Changing the law will make those at risk of abuse much more vulnerable, says Tim Farron, as well as putting pressure on the elderly and infirm to ‘do the decent thing’ and choose death
This Friday, the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill - otherwise known as the assisted dying bill - will be debated by the House of Commons.
MPs will have a free vote and the government is officially neutral, but the Cabinet is divided. Notably Wes Streeting, the Health Secretary who would be in charge of implementing it, is publicly arguing against the bill.
Passionate debate is filling our newspapers, social media feeds and MPs’ inboxes, and not all of it is polite. I have strong views on this bill, but I recognise that both sides are primarily motivated by compassion and a desire for dignity at the end of life. This is such an important debate that we must not allow it to become angry and tribal.
The right to end my life may mean others will be coerced, or feel coerced, into ending theirs
An unlikely coalition of voices are campaigning against the bill. There are those with faith convictions, but there are also ‘old left’ atheists who will be voting against the bill out of concern for the vulnerable. Right and left, religious and atheist, doctors and lawyers are working together to oppose it.
Coercive control
My main concerns about the bill relate to coercion. Parliament has recently debated domestic violence legislation and begun to grapple with the nature of coercive control. This is a pattern of abusive behaviour where someone attempts to exert complete control over another person’s life and their decisions. It is usually subtle and may be insidiously manipulative, humiliating and intimidating.
People generally don’t recognise they are victims because it becomes their ‘normal’ life. It is often hidden and unnoticed by outsiders. In the context of assisted dying, I am deeply concerned that people will be deviously coerced into ending their lives without realising that their personal sovereignty has been manipulated. Once they are dead, it will be too late for the penny to drop.
No compromise
Another form of coercion that it is impossible to legislate against is self-coercion. We’ve all heard elderly relatives saying words to the effect of “I’m a burden to you” or “I’m just a nuisance”. As we become older and frailer, sicker or more dependent on others, we feel our autonomy slipping away and fear becoming troublesome to others. How many people will consider assisted dying to ease the perceived burden on their loved ones?
Once I recognise that the right to end my life may mean others will be coerced, or feel coerced, into ending theirs – because no safeguard can stop this happening – then my right to die compromises your right to live. As a liberal, I find this a compelling argument. Do no harm. It is also the basis of the Hippocratic oath taken by the medical profession.
Shifting perception
If this bill becomes law, it will change the very nature of how we think about life and death – and the state’s role in procuring or preventing it.
In an article for The Times last spring, journalist and former MP Matthew Parris became perhaps the first person to publicly take the concept of assisted dying to its logical conclusion for our transactional society. In an article, published on Good Friday and entitled ‘If Jesus submitted himself to death for the good of many, why can’t your Granny?’, he pointed out that “social and cultural pressure will grow on the terminally ill to hasten their own deaths so as ‘not to be a burden’ on others or themselves”.
How many people will consider assisted dying to ease the burden on their loved ones?
Parris advocates what some call the slippery slope argument as a “healthy development” and “socially responsible”. Unless you are economically active or ‘useful’, you quickly become a costly drain on society and, he said, dying really would be the decent thing to do. His argument is both provocative and chilling. It demonstrates how society’s attitudes are shifting and suggests the trajectory they will take.
Made in God’s image
Our culture no longer believes in the deepest human dignity that springs from understanding that each individual is an awesome image-bearer of the creator God. Instead, it focuses on what we can do and how independent we are of others. This impoverishes our view of human worth and I do not doubt that it will lead to a world where assisted death is just another service provided by the state.
I know that there are Christians on both sides of this debate, and I respect the views of those who differ from my own. I truly hope that MPs feel the gravity of this decision and consider the potentially huge – and terrible – consequences of an ‘Aye’ vote honestly.
But I also believe, in the words of former Prime Minister Gordon Brown, that we need to get better at providing “assisted living” – including proper funding for palliative care – before we consider whether assisted dying is really a step that we want to take. If we open this door, it will change Britain forever.
2 Readers' comments