Danny Kruger: Assisted dying is NOT about freedom

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Danny Kruger

Danny Kruger, a British MP representing East Wiltshire, was invited by the Economist (a pro-euthanasia publication) to provide a position opposing assisted suicide. 

Kruger, with his mother, Prue Leith, participated in a TV production based on their trip to Canada examining the euthanasia law. Leith is a long-timer supporter of euthanasia. Kruger was the co-chair of the All-Party parliamentary group on Dying Well.

Danny Kruger's article: Assisted-dying advocates’ claims of freedom have it backward was published in the Economist on November 21, 2024. 

Kruger states that the primary purpose of the assisted dying bill is to give people the right to ask the state to kill them:

The practical problems with the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill are stark and inescapable. The proposed law would require doctors and judges—both are needed, in a reflection of the fact that neither is really competent to do so—to confirm that a patient may reasonably be expected to die within six months, and that he or she genuinely and freely wishes to die.

A 6 month prognosis can be assigned to a person who refuses treatment (drugs) and refuses to eat. Kruger continues:

If our only object were—as it should be—to relieve suffering at the end of life, to address the practical realities of death, there is a simple solution: to properly resource palliative care. Modern pain-relief drugs mean almost no one needs to die in unbearable physical agony. Everyone can be helped to die well, but end-of-life care at the moment is patchy and shamefully underfunded.

Many of the assisted dying campaigners view the bill as a beginning. Once legalized assisted dying will soon be expanded as Kruger points out:

The idea that animates the bill is that of absolute patient autonomy.

But the opposite becomes true:

... the crucial paradox is that it will have precisely the opposite effect. A religion of individual control, of personal freedom, is not liberating in practice, but rather deeply disempowering. There remain Labour members of Parliament who remember that “progressive” politics used to be about protecting the vulnerable from abuses of power—that individual autonomy is not the highest good, because different people have different degrees of agency and in a liberal free-for-all the powerless get trampled....

Under the bill, doctors will be allowed to suggest assisted dying to patients who have not mentioned the idea themselves. If the patient requests it from a doctor who does not agree with the practice, that doctor will be obliged to refer them to a colleague who does. Here we see the dynamic established: this is presented as a plausible, even a good choice for patients to make, and the system will help them to make it. The echoes of the Liverpool Care Pathway, a notorious scheme of ten years ago by which patients were essentially assigned by the National Health Service to die, should sound in our ears.

The law’s very existence would put pressure on each patient and their family to have “the conversation”, whether openly at the bedside or whispered outside the room: is it time for Mum or Dad to die? Patients would bear the awful responsibility of deciding whether to go now—sparing their loved ones the cost and distress of caring for them—or to hold on selfishly, messily, expensively.

This is not freedom. It is not autonomy.

It is a terrible burden to place on people at their most vulnerable. It is not “choice” when one option is so total and potentially compelling. It speaks of a profound disrespect for the frail, and raises over the disabled a spectre that haunts them: the awareness that others might think them better off dead.

Kruger calls for a greater commitment to caring:

The dignity that we need at the end of life is to be fully cared for as we die. There is no disgrace in dependence or being a “burden” to others. And the choice we need is that over our care, including using advanced health-care directives to provide clear wishes on being resuscitated or kept alive if we were to lose cognition or the ability to communicate.

Not for nothing do campaigners for assisted dying call it “the last right”. For this is the unintended object of the theology of control. Cross this Rubicon and, as with Julius Caesar, the republic of liberty falls. In the name of progress we will obliterate the key protection which all of us have need of as we grow old and ill and burdensome: that the people at our bedside will not connive to kill us.

Previous article related to Danny Kruger:

• The cruelty of assisted dying (Link).
  

Assisted Suicide: too many “complicating factors” to be safely implemented, says British poll

A poll, commissioned by Living and Dying Well, found that the British public believe there are too many ‘complicating factors’ for assisted suicide to be safely implemented in the UK.

See below Living and Dying Well’s press release, or download a PDF version here.

The poll found that:

• 56 per cent of those who express an opinion (71 percent of all those surveyed) support legalising assisted dying/assisted suicide (AD/AS) in principle but feel there are too many complicating factors to make it a practical and safe option to implement in Britain. 
• A majority feel that if AD/AS is legalised in the UK, patients should have the legal right to choose to be treated by doctors and other health professionals who have opted out of participating in it. 
• Legalising AD/AS is not a political priority for most people. Legalising AD/AS ranked 23 out of 24 of issues that need attention, with “regulating AI” and “international trade deals” ranking higher. Only four per cent thought it should be a priority for politicians. 
• 60 per cent of those surveyed worried that legalizing AD/AS would fundamentally change the relationship between doctor and patient, including more than half (51 per cent) of those who support AD/AS.

