As some may know, I am a member of the Complex Life and Death Decisions Group (CLADD). CLADD is a King’s College London based group with expertise in psychiatry, palliative care, bioethics, public policy and law. Together with Professor Gareth Owen and Professor Katherine Sleeman, also CLADD members, we have prepared a briefing on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill.
We are neutral as to whether assisted dying / assisted suicide should be made law. We are committed to the principle that it is for Parliament to decide.
We are equally committed, however, to the principle that any law that is passed must function as a workable framework which protects the interests of patients, professionals and wider society.
Wherever one stands on the principle, we suggest that the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (‘the TIA Bill’) as it stands is not good law, as it:
- Does not appropriately delineate the cohort to whom it is intended to apply;
- Applies a test for determining their ability to seek assistance which is not fit for its purpose;
- Is unclear as to whether the provision of assistance constitutes treatment for the wider purposes of the medical profession;
- Does not appropriately address the place of palliative care;
- Does not facilitate multi-disciplinary consideration of the multi-faceted question of the person’s eligibility until too late in the process;
- Provides for advocacy without clarity as to its scope, provision or purpose;
- Establishes an authorisation body – a Panel – which is both over- and under-protective;
- Does not adequately address the situation where a person experiences complications following the provision of assistance;
- Does not provide for appropriate monitoring.
Our briefing addresses these key points, and is to be read alongside the version of the Bill to be found here. That version outlines how the Bill would look if it were properly to address these matters, as well as setting out a number of technical amendments required to enable the Bill to operate within the wider context of the law. We have, separately, prepared more detailed briefings on capacity, eating disorders(led on by Dr Lucy Stephenson), the preliminary discussion, multi-disciplinary consideration, and the Panel, which set out the issues and our proposed amendments.
We have also prepared a briefing explaining the difference (in clinical and legal terms) between refusing treatment and assisted dying.
