Noel Conway, aged 67, is currently challenging the Royal Court of Justice in London to change the law to allow terminally ill adults to be given assistance to die, surrounded by their loved ones. Conway was diagnosed with motor neurone disease in November 2014 and is not expected to live beyond 12 months. Supported by campaigning organisation Dignity in Dying and law firm Irwin Mitchell, he is asking the courts to declare that the blanket prohibition on assisted dying is contrary to human rights, and establish criteria and safeguards for patients to make their own decisions about ending their lives.
In the UK, assisted dying is prohibited by section 2(1) of the Suicide Act 1961 and voluntary euthanasia is considered murder under English and Welsh law. This is continuously being challenged by members of the public like Conway, a former social sciences lecturer, who states “current law means that I will have no control of how my life ends and I will have to endure this nightmare for as long as it takes. As someone who has always been in control of his life and taking responsibility for himself, I find this quite unacceptable”. Before his illness, Conway enjoyed hiking, cycling and travelling, however his deteriorating condition means that his ability to move, dress, eat and deal with personal care independently has diminished considerably. He is also dependent on a ventilator to breathe overnight, as his breathing muscle tissue continues to weaken. He claims, “It is a muscle wasting disease and I am now heading for its final stages when I face not being able to move at all. This prospect is terrifying and the amount of suffering unimaginable”.
Voluntary euthanasia continues to be one of the UK’s most controversial topics. Supporters of its legalisation propose that it is a fundamental, basic human right, allowing terminally ill sufferers to die a merciful and honourable death. They believe it is a tragic last resort for individuals who perceive death to be more peaceful than existing in anguish. Who are we to prolong the demise of patients whose physical capabilities cannot be restored, whose degenerative plight cannot be reversed, and whose intractable pain cannot be eliminated? Conway shares, “Having the option of an assisted death would bring me great comfort in my final months – it would empower me to live my life as I choose and to end it with dignity. It’s a question of whether I die with or without suffering and on my own terms or not.” Lying in our hospital beds today are many others, afflicted with excruciatingly painful, terminal conditions. They can only look forward to lives filled with yet more degradation and deterioration. Voluntary euthanasia supporters believe that when such people beg for a merciful end, it is cruel and inhumane to refuse their pleas.
On the other hand, anti-euthanasia campaigners believe that legalising assisted dying would violate one of the most important medical ethics, which, in the words of the International Code of Medical Ethics, is: “A physician shall always bear in mind the obligation to respect human life”. Asking doctors to abandon their obligation to preserve human life could damage the doctor-patient relationship. Hastening death on a regular basis could become a routine administrative task for doctors, leading to a lack of compassion when dealing with elderly, disabled or terminally ill people. There is a concern that a society that allows voluntary euthanasia will gradually change its attitudes to include non-voluntary and then involuntary euthanasia, where the patient’s consent is not required.
Additionally, legalising euthanasia may discourage research into palliative treatments, as dying would become an easier solution to end one’s suffering. This could potentially prevent cures for people with terminal illnesses being found. Furthermore, occasionally doctors may be mistaken about a patient’s diagnosis and outlook, and the patient may choose euthanasia after being wrongly told that they have a terminal condition. In cases such as these, the doctor may have to face the court and be pressed with charges.
Conway’s desire is to be allowed to spend as much of his remaining time with his family in his own home, without being forced to travel abroad to a country with a more lenient stance on assisted dying. His law firm has issued proceedings in the High Court and hopes that a full hearing of the case will be granted in the coming months.
By Serena Hunt
