Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Committee

Public Petitions Committee, 31 Jan 2007

31 Jan 2007 · S2 · Public Petitions Committee

Item of business

New Petitions

Assisted Suicide<br />(Opposition to Legislation) (PE1031)

Professor Donald MacDonald: Watch on SPTV

Good morning and thank you, convener, for the opportunity to address your committee. Just a year ago, there was an unsuccessful attempt to introduce a member's bill to legalise assisted suicide. Many of us are concerned that such a bill might well be introduced in the new session. The petition is to request MSPs to oppose the introduction of a member's bill that would legalise assisted suicide for people who suffer from incurable or terminal illnesses. I will highlight just a few reasons why we oppose such a bill. The principle of the sanctity of, or utmost respect for, human life has been basic to our civilisation. It is upheld not only by the Christian religion but by all the major world religions. It is also supported by the ancient Hippocratic tradition, which lies behind modern medicine, that the doctor's duty is always to care and not to kill. We are convinced that that principle demands that we do not deliberately end anyone's life, even at a time of suffering. Rather, we should do all that we can to relieve that suffering and to give support to the very end. That is why we emphasise in our petition the importance of the wide availability of good palliative care. As members know, Britain—Scotland, in particular—has been a world leader in provision of palliative care. It has been shown that, where good palliative care is available, the number of requests for euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide is greatly diminished. However, when euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are legalised, as in the Netherlands and the state of Oregon in the USA, palliative care suffers and is not well developed.As well as the principle of the sanctity of human life, there are various pragmatic reasons for opposing physician-assisted suicide. If it were legalised, it would alter fundamentally the doctor-patient relationship. The doctor would no longer be seen as the person who will support and care for someone at all costs, but as one who might well end life. That should be resisted.There are also practical dangers. Someone might be wrongly diagnosed as being terminally ill. Depression is common among patients who receive such diagnoses and they might well request assistance in ending their own lives. If the depression were treated, they would not request such help. There is also the danger, if physician-assisted suicide were introduced, that there would be pressure on people who were terminally ill, or that those people would request—perhaps for financial reasons—that their lives be ended because they felt that they were a burden on others. If physician-assisted suicide were legalised, it would have the overall result of diminishing our respect for human life at its weakest and most defenceless.I want to end on a personal note. I have an illness—multiple sclerosis—that is slowly deteriorating, and I may well have a slow and lingering death. I do not want that process to be shortened in any way, but I want all necessary facilities, care and support to be available to me. I fear that if euthanasia or assisted suicide are legalised, people will prefer to take the easy way out and will lose the desire to provide support and help, which is often burdensome and wearing, both to those who care and to the person who is dying. To ensure that people die with dignity, it is better to give them all the support that is needed, through palliative care, than to end their lives summarily by giving them a lethal substance. I call on MSPs to resist such legislation.