We can’t afford a taboo on assisted dying

The late Michael Foot, that cerebral thinker, superb orator and calamitous Labour leader, once taught me a truth I’ve taken to heart. In any debate (Foot said) a good speech identifies the weaknesses in the other side’s case; but a great speech confronts its strengths.

As the Scottish parliament begins work on a bill to legalise assisted dying — a measure I’m sure is overdue — I could spend these thousand words on weaknesses in the objectors’ case. I could tackle the religious objections, which are irrelevant unless you believe in a divinity who has sanctified all human life, and absurd if you aren’t then a pacifist. I could tackle the argument that near-miraculous deathbed recoveries have occurred: yes indeed, but one Lazarus cannot justify a million torments. I could tackle the argument that unscrupulous relatives impatient for their inheritance may try to talk a sick person into ending it all. They may — but they’ll need to involve the certifying doctors in their plot. All these “what if” and “what about” arguments can be resisted, and in the fierce continuing debate, they will be. But count me out.