Assisted dying – a summary of the BMA’s position July 2006 At the BMA’s annual conference in Belfast on 29 June 2006, doctors voted by an overwhelming majority against legalising physician assisted suicide and euthanasia. The current policy is therefore that the BMA: (i) believes that the ongoing improvement in palliative care allows patients to die with dignity; (ii) insists that physician-assisted suicide should not be made legal in the UK; (iii) insists that voluntary euthanasia should not be made legal in the UK; (iv) insists that non-voluntary euthanasia should not be made legal in the UK; and, (v) insists that if euthanasia were legalised, there should be a clear demarcation between those doctors who would be involved in it and those who would not.
The book strives for as complete and dispassionate a description of the situation as possible and covers in detail: the substantive law applicable to euthanasia, physician-assisted suicide, withholding and withdrawing treatment, use of pain relief in potentially lethal doses, terminal sedation, and termination of life without a request (in particular in the case of newborn babies); the process of legal development that has led to the current state of the law; the system of legal control and its operation in practice; and, the results of empirical research concerning actual medical practice.
Comprehensive guidance for doctors on care at the end of life, including difficult decisions on when to provide, withhold, or withdraw life prolonging treatment, will go out for consultation from the UK’s General Medical Council in March. The draft guidance was approved by the council at its February meeting, subject to minor amendments. The consultation will be launched in the week beginning 23 March and will end in July. The new advice takes account of the Mental Capacity Act 2005; government strategies on end of life care in England and Scotland; GMC guidance in 2007 on consent; recent research; and a Court of Appeal judgment on a legal challenge to the GMC’s 2002 guidance Withholding and Withdrawing Life-Prolonging Treatments (Burke).
There is evidence from outside the UK to show that physicians’ religious beliefs influence their decision making at the end of life. This UK study explores the belief system of consultants, nurse key workers & specialist registrars & their attitudes to decisions which commonly must be taken when caring for individuals who are dying. Results showed that consultants’ religion & belief systems differed from those of nurses & the population they served. Consultants & nurses had statistically significant differences in their attitudes to common end of life decisions with consultants more likely to continue hydration & not withdraw treatment. Nurses were more sympathetic to the idea of PAS for unbearable suffering. This study shows the variability in belief system and attitudes to end of life decision making both within and between clinical groups. The personal belief system of consultants was not shown to affect their overall attitudes to withdrawing life-sustaining treatment or PAS.
An Australian doctor stopped at Heathrow Airport when he arrived to hold workshops on euthanasia has been granted leave to stay in UK. Philip Nitschke was interviewed under the Immigration and Asylum Act after arriving from Australia on Saturday. Dr Nitschke plans to hold a workshop in Bournemouth, Dorset, on Tuesday to talk about assisted suicide.
The editorial by Ira Byock (1) commenting on the report from van den Block et al (2) correctly says that only 22 cases of euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide (PAS) occurred (1.3% of all 1690 non-sudden deaths), suggesting that this means these actions ‘occur relatively infrequently’. However, there were a further 26 cases of 'life ending drugs without patient request'. Readers should know that this latter category consists of doctors who answered the same question in the same way as the doctors who are counted as having provided euthanasia or PAS, except that in a subsequent question the doctors indicated that the patient had not asked for euthanasia at the time.
But there is evidence that some clinicians may already be using continuous deep sedation (CDS), as a form of "slow euthanasia". Research suggests use of CDS in Britain is particularly high - accounting for about one in six of all deaths.
A national survey of 3733 UK doctors reporting on the care of 2923 people who had died under their care is reported here. Results show that there was no time to make an ‘end-of-life decision’ (deciding to provide, withdraw or withhold treatment) for 8.5% of those reporting deaths. A further 55.2% reported decisions which they estimated would not hasten death and 28.9% reported decisions they had expected to hasten death. A further 7.4% reported deaths where they had to some degree intended to hasten death. Where patients or someone else had made a request for a hastened death, doctors were more likely to report expecting or at least partly intending to hasten death. Doctors usually made these decisions in consultation with colleagues, relatives and, where feasible, with patients.
A mother has been found not guilty of the attempted murder of her severely ill daughter who had ME. Bridget Kathleen Gilderdale, 55, of Stonegate, East Sussex, was cleared of attempting to murder Lynn Gilderdale by jurors at Lewes Crown Court. Gilderdale had previously admitted aiding and abetting the suicide of her 31-year-old daughter and was given a 12-month conditional discharge.
A question has arisen as to whether it was in the public interest for the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to have prosecuted Kay Gilderdale for attempted murder. This is an important question and, in the interests of transparency and accountability, I have decided to issue a short public answer. As is well known, before proceeding with a case, the CPS must be satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction and that it is in the public interest to bring the case before a court.
Police are to investigate claims made by a BBC broadcaster that he killed a former partner who was terminally ill. Ray Gosling told the East Midlands' Inside Out programme, broadcast last night, that he had agreed to smother his lover, who was living with Aids, if his suffering became too intense. Gosling said that his partner had been in hospital in "terrible pain" when a doctor told him there was nothing more that could be done. He said that he asked the doctor to leave them alone and then, "I picked up the pillow and smothered him until he was dead". A spokeswoman for Nottinghamshire police said the force had not been aware of the issue until the broadcaster made his revelation on television last night. "We are now liaising with the BBC and will investigate the matter,".
A TV presenter's on-air confession that he killed his ailing lover is to be investigated by Nottinghamshire Police. Ray Gosling, 70, told the BBC's Inside Out programme he had smothered the unnamed man who was dying of Aids. Pressure group Care Not Killing said it was "bizarre" the BBC had not told police of the admission when it was filmed in December. The BBC said it was under no obligation to report to police ahead of broadcast but would co-operate with the inquiry. During a documentary on death and dying the Nottingham filmmaker said he had made a pact with his lover to act if his suffering increased. In the BBC East Midlands programme, broadcast on Monday, he told how he smothered the man with a pillow while he was in hospital after doctors told him that there was nothing further that could be done for him.
TV presenter Ray Gosling has been arrested on suspicion of murder by Nottinghamshire Police after he admitted killing his lover. The 70-year-old's confession that he had smothered the unnamed man who was dying of Aids was broadcast on the BBC's Inside Out programme on Monday. The Nottingham filmmaker said he had made a pact with his lover to act if his suffering increased. Police are questioning the presenter over his claims.
Today I am publishing the Crown Prosecution Service’s policy on encouraging or assisting suicide. When it passed the Suicide Act 1961, Parliament specifically required discretion to be exercised in every case and my consent is needed before any prosecution for assisted suicide can be brought. In the case brought by Debbie Purdy last year, the House of Lords understood that. It did not question whether there should be a discretion to prosecute or not. But, accepting that discretion, it required me, as DPP, to “clarify what [my] position is as to the factors that [I] regard as relevant for and against prosecution”.
On 25 February, the Director of Public Prosecutions, Keir Starmer QC, launched the Policy for Prosecutors in respect of cases of Encouraging or Assisting Suicide.