Facing a prolonged death—or watching a loved one die—is a physical and emotional roller coaster.
The fear of what lies ahead can be overwhelming. So it is entirely understandable that many in this position – including Dame Esther Rantzen (and, if the polls are to be believed, much of the British public) – believe that a legalised system of euthanasia is long overdue.
And who would want to deny a terminally ill person a “good” death – painless, peaceful, and at a time and place of their choosing?
But while many people seem to think they are voting for a Swiss-style scheme, modelled on the Dignitas clinic where more than 500 people from the UK have chosen to end their lives since it opened in 1998, there are still so many unknowns and questions about what a British system would look like – and in particular what safeguards it would have.
So blindly supporting it is not only fundamentally flawed, it is downright dangerous. Dignitas is a non-profit organisation that is largely separate from the Swiss healthcare system and has a robust screening process before access to its services is granted.
It is perfectly understandable why many people, including Dame Esther Rantzen, believe that a legalised system of euthanasia is long overdue, but blindly supporting euthanasia is downright dangerous.
This means that at least two personal interviews take place with the clinic’s doctors, so that they are sure that the patient meets their criteria.
Clients must demonstrate that they are of sound mind, provide medical reports detailing their diagnosis and failed treatments, and—in the case of a mental illness—often provide a comprehensive medical report from a psychiatrist to support the request.
As it stands, there is little such detail in the proposed UK system. Instead, doctors working for the NHS – the same doctors who are supposed to protect the sickest and most vulnerable – would be tasked with helping many to commit suicide.
Yet none of us in the NHS are trained to see if someone is being forced to end their own life. Nor are we qualified to help those who want to end it, not because they are facing imminent death, but because they feel they are simply too much of a burden on society.
And where would the deed be done? In NHS hospitals, where lives should be saved, not ended prematurely? Or in hospices that are currently doing such a wonderful job of making those final days and weeks as comfortable as possible?
Assisted dying does not fall within a physician’s duty of care. Worse, evidence from parts of the world that have legalized it suggests that there could be serious consequences.
For example, in Oregon, the US state that first legalized euthanasia in 1994, the number of suicides among the general population has increased by 31 percent since the law was changed.
Why? Because it “normalized” it – it made it more socially acceptable for people to end their own lives.
If we continue with euthanasia, who is it for? In Belgium, children have the legal right to request it. They need parental consent, but it is still available.
And don’t be fooled into thinking that it’s always a death without any suffering. Last year, it took five days for a patient in Oregon to die after being given medication.
Campaigners in support of voluntary euthanasia protest outside parliament in Westminster, London
It is not known what went wrong, but it is not uncommon for people to vomit up the drugs, have epileptic seizures or even wake up hours later.
I also worry that if more money is put into euthanasia, the NHS will spend less on palliative care.
New Zealand used to be ranked third in the world for the quality of palliative care. After introducing euthanasia in 2019, it dropped to 11th. Around 180,000 people in the UK die each year without access to good palliative care, instead dying in painful, traumatic ways.
This should be our priority. Better to focus on improving NHS palliative care than introducing euthanasia. Yet that doesn’t even seem to be on the agenda.
As told to Pat Hagan.