Voluntary Assisted Dying: Will Inadequate Terminology Not Mislead Public and Parliament?
Dear Editor
Voluntary Assisted Dying: Will Inadequate Terminology Not Mislead Public and Parliament?
Dr Kamran Abbasi’s editorial (2nd November) is instructive but certain terms, words, and phrases in his and other related articles do not adequately impart the correct meaning of what is required to happen.
“Few UK medical organisations oppose assisted dying, …”[1] What few, quantitatively, is the meaning supposed to impart? Was this not the obscure kind of meaning that could make The Times front page headline on October 17 to show “Doctors want a dedicated service for assisted dying” [2], rather than “Some doctors …”? Even when the authors Chris Smyth and Aubrey Allegretti quite correctly state that “The British Medical Association (BMA) and other organisations are now neutral”? [2].
Furthermore, when you state “surveys suggest most of the British public is supportive”, without overwhelming evidence that this is, in fact, so are you not helping the undecided to sway in the direction of approval? When people decide on voluntary assisted death should the decision be described as “a right” as you so describe it?
I have been a BMA member since 1959 and been elevated to Life Member since 2009. Am I not surprised to read a headline in The Times which assumes I can be included in the BMA Doctors’ decision when, in fact, I think the “slippery slope” warning of the Most Rev Justin Welby, Archbishop of Canterbury [3], should be clearly trumpeted?
Owen Dyer just last month [4] mentioned a challenge to the Canadian “Medical Assistance In Dying” (MAID) that currently allows people to apply for service even if their medical condition is not leading to a “reasonably foreseeable” natural death. And this very month, November 1, The Defender News reporter Brenda Baletti broadcast that “Doctors in Canada Euthanise a man with Disabling Covid-19 Vaccine Injury and Mental Illness”. [5] Twice your editorial, quite correctly, mentions “what’s best for patients” [1] but, again, for all patients? And for all doctors if the law constrains them to oblige? I have myself, with 26 references, given reasons why my Competing Interest in this matter is heavily laden with Christian Ethics. [6]
F I D Konotey-Ahulu MD(Lond) FRCP(Lond) DTMH(L’pool) Kwegyir Aggrey Distinguished Professor of Human Genetics, University of Cape Coast, Ghana and Former Consultant Physician Genetic Counsellor in Sickle Cell and Other Haemoglobinopathies, Phoenix Hospital Group, 9 Harley Street, London W1G 9AL felix@konotey-ahulu.com
1 Abbasi Kamran. Voluntary assisted death access and safety. Editorial. BMJ 2024; 387:q2399 (2-9 November 2024)
2 The Times. Doctors want a dedicated service for assisted dying. October 17, 2024 [Front page headline]
3 Welby Most Rev Justin, Archbishop of Canterbury. The Times 17 October 2024 quotes his “slippery slope” warning.
4 Dyer Owen. Assisted dying: Disability advocates launch legal challenge to Canada’s law. BMJ 2024; 387: q2161 (03 October 2024)
5 Baletti Brenda. Doctors in Canada Euthanize Man with Disabling Covid-19 Injury and Mental Illness. The Defender News November 1.
6 Konotey-Ahulu FID. “So You Know Where I Am Coming From (SYKWIACF)” Prefaces Religious Belief Competing Interest. Re: What readers thought about The BMJ’s articles on assisted dying. https://www.bmj.com/content/361/bmj.k1558/rr-4