Assisted dying/assisted suicide has too many “complicating factors” to be implemented safely, says the British public in a major new poll. 

The poll, of more than 2,000 British adults, by British Polling Council member Whitestone Insight, finds that behind the headline figures of support for AD/AS, the public expressed ambivalence about its consequences and signalled serious doubts. 

The poll, commissioned by the think tank Living & Dying Well (LDW) and released just ahead of a new attempt in the House of Lords to change the law, also found:

• Seven in 10 (70 per cent) said that assistance in dying in countries like Canada and the Netherlands, where young people with no terminal illness are helped to die, has gone too far. This rose to more than eight in 10 (84 per cent) when those who answered ‘don’t know’ were discounted. 
• Young people reject AD/AS more than do any other age group. Fewer than half (44 per cent) of 18–24-year-olds supported legalising AD/AS. 
• A clear majority – 56 per cent – voiced fears that legalising AD/AS would lead to a culture where suicide becomes more normalised than it is today. This rose to 67 per cent when those who answered “don’t know” were omitted. 
• Similarly, 43 per cent fear that introducing AD/AS when the NHS and Social Care budget is under such pressure would inevitably place an incentive on health professionals to encourage some people to end their lives early.

Four in ten people (41 per cent) are concerned that introducing AD/AS when the NHS is under such strain would “inevitably” risk funding for palliative care services. The survey was conducted in the wake of comments made by a handful of politicians, who wrongly believe the public are broadly supportive of changing the law to legalise assisted suicide and euthanasia. It is being released on the eve of the first reading of a new bill in House of Lords. It pushes back against the narrative frequently promoted by those who say the public support a change in the law and highlights the serious concerns of ordinary people that need to be considered by parliamentarians ahead of any future discussion.

The poll shows that support for AD/AS suicide amongst the public changes when confronted with evidence from where it is legal. Nearly half (47 per cent), for instance, worried that people in places where it is legal opt for AD/AS because they feel they are a burden. Of those expressing any opinion this concern rose to 59 per cent of those who said they support AD/AS. 

Half (50 per cent) of those who supported it in principle think that the fact that Canada saves money with every patient euthanized was a strong argument against legalisation. A third (33 per cent) of those who support AD/AS in practice thought that the revelation that rates in Oregon – the model for the current bill – went up by 260 per cent was concerning. 40 per cent of those who had supported legalisation reconsidered when confronted with the fact that young people suffering from mental illness were euthanized in Belgium and the Netherlands. 

On conscientious objection, more than three quarters (77 per cent) felt all doctors, healthcare workers, and hospices should have the right to opt out of the service. This rose to nine in 10 (89 per cent) of those who expressed an opinion. 

These results run in stark contrast to previous polls on the subject that frame the debate in a simplistic way without asking people to consider what changing the law actually entails. The poll shows that the British people are increasingly suspicious of AD/AS as disturbing evidence emerges from places like Canada.

Tanni Grey-Thompson

Tanni, The Baroness Grey-Thompson DBE, chair of LDW, said: 

“This nationally representative poll conducted under British Polling Council guidelines gives a very different snapshot of ordinary peoples’ attitude towards assisted suicide than the glossy picture presented by proAD/AS organisations. It shows that, at best, people are ambivalent about the prospect. And the survey shows that the more people know about the issue, the more likely they are to reject this legislation.” 

Whitestone Insight surveyed 2001 GB adults online between 5 and 6 June 2024. Data were weighted to be representative of all adults. 

Whitestone Insight is a member of the British Polling Council and abides by its rules.

Jersey assisted suicide debate delayed

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The Jersey Evening Post reported on October 5, 2023 the announcement by Jersey Health Minister Karen Wilson last Monday, that the debate on the proposed assisted suicide law will take place during the third quarter of 2024, rather than in February as originally planned.

Jersey is an island country and self governing Crown Dependency and the largest of the Channel Islands, with a population of around 100,000 people.

Duty of Care Jersey and the Jersey Dying Well Group, represented by retired GP Dr. John Stewart-Jones, consultant psychiatrist Dr. Rachel Ruddy, and GP Dr. Andreas Melchior stated in a press release: 

“The decision is an important and welcome development as it allows more time for politicians, especially the 21 newly elected States Members who played no part in the previous discussions, to properly understand the complexities of introducing assisted suicide and euthanasia into healthcare.

