Oppose euthanasia and assisted suicide

STOP PRESS! (12 May)

Lord Carlile's amendment to stop the further consideration of the Bill was agreed by the House of Lords by 148 votes to 100 votes.  A majority for the amendment of 48. 14 bishops voted.

**********************************************************************

A new Bill to make it easier for terminally ill people to kill themselves is being brought before Parliament. The Private Members Bill, introduced to the House of Lords by Lord Joffe, will make it legal for doctors to prescribe fatal drugs to people who have asked to die. It is feared that this law change would be a first step towards legalised euthanasia.

Christians believe that their lives are given by God.  They do not believe they own them and cannot choose to end them deliberately.  But the prospect of a change in the law is a matter of great concern for all people, not just for those of faith. Doctors and physicians working in palliative care are overwhelmingly against any change. In Britain we are world leaders in palliative care, but there is still a need for better funded and more coordinated services. It is feared that any change in the law, to introduce an option of assisted suicide for terminally ill people would undermine vital palliative services in a cash-needy NHS. There is a real possibility that terminally ill people may feel pressured to ask for an early death to avoid feeling a burden to their family or the health system. Furthermore, mistakes in diagnoses or changes of mind by those learning to cope with illnesses might hasten deaths.

Many questions about the wider impact of Lord Joffe's Bill remain unanswered. Life and death decisions are about more than just expressions of personal choice and any change in the law is likely to fundamentally alter society's attitude towards death and the value of life. Furthermore the bond of trust between doctor and patient needs to be enhanced, not eroded, as any new law is likely to do.

Under existing law doctors and patients know exactly where they stand.  Changing the law would require doctors to make judgements - e.g. about degrees of suffering or the absence of psychological pressures - which are outside their clinical competence.  What is now a clear line between what doctors can and cannot do would become a blurred one, applied inconsistently between one doctor and another and easily crossed.