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.
Results: Laws on assisted dying in The Netherlands and Belgium are restricted to doctors. In principle, assisted suicide (but not euthanasia) is not illegal in either Germany or Switzerland, but a doctor’s participation in Germany would violate the code of professional medical conduct and might contravene of a doctor’s legal duty to save life. The Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill proposed in the UK in 2005 focused on doctors, whereas the Proposal on Assisted Dying of the Norwegian Penal Code Commission minority in 2002 did not. Conclusion: A society moving towards an open approach to assisted dying should carefully identify tasks to assign exclusively to medical doctors, and distinguish those possibly better performed by other professions.
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 The draft guidance was approved by the council at its February meeting, subject to minor amendments.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.
A mother of a prominent ME sufferer and campaigner has admitted aiding and abetting the suicide of her daughter. Bridget Kathleen Gilderdale, 54, of Stonegate, near Heathfield, Sussex, pleaded guilty to the charge at Lewes Crown Court. But she denied a charge of attempted murder and one of aiding and abetting attempted 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.
Ray Gosling, the veteran TV presenter who confessed on television to suffocating a gay lover in a mercy killing, said today he would refuse to answer police questions – "even under torture" – about whom he killed, when and where.
Detectives have been given another 12 hours to question a BBC presenter who said he killed his terminally ill lover. Ray Gosling, 70, was arrested on Tuesday morning after he told a BBC documentary he had smothered the man, who he said was dying of Aids. Mr Gosling's solicitor said his client had still not named the individual to police.
Broadcaster Ray Gosling, who said in a BBC television programme that he had killed his terminally ill lover, has been released on police bail. Mr Gosling, 70, was arrested on Wednesday morning on suspicion of murder after his comments were aired on the BBC's Inside Out programme. In Monday's documentary he said he had smothered the man, who he said was dying of Aids. His solicitor said his client had not named the individual to police.
... over the years there have been numerous complaints by hon. Members regarding the persistent bias of the BBC on matters relating to euthanasia and other life issues and on the manner in which the BBC have misused public funds to promote changes in the law; ... the bias of the Corporation applies not only to news programmes but to drama, with thinly-disguised plays and soap operas being used to promote the use of euthanasia ...; ... these presentations have culminated in the last weeks with a multi-million pound campaign featuring Mrs Kay Gilderdale in Panorama and ... Sir Terry Pratchett, given centre stage to present this year's BBC Richard Dimbleby lecture calling for euthanasia and supported by the BBC website; ... every disability rights group in the UK is opposed to the legalisation of assisted suicide and euthanasia on the grounds that from experience they know it would undermine the right to life of the disabled; ...
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”.