“Since the vote in principle in favour of assisted dying in November 2021, there have been significant amounts of new information of the growing harmful effects of introducing this into law, especially in Canada, which legalised medical assistance in dying by euthanasia and assisted suicide in 2016.

“Since then, there has been a continual erosion of the so-called safeguards that were initially set in place – this is especially relevant to Jersey, as the proposals closely mirror the Canadian “twin-track” approach for terminal and non-terminal illnesses.”

We have always maintained our concern and stance on the topic of a change in law, as when taking such decisions the politicians involved must give due consideration to those most vulnerable in society, to the lowest common denominator, and we don’t believe that this was the case when the ‘in principle’ vote was taken by the last government.”

Alex Schadenberg in scheduled to speak in Jersey in early November 2023.

Article: Doctors in Jersey oppose euthanasia and assisted suicide (Link).

The cruelty of assisted dying.

Prue and Danny's Death Road Trip.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Prue Leith and Danny Kruger

Kevin Yuill, an emeritus professor of American history, wrote about the Channel 4 UK program titled: Prue and Danny's Death Road Trip. The program featured Prue Leith, who has a UK show - Great British Bake Off - and her son Danny Kruger, who is a UK Tory MP. Yuill explains in his article published by Spike-online:

The catch is that Prue and Danny are on different sides of the debate. Prue is an atheist, while Danny is a conservative Christian. Prue has been a member of Dignity in Dying, a well-funded pro-assisted dying campaign group, ever since her older brother died a long and ‘most horrible death’ in 2012. Danny, a fervent opponent of legalising assisted dying, is chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Dying Well.

Kevin Yuill

Yuill states that he considers this documentary as one of the best ever produced on the topic because it is not one-sided, but balanced and it considers the social ramifications of treating death as a from of healthcare. Yuill explains:

Prue and Danny go first to the state of Washington, where it is legal for a doctor to assist a patient in ending his or her life by prescribing lethal doses of medication. Euthanasia – where a doctor ends a patient’s life, usually via lethal injection – is still outlawed. This is Prue’s opportunity to impress upon Danny the case for legalising assisted dying. A woman called Sher talks movingly about how her parents chose to die together after they were both diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease and terminal cancer. This is powerful stuff.

In fact, nearly all of the first section of the documentary gives Prue’s side the upper hand in the argument. That is, until they travel from Washington to Atlanta. Here, they interview a doctor who questions whether assisted suicides are any more peaceful than executions. Prue sees this as a red herring. She asks whether different drugs could be prescribed to allow for a more peaceful death. And she suggests Danny is ‘scaremongering’ by exaggerating the pain caused by a lethal dosage of medication. To this he replies: ‘I think you’re scaremongering.’ He points out that, in general, ‘People are unlikely to die terrible and agonising deaths’, if they are allowed to die of natural causes. Touché. Even according to the campaigners at Dignity in Dying, just over one per cent of people suffer as they die in the UK. That gives most of us good odds.

From this point on Yuill explains that Danny's arguments against assisted dying prevail. Prue and Danny now go from Washington state to Vancouver Island Canada. Yuill writes:

Over the past year or so, horrific stories have been coming out of Canada about people being offered MAID rather than medical care. This has made Canada a no-go area for proponents of legalised assisted dying. In the UK, Dignity in Dying mentioned Canada 88 times in its tweets between 2016 and May 2022. But since stories have emerged of Canadians being offered euthanasia because they were poor or homeless, Dignity in Dying has been silent about Canada. Until Prue and Danny’s Death Road Trip documentary this week, the liberal media in Britain had largely steered clear of it, too.

Prue and Danny meet with Dr Stefanie Green who has done at least 300 euthanasia deaths. Yuill writes:

In British Columbia, we meet Dr Stefanie Green. She comes across well, despite the fact that she has dispatched at least 300 people. Unlike in Washington, Canadian doctors are able to inject their patients with poison, rather than simply prescribing it. This was the preferred method of death for all but seven of the 10,064 MAID cases in 2021.

Green seems like a good and caring doctor. She is hesitant about approving MAID for Jan, a retired carpenter living with advanced Parkinson’s, at his first consultation. As the programme notes at the end, however, Jan has now been approved for an assisted death.

