Scottish lawmakers reject bill to let terminally ill people end their lives
apnews.com
Scotland’s Parliament rejected legislation that would have made Scotland the first in the U.K. to allow terminally ill adults to end their lives.

LONDON (AP) — Lawmakers in the Scottish Parliament will vote Tuesday on whether to make Scotland the first part of the United Kingdom to allow terminally ill adults to end their lives.

Members of the Edinburgh-based legislature have been given a free vote on the assisted dying bill, meaning they can decide according to their consciences, rather than along party lines. That makes it hard to predict the outcome of the decision, expected after 2200GMT.

Scotland is part of the U.K. — alongside England, Wales and Northern Ireland — and has a semi-autonomous government that has authority over many areas of policy, including health.

If the bill became law, people in Scotland with six months or less to live would be able to seek help to end their life. Two doctors would have to confirm the person was terminally ill and had the mental capacity to make the request.

  • TheTechnician27@lemmy.worldEnglish
    2·
    1 day ago

    I felt like the proposal was obvious, but a line in the article gave me pause:

    Some medical organizations, including the Royal College of Psychiatrists and the Royal Pharmaceutical Society, are also opposed.

    The article states: “But opponents of assisted dying argued that vulnerable, elderly, ill and depressed people could be pressured to end their lives so they’re not a burden on others.” It’s a concern I understand and that these major organizations (respectively the main organizations for psychiatry and pharmacy in the UK) seemingly think can’t be outweighed (edit: this assumption wasn’t the whole story). Maybe I’ll look for their statements (if they’re publicly available) and read what specific issues they see.

    Edit:

    Section 18 previously provided statutory protections for clinicians who chose not to participate in assisted dying, ensuring that their decision would not affect their employment, regulatory standing or professional relationships. […] [Found in full statement:] Without explicit legal backing, psychiatrists are concerned that they may facepressure from colleagues or employers, or be placed in professionally contentious situations without adequate safeguards. This raises risks both for practitioners and for patients."

    While the Royal Pharmaceutical Society takes a neutral stance on assisted dying, we have maintained the position that any proposed legislation must include clauses on both conscientious objection and criminal liability.

    Both go into detail about their objections, but the RPS arguably moreso.