assisted dying because she had not been able to recover from the experience of seeing friends die in a terrorist attack. Assisted dying accounted for 4.1% of all deaths in Canada in 2022 and in Belgium the numbers have risen from 230 per year to 3,000.
In both countries, the stated intention was that assisted dying would only be available to the terminally ill but it has proved impossible to restrict the interpretation and operation of the law to the extent required. A parallel in the UK would be the abortion law: the law's permissive scope has expanded to the extent that 25% of all pregnancies end in abortion.
While Oregon has continued to limit the operation of its Dying with Dignity Act to people who are terminally ill, the state's Health Authority has reported that 'being a burden' was a factor in the reasons given by 46% of those who were allowed assisted dying and 'financial considerations' were a factor in 6% (in part, the costs of healthcare).
Thank you once again for taking the time to contact me.
Craig Whittaker MP
March 2024