It is in Prue and Danny’s meeting with Green that we begin to see the self-deception involved in the case for assisted dying. When Danny asks Green about the Hippocratic oath and whether she is violating its prohibition on killing, she squirms. ‘I don’t believe I’m killing patients. I believe the illness and disease are killing the patients. We don’t say killing’, she says. She then demonstrates how to inject lethal substances into a patient.

Roger Foley

Prue and Danny go to Toronto where they meet with Roger Foley, a disabled man who was offered euthanasia rather than care. Yuill continues:

Prue and Danny also meet Dr Ramona Coelho who thinks the Canadian legislation has gone too far. In her view, MAID threatens the disabled, vulnerable and old. She tells Prue and Danny of other cases where MAID has been offered to patients with curable diseases who had previously expressed no interest in dying.

If all that weren’t troubling enough, Canada is currently proposing to extend its MAID programme to allow people suffering from a mental illness to qualify. Prue says that she’s ‘on the fence’ about assisted dying for cases of mental illness alone. Danny isn’t. ‘If someone was trying to jump off a bridge’, he says, ‘the natural inclination would be to try and stop them. So why is this any different?’

Prue and Danny then met John Scully, a former BBC and CTV journalist, who has suffered with extreme depression and PTSD for 30 years and wants to have an assisted death when it becomes legal with mental illness. Yuill explains:

He (Scully) has attempted suicide twice, but he says he can’t try it a third time. ‘It’s a mess’, he explains, ‘I screw it up, and it is terribly devastating to the families’. Prue, obviously rattled, says she is conflicted. Danny concludes – correctly, in my view – that Scully’s story goes to the heart of the debate. It forces us to reckon with the question of whether an individual patient’s wishes trump the wider impact on society. What does it mean for people’s families and loved ones if suicide is made so easily available? And what message does it send to those with suicidal thoughts – that it is right to act on them?

Yuill concludes with his position:

Prue and Danny’s Death Road Trip deserves great credit for exploring the grim situation in Canada. After all, Canada is the logical endpoint of legalising assisted death. If death comes to be seen as medical treatment for suffering, how can it be denied to anyone who suffers? Earlier this month, Canada moved to delay the expansion of MAID to patients with mental-health difficulties for a year, but the federal government is still committed to the principle.

The best safeguard against the kinds of horror stories appearing in Canada would be not to legalise any sort of assisted dying in the first place. In the UK, all forms of assisted dying are illegal, but the Isle of Man is currently considering legalisation. Meanwhile, Jersey has approved legalisation in principle and is currently taking steps towards setting up an assisted-dying service.

Yuill, who is an athiest and the author of the book: Assisted Suicide: The Liberal Humanist Case Against Legalization - is right. The only way to prevent the horror stories of what is appearing in Canada is to not legalize euthanasia.

Strong opposition from MPs to introducing euthanasia and assisted suicide in the UK

The following is a media release from the Care Not Killing Alliance on July 4, 2022

Date: Monday 4th July 2022 

Release time: Immediate

Care Not Killing is pleased at the “strength and breadth” of opposition from MPs towards the policy of introducing euthanasia and assisted suicide (EAS) in the UK.

During today’s Westminster Hall debate, parliamentarians heard about just some of the dangers of introducing so-called “assisted dying”, including evidence from Oregon, Canada, and the Netherlands, with vulnerable people feeling pressured into ending their lives prematurely, and the growing link between introducing EAS and increases in a jurisdiction's suicide rate.

Danny Kruger MP

Danny Kruger (Con), Chair of the Dying Well All-Party Group, referred to considerations of financial savings in extending euthanasia in Canada beyond terminal illnesses, and the reality of care rationing within the NHS.

Stephen Timms (Lab) described the NHS as his party’s greatest achievement, and said its being underfunded was not a reason to give up on seeking achievable, high-quality, equally-accessed palliative care. He said:

“I agree with the organisation Care Not Killing that we want… a funded policy for comprehensive hospice, community and hospital specialist palliative care services across the country, with a duty placed on NHS trusts to ensure these services are made available to all who need them.”

As the debate drew to a close, the Minister restated the Government's longstanding position: the ultimate decision is for Parliament, as with other issues of conscience, and "our neutral stance means that this would have to be via private members legislation."

Article: Assisted suicide to be debated in the UK (Link).

