The latest move by euthanasia activists in the U.K. is a proposal to extend immunity from prosecution to family members taking terminally ill or disabled people to Switzerland for assistance in committing suicide. Jane Campbell (Baroness Campbell of Surbiton) has written a concise attack on the rationale for granting such immunity in today’s edition of The Guardian:
Today I and hundreds of other disabled and terminally ill people want you to know, we do not want assisted dying to be legalised for “people like us”. I will speak in the House of Lords against proposed amendments to the coroners and criminal justice bill that seek to set this country on the road to legalising assisted dying and, ultimately, euthanasia for people with terminal conditions.
Two distinguished peers, the former lord chancellor, Lord Falconer, and Lord Alderdice, want to remove the threat of prosecution from anyone who assists a disabled or terminally ill person to travel abroad for the purpose of being assisted to die.
She makes an excellent point in spelling out just who has not endorsed these amendments:
We are at odds with the supporters of today’s amendments, who say they only want to help disabled and terminally ill people. Not one organisation of or for disabled and terminally ill people has campaigned for the changes proposed. This includes organisations that advocate on behalf of people with multiple sclerosis and motor neurone disease; two disabling conditions that are often referred to when describing who would benefit most from this legislation.
If you’re interested in how this battle is playing out in the U.K., you should read the rest of Jane Campbell’s commentary.
I only have one thing to add. The amendments are probably an initial step in a “slippery slope” political strategy. It is meant to act as a door opener that paves the way for eventual adoption of broader policies. For example, I would guess that within 1-2 years of this “immunity” granted to people travelling to Switzerland, there would be a very predictable follow-up:
Some people don’t have the money or don’t have the physical ability to travel to Switzerland. If we’ve provided comfort and cover for those with the wherewithal to travel to Switzerland, don’t we have to provide the same protections for those who want to help family members kill themselves at home?
Of course we do. That’s the plan. Don’t think of it as a “slippery slope” so much as a well-constructed roadway. –Stephen Drake
BRAVA Jane Campbell!
There’s that word “help” again. That’s not the kind of “help” that I need as a person with severe disabilities. (To me,”help” would be attendant care to live at home, if my caregiver should be unable to continue to do so – my spouse.)
I have an e-pal in
England, with the disabling illness that I have (CFS/ME) and the gov’t wants to change the view of the illness from neurological/physical to psychiatric rather than physical illness, in order to “downplay” seriousness of the illness. (Same thing went on/goes on here in re CDC, NIH) The end goal of the move to make it all “head trips” is to save money by removing the supports/benefits now existing in England.
Note:similar myths, ignorance and stereotypes exist in the UK about disability as continue here. Caregivers are called “carers” in England. Also, there seems to be the same misguided concept of one needs a family member to be carer for a person with a disability, all ages, which does not get updated to understanding that it need not be a family member, since so many folks don’t have family, and/or want to live independently. I read the Guardian website and a couple of other English newspapers online. The comments by readers to articles is often painful to read. I make comments.
People here would be shocked to know how much is covered in England:conversion to making a home wheelchair accessible, a car, and more via the NHS, National Health Service. John Pilger made some good comments about the disparity of health care in the US compared to England’s NHS,
this week in an interview on DemocracyNow. http://www.democracynow.org
He did note, however, that his experience does not include severe illness (nor, I add, disability or disabling illness), but his point is good for people in the US to know. I am convinced money colors the issue of “helping us to die”.