What is RSS?

Working with the media

Nine leaders from six major British faith groups join together in unprecedented stand against assisted suicide and euthanasia

7 October 2005

In an unprecedented move, nine leading figures from the six major faith groups in the UK have joined forces to give a serious warning about any proposed change in the law to allow assisted suicide and voluntary euthanasia. The action comes just a few days before the high profile debate in the House of Lords on the Select Committee report on Lord Joffe’s Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill, on 10 October.

The nine leaders, representing many millions of adherents, have published an open letter - signed by them all – sent yesterday to all members of both Houses of Parliament.

The religious leaders remind Parliament that legalising assisted suicide and voluntary euthanasia would radically alter the moral basis of our society by severely undermining respect for life. They collectively re-affirm their belief in the sanctity of human life which is underpinned by rapid advances in palliative care. These mean that suffering can be minimised - the arguments put forward by the pro-euthanasia lobby that assisted suicide is necessary to ease the sufferings of the terminally ill therefore lack any credible scientific evidence.

The leaders also stress the opposition of the vast majority of medical professionals, including GPs, to any change in the law on intentional killing. They point to the serious problems being faced by countries that have legalised euthanasia or assisted suicide.  In the Netherlands, 1 in 32 deaths now involves some element of legal or illegal euthanasia; a similar law in the UK could lead to 13,000 deaths a year. Furthermore Dutch pro-euthanasia groups are now campaigning for further relaxations, for example to include people suffering from dementia. They conclude with a warning that the so-called ‘right to die’ would inexorably become the duty to die and potentially economic pressures and convenience would come to dominate decision-making.

Welcoming the letter, the Rt Revd Christopher Herbert, Bishop of St Albans, said, “As a member of the House of Lords Select Committee I warmly welcome the stance taken by leaders of the faith communities in our country. It indicates the gravity and breadth of concern felt by many in the country about the possible Bill, a concern which deserves to be taken with the utmost seriousness.”

 

The open letter to Members of both Houses of Parliament was personally signed by:

Bimal Krishna das, General Secretary, National Council of Hindu Temples (UK)

Sheikh Dr M A Zaki Badawi, Principal, Muslim College, and Chair, Muslim Law Sharia Council

Joel Edwards, General Director, Evangelical Alliance

The Rt Revd Tom Butler, Bishop of Southwark, Church of England

Peter Smith, Archbishop of Cardiff, Catholic Church in Great Britain

Sir Jonathan Sacks, The Chief Rabbi

His Eminence Archbishop Gregorios of Thyateira and Great Britain

Lama Jampa Thaye, Spiritual Director of the Dechen Community

Dr Indarjit Singh, Director, Network of Sikh Organisations

 

 

The text of the letter appears below:

 

An open letter to all Members of Parliament and of the House of Lords, from leaders of British faith communities of Buddhists, Christians, Hindus, Jews, Muslims and Sikhs, expressing grave concern at continuing and renewed efforts to legalise euthanasia

 

We, the undersigned, hold all human life to be sacred and worthy of the utmost respect and note with concern that repeated attempts are being made to persuade Parliament to change the law on intentional killing so as to allow assisted suicide and voluntary euthanasia for those who are terminally ill. As it

appears likely that yet another Bill will be brought before Parliament in the near future, we consider it our duty to bring the following to the attention of Members of both Houses:

 

1. Palliative care is advancing very rapidly both in relieving the spectrum of suffering experienced by those with a terminal illness, and in supporting their families. However, such state of the art care is very unevenly distributed around the country. Providing good care does not require any change in the law but a reprioritisation of NHS resources in order to ensure that adequate training is given to doctors and nurses and that centres of specialist palliative care exist where they can be accessed by those who need them¹. The argument that assisted suicide or euthanasia is necessary to deal with the suffering of terminal illness is false.