Dr Gordon Macdonald

Dr Gordon Macdonald, Chief Executive of Care Not Killing, commented: 

“Doctors’ groups such as the Association of Palliative Medicine, disability rights organisations, and all those who oppose the introduction of euthanasia and assisted suicide will be pleased at the strength and breadth of opposition to changing the law in Parliament.

“We heard MPs acknowledge that palliative care remains a Cinderella service, hugely reliant on charity with many patients who would benefit from this type of care not currently receiving it; this should be the priority. MPs like Sir Peter Bottomley recognised the growing body of evidence that shows legalising assisted suicide or euthanasia does not reduce the suicide rate in the general population but increases it. This was explored convincingly in a recent peer-reviewed study from the UK’s Anscombe Bioethics Centre published in February, which showed a ‘consistent association’ between the passing of assisted suicide and euthanasia laws and an increase in suicide rates (including assisted suicides) among the general population across those countries that have introduced euthanasia or assisted suicide.”

Dr Macdonald continued: 

“Some MPs rightly expressed concern at the mission creep we see in countries like Canada,which legalised so called ‘medical assistance in dying’ in 2015. The law was originally limited to those whose natural deaths were ‘reasonably foreseeable’, but in September 2019 the Quebec Superior Court struck down that restriction. This followed the case of Alan Nichols, a former school caretaker who was physically healthy, but struggled with depression. His life was ended by lethal injection in July 2019. That same year also saw the chilling case of Roger Foley, who was repeatedly offered the drugs to kill himself, while being denied the social care to live a dignified life, due to the cost.

“At the same time, deaths from lethal injection continue to rise in Canada. In 2020 7,595 had their lives ended this way, including 1,412 who cited loneliness as a reason for opting to be killed, no doubt this was compounded by COVID. Now the Canadian law has been expanded to include those with chronic conditions, and soon, mental health conditions.

“Our current laws protect vulnerable people and do not need changing, instead we need to refocus our attention on how to ensure we provide the very best palliative care to those who need it.”

For media inquiries, please call 07970 162225.

Ends

Care Not Killing is a UK-based alliance bringing together over 40 organisations - human rights and disability rights organisations, health care and palliative care groups, faith-based organisations groups - and thousands of concerned individuals.

We have three key aims:

• to promote more and better palliative care; 
• to ensure that existing laws against euthanasia and assisted suicide are not weakened or repealed;  
• to inform public opinion further against any weakening of the law. 

*As this story is dealing with suicide, please could we ask that you include details about organisations that offer help and support to vulnerable people who might be feeling suicidal such as the Samaritans, CALM or similar - Thank you.*

Assisted suicide to be debated in Britain.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

A parliamentary debate to legalize assisted suicide in the UK was spawned by a petition to parliament. According to Yahoo News:

Assisted dying will be debated in the House of Commons today, after a petition calling for its legalisation reached the required number of 100,000 signatures.

Yahoo News quoted from Dr Henry Marsh, a brain surgeon in the UK who is living with terminal cancer and supports assisted suicide, and Dr Mark Pickering from the campaign group Care Not Killing Alliance. Pickering told Yahoo News that:

Many of the heartbreaking stories that we hear driving the assisted suicide debate are of people who sadly did not get the right palliative care, and did not have access to the best support at the time of their dying or their loved ones dying. We really need to fix that.

Tanni Grey-Thompson

A bill to legalize assisted suicide was defeated in the House of Lords by a vote of 179 to 145. During that debate, members of the House of Lords with disabilities spoke out against assisted suicide.

Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson stated during the debate:

...hundreds of people – from both sides of the argument – had written to her about the amendment, which would – if passed – “fundamentally change the political and societal landscape for disabled people”.

“If people have not read it, they should look at the article by… Lord Shinkwin this weekend about how disabled people are encouraged to think that they would be better off dead than live with an impairment.

“Even in this chamber, we hear about things such as incapacity and incontinence and all the things that people fear.

“I push back on that, and I push back on the view that public opinion is overwhelmingly in support of this.”

The All Party Parliamentary Group for Dying Well promotes access to excellent care at end of life and stands against the legalisation of doctor assisted suicide in the UK.

Study shows negative impact of MAID on palliative care in Canada

This article was published by Dying Will on November 3, 2021.

A study conducted by a group of physicians in Canada reveals the detrimental impact that the legalisation of assisted dying has on palliative care.

