Catholic Medical Quarterly Volume 75(3) August 2025
Killing is wrong- but Assisted Dying Bill passes its second reading
Dr Adrian Treloar
Despite
huge and heroic efforts by organisations such as Care not Killing, Right
to Life, SPUC and Our Duty of Care etc, the Assisted Dying Bill brought
forward by MP Kim Leadbeater was approved in the Commons with a majority
of 23. That majority was half that seen at the first reading and it
appears that concerns about safeguards persuaded many MPs to vote “No”.
The Bill now passes to the Lords where it will be scrutinized and where
some attempts may be made to strengthen the safeguards, but it is rare for
legislation voted for in the Lower Chamber to be stopped by the Upper
Chamber.
It must be said that the safeguards appear thin, circumventable and bound to fail at least some vulnerable people.
Clinicians are powerful people and can be very coercive. I recall how upset my 93yr mother (who had heart failure) was when two consultants walked into her room and said (well my mother said they shouted at her) “you must consent to be ‘not for resuscitation’. If you don’t consent we wont resuscitate you anyway”. She felt bullied and coerced. After discussion we agreed full ongoing care but not for resuscitation. Which seemed sensible and right. But despite that agreement, within an hour, despite unstable O2 sats, she was moved to a low dependency bed and within 8 hours she was dead. She had been bullied by doctors, had been afraid of the senior doctors and agreed under duress to limit care and died.
How much more so will frail older people feel the pressure to “consent” to Assisted Dying. It seems impossible to think that that vulnerable people will not feel coerced into “consenting” to being killed.
But that is not, I think, the greatest problem.
Killing is wrong
What worried me most about the debate was not the issue of coercion and safeguards. Many MPs stated that with proper safeguards they would be in favour of legislation being passed. No one seemed to question the notion (explicit in the draft Bill) that with informed consent it may be ok to kill yourself or to be killed. “Give me choice over my death” and “It’s my choice, allow assisted dying” were the slogans. As Christians, we do not agree with that. Life is a gift of God and to take life is wrong. We should not have the “choice” to kill ourselves. Just as we do not have the right to choose to kill others, or to rob a bank etc. Nor do we have the right to offer poor quality healthcare. Some things are always right. More things are always wrong. Killing is always wrong.
In the debate on Assisted Dying concepts of “right and wrong” were left out, replaced by “choice”. The concept of choice depends upon choices being legitimate ones.
But it is God who gives life and takes life away. Killing is always wrong. We should not be able to choose Assisted Dying. The problems of safeguards, poor care, coercion and negative effects on the rest of healthcare are all effects of legislation that makes death a choice. But they are not the core argument.
Sadly, in our current non-religious society, the argument that we should not be able to choose death because life is given by God could not and cannot be heard. Many will lose their lives because the debate on assisted dying was lost.
When assisted dying becomes law in 2027, the need for doctors who will not kill will be greater than ever. As will doubtless be the attempts to marginalise and silence us.