BMJ Editor Says He Doesn’t “Get” Disability Opposition to Assisted Suicide – Is He Really That Stupid or Just a Liar?

I’m late getting to this one. Last month BMJ published an editorial by Deputy Editor Tony Delamothe titled “Assisted Dying: what’s disability got to do with it?“

Here’s his intro:

The debate on assisted dying has been hijacked by disabled people who want to live. It needs to be reclaimed for terminally ill people who want to die

Assisted dying, assisted suicide, assisted killing: call it what you will, I’m in favour of it as an option for terminally ill adults of sound mind who want to die. Nevertheless, I try hard to keep up with the arguments against it. I think I understand them all, with the exception of those emanating from various disability lobby groups.

Delacothe claims he doesn’t understand the arguments from disability rights groups. After reading his commentary, I can only guess that hasn’t bothered engage in any research or critical thinking in regard to the the disability activists who have actively opposed legalization of assisted suicide.

Either that, or he’s lying – and hoping his readers are both uninformed and stupid.

I’m leaning toward the latter explanation.

Here’s why:

Delacothe devotes a lot of space to discussing Jane Campbell’s statement during the debate in the House of Lords prior to the vote on the Falconer bill. Campbell, who has spinal muscular atrophy, spoke about meeting the “qualifications” for admission to a Dignitas clinic. Delacothe complains that she didn’t “tick off” a box saying she wanted to die and is therefore irrelevant to the debate. He conveniently omits any mention of the struggles her husband had during a recent health crisis – having to convince doctors that his wife’s life was one worth living – and saving. Or Campbell’s own concerns about how easily she could have been talked into an easy death in her debilitated state. (Quotes are in this blog entry – the links from the original news coverage aren’t working for me right now.)

Further, he discusses Debbie Purdy, a woman with muliple sclerosis, who wants assurances her husband won’t get prosecuted if he helps her go to Dignitas to commit suicide. Purdy is not terminally ill – she has a chronic condition with an uncertain trajectory. Likewise, Daniel James, a 23-year-old man whose parents took him to Dignitas due to his inability to adjust to life with paraplegia is mentioned by Delacothe. Since the parents of Daniel James were left alone by police and supported by the public, how is this not an issue that impacts directly on the lives of people with disabilities?

The short answer is that this is a disability issue. I strongly suspect that Delacothe knows that, but doesn’t want to argue with disability activists in an honest and open debate.

It’s easier to lie, especially when the rest of the editorial staff gives you a free pass.

If Delacothe ever loses his job as an editor at the BMJ, there’s a bright future for him in one of the more sensational tabloids. His willingness to distort facts and abuse his position of editorial privilege prove his qualifications for a job at one of those rags. –Stephen Drake