Thursday, May 20, 2021

Suicide is not something to be encouraged or assisted.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Baroness Ilora Finlay
Baroness Ilora Finlay, who is a doctor, a professor of palliative medicine and a British House of Lords cross bench member, wrote an excellent article that was published by The House on May 20. Finlay, who for many years has promoted palliative care and opposed assisted suicide responded to a new push, in the UK, to legalize assisted suicide.

Finlay wrote:
The House of Lords is once again being asked to look at a Private Member’s Bill proposing so-called ‘assisted dying’. Words matter. They can inform or they can mislead. In this case it’s the latter.

Contrary to what the words might suggest, what’s being suggested isn’t that people should be given assistance as they die. That’s what doctors, and especially those of us who specialise in end of life care, do. What's being proposed is something radically different – that doctors should be licensed by law to supply lethal drugs to terminally ill people who appear to them to meet certain broadly-worded conditions. In law that’s assisting suicide and it’s unlawful.

Finlay continues:

Campaigners talk of strict safeguards. But what exactly are those ‘safeguards’? If we go by the previous Private Member Bills, they will be vague stipulations about what ought to happen in a perfect world – that someone seeking ‘assisted dying’ should have, for example, a “settled wish to die” and should be free from pressure. But what would be the minimum steps to ensure that these and other conditions were properly met? If we go by previous bills, none.
Finlay then comments on the role of doctors:
Who would be required to make these life-or-death decisions? The answer is doctors – because the people concerned would be terminally ill. Yes, doctors can diagnose terminal illness and offer an opinion (or best-guess ) on prognosis. But can, or should, overburdened doctors to be required to judge whether there is something in the patient’s life that might be influencing a request – like feelings of being a burden, or subtle pressure being exerted by others? No, they can’t assess it reliably.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of ‘assisted dying’ may be, one thing is clear. It is not part of clinical care. Most doctors who are caring for dying patients don’t want such powers. ...
Finlay then comments on compassion:

It may sound compassionate to embed such practices within health care. But it’s also dangerous. We rightly trust our doctors not to do us harm, even if that means sometimes being refused treatments we think we want. Seriously ill patients often look to their doctors, not just for treatment, but for guidance. They are susceptible to subtle messaging. A doctor who agrees to a request for lethal drugs risks sending the message, however unintended, that in his or her opinion suicide is the patient’s best course of action.
Finlay then states that suicide is not something to be encouraged:
It may sound compassionate to embed such practices within health care. But it’s also dangerous. We rightly trust our doctors not to do us harm, even if that means sometimes being refused treatments we think we want. Seriously ill patients often look to their doctors, not just for treatment, but for guidance. They are susceptible to subtle messaging. A doctor who agrees to a request for lethal drugs risks sending the message, however unintended, that in his or her opinion suicide is the patient’s best course of action.

We are told the numbers would be small, yet other legislatures have shown such deaths increase year on year, often with the law’s boundaries becoming ever slacker, rising rates of suicides and yet their palliative care remains patchy and inadequate. As observed previously – such legislation would change the moral landscape.
Thank you Baroness Finlay for your well reasoned professional article.

Some previous articles by Baroness Finlay:

1 comment:

Connie said...

very well said. thank you for passing on Finlay's words.