Letters: Assisted dying and palliative care should not be exclusive of each other

I WAS surprised that Dr Pattisson’s letter on assisted dying (A&T 6th Dec) failed to appreciate a basic understanding of the parliamentary bill. I watched the whole of the second reading in parliament and time and again MPs cited concerns about the inconsistency of end-of-life care in the UK. Assisted dying and palliative care should not be exclusive of each other.

Dr Pattisson wrote that services provided in care homes is a form of assisted dying. The function of care homes is to help elderly people who are unable to live independent lives. A Macmillan nurse’s role is not to assist patients to die. They provide expert support for people nearing the end of life; my own father had excellent support from a Macmillan nurse.

Unfortunately, during the parliamentary debate, many MPs opposed to the bill were coming from a religious standpoint, Evangelical Christian, Roman Catholic and Muslim. However, not one MP mentioned religion as their primary reason for opposing the bill. Is this honest?

As an example, the Christian Medical Fellowship, in opposing the bill, cite the unease of some such as coercion and concern for disabled people. On the other hand, their fundamental standpoint is based on faith and not rationale thinking. On their website they say, “Let us cry to Him for mercy and that this bill might still be stopped.”

In the continuing debate on assisted dying, all sides of the argument should show respect for each other’s views. If passed into law, this will mean a fundamental change in how we manage end-of-life outcomes. Is it time for those who want the bill to fail on religious grounds to come clean and declare it is religion that is determining their views?

Jerry Weber

Lymington

* * * * *

IN all the discussions prior to the passing of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, what does not appear to have had a mention is the provision (requirements?) for doctors to initiate the question: “Do you want to die?”

Without any previous input from the patient, the doctors’ ruling bodies are very worried about this provision, and the rest of us should be too.

If a vulnerable patient is asked this question by a doctor, ie someone in authority, they might feel obliged to say ‘yes’ regardless of their true feelings.

Name and address supplied