 

2. Countries which have legalised assisted suicide or euthanasia are experiencing serious problems. In Holland 1 in every 32 deaths arises from legal or illegal euthanasia²: a similar law here could lead to some 13,000 deaths a year³ and Dutch pro-euthanasia groups are now, moreover, campaigning for further relaxations of the law – for example, to encompass people with dementia⁴. In Oregon the reluctance of many doctors to participate in legalised suicide is leading to ‘doctor-shopping’ with the result that many patients who receive lethal drugs, including some with psychiatric disorders, are not known to the doctors who supply them. There is also no monitoring of lethal drugs released in this way into the community⁵.

 

3. The majority of doctors remain opposed to assisted dying and medical opposition has actually intensified in recent years. The largest most recent surveys show only 22-38% of doctors in favour of a change in the law.^6,7,8 This was made very clear to the recent House of Lords Select Committee examining Lord Joffe’s Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill⁹. A recent and much- publicised vote at the BMA annual conference to adopt a position of neutrality towards any future bill was unrepresentative of the Association’s 134,000 members. It was carried by a very narrow majority (93 votes to 82) at a barely quorate meeting on the last day of the conference when over half of the delegates had either left or were otherwise engaged. In the debate on the matter two days before, the majority of speakers had opposed any change in the BMA’s opposition to euthanasia. The Royal College of Nursing (RCN) and Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) are both opposed to a change in the law.

 

4. Opinion polls purporting to show that a large majority of people would favour a change in the law are misleading. They are based on answers to Yes/No or Either/Or questions without any explanatory context and without other options - eg good quality palliative care - being offered. Most people have little understanding of the complexities and dangers in changing the law in this way

and opinion research consists therefore to a large extent of knee-jerk answers to emotive - and often leading - questions¹⁰.

 

5. Assisted suicide and euthanasia will radically change the social air we all breathe by severely undermining respect for life. The previous Lords’ Committee on this issue opposed assisted dying because of concern that ‘vulnerable people - the elderly, lonely, sick or distressed - would feel

pressure, whether real or imagined, to request early death.’¹¹ This concern is just as valid today. The so-called ‘right to die’ would inexorably become the duty to die and potentially economic pressures and convenience would come to dominate decision-making. We encourage all Members of both Houses to read the report¹² of the recent Select Committee on Lord Joffe’s Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill. This report summarises the arguments on both sides clearly and comprehensively.

 

(Footnotes)

¹ See HL Paper 86-I, Paragraphs 80-90

² Ibid, Paragraph 131

³ Ibid, Paragraph 243

⁴ See HL Paper 86-II, Pages 417-418

⁵ See HL Paper 86-I, Paragraph 164

⁶ Majority of doctors oppose euthanasia. Hospital Doctor 2003; 13 March

⁷ Doctors oppose assisted suicide. Hospital Doctor 2003; 15 May

⁸ See also frontline doctors’ responses to recent BMJ editorial advocating euthanasia at h_ p://bmj.bmjjournals.com/

cgi/ele_ ers/331/7518/0-g?ehom

⁹ Ibid passim but see, for example, HL86-II Pages 96-164

¹⁰ See HL86-I, Pages 75-80

¹¹ Select Commi_ ee on Medical Ethics. Report. London: HMSO, 1994. (House of Lords paper 21-I)

¹² The report was published by The Stationery Offi ce on 4 April 2005 as HL Paper 86

 

 

Rev. Joel Edwards

General Director, Evangelical Alliance

 

Lama Jampa Thaya

Spiritual Director of the Dechen Community of Sakya

and Kagyu centres of Buddhism in Europe

 

Sir Jonathan Sacks

Chief Rabbi

 

Peter Smith,

Roman Catholic Archbishop

of Cardiff

 

Sheikh Dr M.A. Zaki Badawi, Principal of the

Muslim College and

Chair, Muslim Law (Sharia) Council

 

His Eminence Archbishop Gregorios

of Thyateira and Great Britain (Greek Orthodox)

Bimal Krishna das, General

Secretary, National Council

of Hindu Temples (UK)

 

Tom Butler, Bishop of Southwark,

Church of England

 

Dr Indarjit Singh,

Director, Network of Sikh Organisations

 

 

 

                                                                                 

 

feedback | contact us | links | site map | copyright & disclaimer | privacy | site help
Supported by Ecclesiastical Insurance Group
Site developed by ILRT