by Lois McLatchie, The Critic
Supporters of assisted suicide should stop depending on emotive anecdotes
Supporters of the assisted suicide bill love a good story about a bad death. Indeed, playing on the emotions of those whose principal source of news is tabloid headlines has been a core plank of their campaigning strategy. Over the last year, anecdotes about suffering friends and relatives have been commonplace from proponents of the bill, and sure enough, the Second Reading in the House of Lords presented much of the same. Suffering, pain, and tragic circumstances should not be downplayed or minimised — these stories are not incidental, they capture the genuine experience of real people and deserve respect. However, legislation by anecdote, however heart-rending, is no replacement for the rigour and scrutiny which are pre-requisites of good law-making.
Lord Falconer of Thoroton, the sponsor of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill in the House of Lords, introduced the bill at its Second Reading with several stories of people suffering at the end of their lives, some of whom travelled to assisted suicide clinics in other countries, others who ended their lives by different means. These deaths are clearly tragic, but stories such as these must be contextualised lest we dangerously oversimplify a very complex debate. Other perspectives matter and must be heard too.
In July, Irish mother Maureen Slough travelled to a Swiss euthanasia provider to end her life without informing her family members. Her daughter was only informed of her death by a WhatsApp message from the clinic, with Maureen’s ashes being sent home to Ireland in the post, leaving her with “a void that feels impossible to fill”. This is, sadly, not the only instance of such tragedies occurring.
In countries where assisted suicide is legal, such as Canada, similar stories are all too common.