New bill to legalise assisted dying proposed at the Scottish Parliament

The Liberal Democrat MSP Liam McArthur introduced the bill which, if successful, would give all terminally ill, mentally competent adults the right to an assisted death. The bill was lodged at Holyrood on 21st June and will be considered in more detail later in the year.

Although previous attempts to change legislation related to assisted dying in Scotland have failed, most recently in 2015 by 82 votes to 36, a cross-party steering group of 12 MSPs have demonstrated support of the bill in an open letter signed by Karen Adam, Ariane Burgess, Jackson Carlaw, Katy Clark, Rachael Hamilton, Patrick Harvie, Liam Kerr, Gillian Mackay, Rona Mackay, Fulton MacGregor, Lorna Slater and Paul Sweeney.

When interviewed McArthur said:

“the current blanket ban on such assistance is unjust and causes needless suffering for so many dying people and their families across Scotland, [and there are] many more examples of those who have been put through, I would argue, needlessly painful, protracted, agonising deaths – and their families and friends are put through the experience with them. I think that lived experience is having an effect, not just in terms of public support but political support.”

McArthur is

“confident [the bill] has strong cross-party support [and] will be a process that needs to be gone through robustly, involve wide extensive consultation then robust scrutiny by the parliament.”

McArthur also said the bill contained “strong safeguards”. These include several qualification criteria that would need to be met for assisted dying, such as people having to have a terminal illness and a certificate of mental competency, in addition to being an adult living in Scotland.

Ally Thomson, director of Dignity in Dying Scotland, has also welcomed the bill, indicating that there is “huge support” among Scottish people and in parliament for the bill.

Thomson stated:

“I would like anybody who would describe this as assisted suicide to speak to the people who have spoken out so bravely about their own experiences of how they are suffering just now. They do not want to die but that choice has been taken from them.”

Thomson also spoke of other jurisdictions where assisted dying is legal such as New Zealand, Australia and the USA, arguing that: “the evidence and research from those places shows that this is a safe choice, a compassionate choice, it is not in any way an alternative to palliative care.”

Further support for the bill comes from the Humanist Society Scotland, where Chief Executive Fraser Sutherland said:

“the current practice of ignoring the demand for assisted dying at home but allowing people well and rich enough to travel to a private clinic abroad is simply immoral and without a shred of compassion.”

However the bill has faced opposition, with those against it stating that the introduction of assisted dying would undermine palliative care, and that it could put pressure on vulnerable patients by making them open to abuse, coercion and exploitation.

Michael Veitch, parliamentary officer at Care for Scotland, who opposes the change in law expressed concern particularly around the issue of safeguards stating that there could actually be “no adequate safeguards” and that terminal prognoses were “fraught with uncertainty”.

He added:

“This law will not just affect the small number of individuals who might choose to access assisted suicide. It will affect every person living with a terminal illness, fundamentally alter the doctor-patient relationship, devalue disabled people’s lives, and undermine wide efforts to prevent suicide.”

Veitch also referred to assisted dying in other jurisdictions and expressed further concerns that an “incremental extension” of the law was “inevitable”.

The bill to legalise assisted dying in Scotland follows a recent attempt in England and Wales headed by Baroness Meacher to implement a similar law enabling the terminally ill to choose how they die. The bill had its first reading on 26th May 2021.

One Response

  1. Do not agree with this law because it is open to abuse by a third party Dr Shipman did it without any laws and they didn’t ask if this law had have been he would never have faced a rial be very carefull what you ask for.

Want to have your say? Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Read more stories

Join nearly 3,000 other family practitioners - Check back daily for all the latest news, views, insights and best practice and sign up to our e-newsletter to receive our weekly round up every Thursday morning. 

You’ll receive the latest updates, analysis, and best practice straight to your inbox.

Features