UK Parliament / Open data

Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill [HL]

My Lords, I speak to support the Bill of the noble Lord, Lord Joffe, and to speak against the, in my view, ill-judged amendment of the noble Lord, Lord Carlile. I still hope that he may withdraw it. All the Bill provides for is an option. The safeguards are very strong. In a review of the safeguards and qualifying conditions, Professor MacLean says that the Bill offers far more protection that the current situation, both for those who want this option and those who do not. I have one reservation about Clause 3 on determination of lack of capacity. Here, if, in the opinion of either the attending or consulting physician, a patient who wishes to make a declaration may lack capacity, the attending physician shall refer the patient to a consultant psychiatrist or psychologist, who shall be independent of the attending physician, for an opinion on the patient’s capacity. I think I should resent that, and I wish it were not in the Bill. I strongly believe in personal autonomy and the right of individuals to decide when and how they die. As a 92 year-old, and I think probably the oldest person speaking in this debate today, I think it is patronising for opponents of the Bill to suggest that elderly people are unable to make informed decisions about their lives. If I were terminally ill, I believe that I would be the only person with the right to decide how I died and whether I preferred palliative care to assisted dying. It would provide me with an additional option on how to end my life, which I would find tremendously reassuring, whichever choice I made. With all the hurdles to get over before it is possible to decide on the assisted dying option, I hope I would have the courage and determination to make that choice. I think I should.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
681 c1203 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Back to top