Volume 1
Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill (HL) / Select Committee on the Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill.
- Great Britain. Parliament. House of Lords. Select Committee on the Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill
- Date:
- 2005
Licence: Open Government Licence
Credit: Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill (HL) / Select Committee on the Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill. Source: Wellcome Collection.
11/152
![ASSISTED DYING FOR THE TERMINALLY ILL BILL [HL] CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1. We were established following the decision of the House on 10 March 2004 to appoint a select committee to examine and report on the Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill [HL]. The terms of reference for a select committee on a bill are the bill itself. The committee’s orders of reference are at Appendix 1. The committee has the power to decide whether the bill should proceed or not; and, if it is to proceed, the committee may amend the bill. In this opening chapter we set the scene for our inquiry, describe our modus operandi and outline the structure of our report. We also set out briefly, as a baseline for what follows, the present legal position regarding assisted dying, and we distinguish between the different terms which we use to refer to the various aspects of the subject. Setting the Scene 2. This subject was last examined by Parliament in 1993/4 through the Select Committee on Medical Ethics. In its report’ the committee concluded that there should be no change in the law on intentional killing, which it regarded as the cornerstone of law and social relationships, even in circumstances where the person concerned was terminally ill and had requested such action. The committee did not believe that it was possible to set secure limits on voluntary euthanasia and that “it would be next to impossible to ensure that all acts of euthanasia were truly voluntary and that any liberalisation of the law was not abused”’. There was also concern that “vulnerable people—the elderly, lonely, sick or distressed—would feel pressure, whether real or imagined, to request early death” and that “the message which society sends to vulnerable and disadvantaged people should not, however obliquely, encourage them to seek death but should assure them of our care and support in life”’. The committee also drew attention to the increasing effectiveness of palliative care to relieve the distress of terminal illness in the great majority of cases. 3. Since the last select committee reported, there have been a number of developments. First, legislation to permit assisted suicide and/or voluntary euthanasia has been enacted in three countries overseas—the US State of Oregon (1997), The Netherlands (2002) and Belgium (2002). The legislation concerned varies from one country to another. In Oregon, for example, it permits only assistance with suicide, in Belgium is legalises only voluntary euthanasia, whereas in The Netherlands both practices are now permitted by law. Second, as Chapter Six of our report indicates, opinion polls continue to suggest that a majority of the public would support a change in the law and that such support has remained steady—and perhaps 1 HL Paper 21 2 HL Paper 21, Paragraph 238](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b32221915_0001_0011.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
