Recently the UK Parliament's Assisted Dying Bill He passed his second studies. In the House of Commons, the vote was 330 in favor and 275 against. But several hurdles remain to be cleared before the bill becomes law. It is being scrutinized ahead of the following parliamentary vote in April.
Many oppose the bill on the grounds that the risks of coercion are too great. Opponents of the bill make much of this point. But as an ethical philosopher who investigates the values of life and death, I believe it will be significant to ask what exactly is oppression? Where can we encounter it? And is it as bad because it sounds?
Check a Dictionary And coercion seems to incorporate force, threats, physical pressure and coercion. But the widespread concern about assisted dying is about something subtle. It's about undue influence – effective but often hidden – over someone's actions.
There is actually a risk that somebody will likely be forced, pressured or persuaded to finish their life when what they really need – and what’s best for them – is to live. But it just isn’t one-sided.
Equally, they could be forced or pressured to proceed living, when what they really need, and what’s best for them, is to die. And I consider that – controversial point, this – unwanted life is worse. Die too early and also you're simply deprived of happiness, too late and also you suffer more.
Does this issue of coercion arise only in relation to assisted dying? And can we avoid this by rejecting this bill? Hardly. I could pressure you or induce you to commit suicide, sign a do-not-resuscitate notice, or refuse further medical treatment, which could be harder to detect than when Teams of doctors and lawyers are involved. But none suggest the risks of misuse mean these procedures ought to be outlawed.
Is oppression bad? Of course, it may be. But one really desires to do what one shouldn’t do. And in that case it’s actually permissible to influence or pressure them to do otherwise.
People will need to die when it might not be of their best interests – or society's, more broadly – to die. Equally, they’ll need to survive when it just isn’t the very best.
Arguably, they have to then be pressured or persuaded to do things they don't need to do, and thus sometimes fight to finish their lives.
Let us agree, nevertheless, that there’s some danger of coercion and of the evil or illegitimate kind. Should we do every thing we will to eliminate this risk – reduce it to zero? Well, it depends.
There is a few risk, each time I get behind the wheel, that I’ll cause an accident. Easy fix – complete ban on driving. No one seriously recommends this, as the prices could be prohibitively high. Allowing people to drive has multiple advantages for society at large, even once we know that some people will drive recklessly, dangerously, under the influence, and cause death.
So then we compromise, manage the danger, and produce it right down to an appropriate level. An enormous a part of that’s making people aware that the penalties for distracted driving could be substantial. The same ought to be done with other end-of-life issues and make it very clear that suspicious deaths will all the time be investigated.
So whether you poison your wealthy and sick relatives, force them to commit suicide, or force doctors to assist and hasten their deaths, you could fear being caught and punished.
Ian Davidson/Almy Stock Photo
Is higher palliative care the one solution?
Still Some argue That unless there are real advantages to allowing someone to die and helping more, then the risks of abuse, regardless of how small, shouldn’t be tolerated.
All dying, they are saying, could be painless and free from suffering. We just have to expand palliative care. And then all this hastening to death will likely be illegitimate, all efforts to influence one to live, despite one's will, will likely be justified. But not only can we doubt that pain can all the time be avoided, we may think that there are lots of other ways through which life could be unbearable.
So the arguments against the Assisted Dying Bill on each counts are usually not as effective as opponents would have us consider. Oppression just isn’t as bad or an issue because it is made out to be. Nor is palliative care — though it actually has its place — the answer.