In their 2020 qualitative study, Matthews and Colleagues interviewed palliative care physicians and nurses who practiced in healthcare settings where patients could access Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) in Southern Ontario. Their findings conclude the negative impact that MAID has on palliative care in Canada:

1. All clinicians spoke about a conflict between maintaining Medical Assistance in Dying eligibility and effective symptom control. Clinicians felt they must withhold symptom control medications that could cause sedation or confusion and therefor jeopardise MAID eligibility, even if the medication could significantly alleviate their patient’s pain. This difficulty in providing optimal symptoms management created by the Medical Assistance in Dying legislation resulted in increased providers and patients’ distress. 
2. Many clinicians described the prevalence of ethical and moral dilemmas regarding the appropriateness of certain discussions regarding MAID with their patients, such as introducing MAID to patients who did not initiate these requests. Clinicians were concerned that introducing the topic of Medical Assistance in Dying might be misinterpreted as an invitation to request for it, and may add to the burden of vulnerable patients and erode families’ trust. Participants also described challenging conversations around supporting patients and resolving tension with families around Medical Assistance in Dying.
   
3. Medical Assistance in Dying has a significant emotional and personal impact on palliative care providers. Many of the clinicians described a large emotional toll created by exposure to Medical Assistance in Dying. 
4. Medical Assistance in Dying changes the patient palliative care provider relationship. The clinicians described how patients thought that palliative care included assisted death, which complicated their relationships with these patients. Further, clinicians with moral or religious objections to Medical Assistance in Dying described substantial challenges with building trust with patients pursuing assisted death. 
5. The clinicians felt that the providing of assisted suicide led to more palliative care resources being dedicated to assisted deaths that would have otherwise been allocated to palliative care.
   

This study should serve as a warning to the UK as Parliament debates the legalisation of assisted suicide. If Canada serves as any example, the implementation of assisted suicide will have a profound negative impact on palliative care.

Large number of Peers speak in opposition to UK assisted suicide bill

Date: Friday 22nd October 2021

Release time: Immediate

Very large number of Peers speak in opposition to Lords assisted suicide bill

In line with convention, the Assisted Dying Bill had its Second Reading in the House of Lords today after over 7 hours and speeches from over 60 Peers opposing the Bill. It is the normal custom for Bills to move to Committee Stage without a division at this stage. It by no means implies the support of the House of Lords.

Given the Bill does not have Government support, it is very unlikely to be given the time in Parliament to be debated in the House of Commons and have any chance of becoming law.

The very large number of Peers who spoke against the Bill signifies that assisted suicide and euthanasia are strongly opposed by a large proportion of the House. The content and the quality of their speeches also demonstrated beyond any doubt that this Bill is unsafe and should not pass into law.

It is clear that many within Parliament robustly oppose this Bill.

Baroness Finlay

Baroness Finlay of Llandaff, officer of the All Party Parliamentary Group for Dying Well and a Professor of Palliative Medicine, said:

“Peers have today demonstrated a powerful opposition to this bill. Many vulnerable people are unaware of the dangers in going down this road, as this bill has hidden dangers, unsafe qualifying criteria, and potentially opens the door to even wider legislation.

“Instead, the focus should be on pressing the Government to do more to ensure good palliative and end-of-life care for everyone, everywhere in this country.”

Baroness Campbell

Baroness Campbell of Surbiton, Founder of Not Dead Yet UK and long-term campaigner on disability equality and human rights, said:

“Passing this law would be a dark day in our nation’s history. It would run counter to our duty to protect those in the most vulnerable situations, and would exacerbate their fears, through insidious pressure, of being regarded as an expendable burden. As has happened elsewhere, the Bill would doubtless be extended.

“No major disability rights group in the UK supports legalising assisted suicide. What they support is immediate and sustained improvement in their care. Now is not the time to abandon them to the desperate temptation of an assisted suicide under the guise of compassion.”

Baroness Grey-Thompson

Baroness Grey-Thompson DBE, Crossbench Life Peer and one of Britain’s greatest Paralympic athletes, said:

“The legal, medical and social implications of the Bill for disabled people are enormous. They need to know that doctors are obliged to do all they can to help everyone to live a good life. The current law keeps unconscious discrimination and social bias towards disabled people in check.”

For additional quotes and interviews, please contact Simon Caldwell on 07730 526847;

Or Alistair Thompson from Care Not Killing on 07970 162225;

Or Ben Furner from Not Dead Yet on 07946 355795.

ENDS

Notes to Editors The All Party Parliamentary Group for Dying Well promotes access to excellent care at end of life and stands against the legalisation of doctor assisted suicide in the UK. For more information visit https://www.dyingwell.co.uk/about/