Lord Falconer's amendment to the Coroners and Justice bill

Dear supporter,

Last weekend Lord Falconer, the former Attorney General, announced that he would be tabling an amendment to make it easier to assist suicide overseas. This amendment has now been published, and it poses a very serious threat. It is urgent that people contact members of the House of Lords urging them to oppose Lord Falconer's amendment. We have given instruction on contacting Lords in our previous action alert http://www.spuc.org.uk/lobbying/alerts/alderdice

The amendment will be debated at the Lords committee-stage of the bill. Three days have been set for this so far (9, 10 and 23 June) and two or three days more are expected - dates to be announced. We understand that the amendment probably won't come up before 23 June.

See below for a short briefing on the Falconer amendment.

As explained in our previous action alert, another pro-suicide amendment was tabled by Lord Alderdice on 28 May. This is broader than the Falconer amendment in that it would sanction assisted suicide in the UK. It is very loosely drafted and appears to be tabled to prompt debate, not as a serious attempt to change the law. Please ask Lords to reject this amendment too.

Yours sincerely,

Paul Tully
General secretary

SPUC short briefing
Lord Falconer's amendment to the Coroners and Justice bill

This amendment, tabled by Lord Falconer and Lord Low, would grant legal immunity to an individual who assisted the suicide of a terminally ill person by accompanying them to a country such as Switzerland where assisted suicide can be legal.

The amendment is a major attack on the legal protection of the right to life. The amendment says:

Insert the following new Clause--
"Acts not capable of encouraging or assisting suicide
(1) An act by an individual ("D") is not to be treated as capable of encouraging or assisting the suicide or attempted suicide of another adult ("T") if--
(a) the act is done solely or principally for the purpose of enabling or assisting T to travel to a country or territory in which assisted dying is lawful;
(b) prior to the act, two registered medical practitioners, independent of each other, have certified that they are of the opinion in good faith that T is terminally ill and has the capacity to make the declaration under subsection (2); and
(c) prior to the act, T has made a declaration under subsection (2).
(2) A declaration by T is made under this subsection if the declaration--
(a) is made freely in writing and is signed by T (or is otherwise recorded and authenticated if T is incapable of signing it),
(b) states that T--
(i) has read or been informed of the contents of the certificates under subsection (1)(b), and
(ii) has decided to travel to a country or territory falling within subsection (1)(a) for the purpose of obtaining assistance in dying, and
(c) is witnessed by an independent witness chosen by T.
(3) "Independent witness" means a person who is not--
(a) likely to obtain any benefit from the death of T; or
(b) a close relative or friend of T; or
(c) involved in caring for T.
(4) D is not to be treated as having done an act capable of encouraging or assisting the suicide or attempted suicide of T by virtue of being with T when, in a country or territory falling within subsection (1)(a), T takes steps (including steps taken with the assistance of D) to commit suicide by lawful means."
Tabled 2 June 2009

Despite the supposed "safeguards", the amendment would place vulnerable people at risk, and pave the way for extending the killing of those who are ill or disabled. Indeed, the supposed safeguards point explicitly to those groups for whom assisted death is being promoted. If it passes it will be used by the euthanasia lobby to attack the prohibition on assisted suicide, by arguing that if it is legal to aid a person in travelling abroad for assisted suicide, it should be legal to help a person to commit suicide in this country rather than "export the problem". Dignity in Dying (the voluntary euthanasia society) are pursuing the right to travel abroad for assisted suicide as just one step in their wider campaign to legalise euthanasia here.

All attempts to sanction assisted suicide and euthanasia must be strongly resisted. Assisted suicide undermines the fundamental human right to life and these proposals, as usual, entail implicit discrimination against those who are terminally ill. The message of the proposal is: "terminally ill people are not worth looking after - they are better off dead". This mentality will soon extend to other vulnerable members of society: those with chronic diseases, disabilities, degenerative illness.

Lord Falconer's amendment attacks the physician-patient relationship by engaging doctors in a certification process akin to the requirements of the Abortion Act. This would further undermine the Hippocratic Oath which demands: "First: do no harm." It creates a two-tier system between those who are fit and unfit to live - Baroness Warnock, a prominent supporter of euthanasia, has spoken of the "duty to die", a logical next step from a "right to die".

The phrase "terminally ill" is used but not defined within the Falconer amendment and could include conditions such as dementia and arthritis which, though not in themselves fatal, are presently incurable. There is no requirement for the two doctors assessing the patient to be qualified in psychiatry, palliative medicine or any other relevant field. The amendment refers to the patient's "capacity" but a patient acting out of fear or who is suffering from depression might still be regarded as having capacity. We know from the experience of Britain's Abortion Act, that the requirement for two doctors to become involved often fails to act as an effective restraint or safeguard, but invites their paymasters in the department of health to demand the widest interpretation of such cost-saving legislation.

FN/PFT 5 June 2009

Stumble It Stumble It Digg this Digg This Add to del.icio.us Add to del.icio.us

© SPUC 2010