The Church of England logoFaithWorshipLife eventsAbout the Church
Information Where to find us
Media Centre Home
Media

Assisted dying does not provide a ‘better way of death’

10 October 2005

Bishops and Peers, speaking in the House of Lords today, stress that the foundations upon which Lord Joffe’s arguments for assisted dying are constructed are not as firm as he might have assumed. Lord Joffe’s proposal would allow for physician-assisted suicide for the terminally ill.

Lord Joffe and his supporters often cite opinion poll findings in support of their plans.  Those opposing legislative changes, who are drawn from every strand of society, including all major UK faith groups, query whether such major changes in the law should be driven by the results of limited and self-selecting opinion polls. Parliament has resisted this logic rightly in the case of Capital Punishment, which regularly commands a majority in the country.

Opponents of assisted suicide or euthanasia are very sympathetic to those who believe their life is over, and to relatives watching what they see as a 'pointless' life. It must be clear that wanting to die for that reason (or wanting a loved one to die) is not wrong, but normal and often appropriate.

“I was sitting with my father as he lay dying exactly a year ago,” says Claire Foster, medical policy adviser to the Archbishops’ Council but speaking in a personal capacity.  “He was in terrible pain.  For whatever reason, the palliative care wasn't working.  The question of euthanasia came up and he was, well, affronted, I guess.  It was an insult to his life.  We did want his life to end, he was in such pain, but we - and he - kind of handed the timing of it over. It wasn't up to us.  He surrendered to what was happening.  It taught me a lesson I'll never forget.  He hadn't been a control freak in life and he wasn't one as he faced his own death.  He became childlike and accepting.  It was terrible and beautiful."

There are many, including members of the medical professions, who oppose Joffe because his view presupposes an absolute clarity of understanding about current and future regimes of palliative care and advances (or lack of them) in medical science.  Should anyone really plan the irrevocable act of their or someone else's death by attempting to assert knowledge of matters always beyond our understanding?

Individual and personal experience surrounds this emotive subject and the sympathy felt for those seeking a lawful way out needs to be tempered with an understanding of those many individuals, of all faiths and none, and their carers who accept that the ending of our lives is inherently complex.