Lord Carey"s judgment on assisted dying is un-Christian

The majority of people who are terminally sick want what Dr Peter Saunders, of the Christian Health-related Fellowship, calls “assisted living” rather than “assisted dying”. This is what the Christian-inspired hospice motion seeks to do, enabling these nearing the finish of their lives to put together for a peaceful and very good death. The truth that excellent hospice care is primarily based on a postcode lottery is what ought to shame us, rather than not obtaining our very own solution to Dignitas in Switzerland.

Rightly, Lord Carey has pointed out that where assisted dying (by any name) has been permitted, it has led to a widening of the provision past the terminally sick to people who are disabled, depressed or just exhausted of existence. He says that it would be “outrageous” if assisted dying have been to be extended to such categories in this nation. But the instances on which he relies present exactly how the arguments will not remain for the terminally unwell alone, but will be extended to other individuals.

There is no exact science that identifies who is dying and when they are going to die. Individuals who have been given six months, or significantly less, to dwell sometimes survive for years. Who will be responsible for premature deaths if Falconer’s Bill gets law?

And let’s not overlook Christian teaching on the worth of the human person, the duty of care and the prohibition on killing, specially the elderly. It is true, of program, that “thou shalt not kill” does not mean officiously maintaining individuals alive at all costs. Individuals can refuse treatment and medical professionals can withdraw it if it is ineffective, unduly intrusive or unbearably unpleasant. But the all-crucial word in these situations is “intention”. What is meant: relief of discomfort, or the death of a patient?

We also have to get account not just of challenging cases but the vast majority of the disabled, the elderly and the vulnerable. They can not be left at the mercy of an ever-widening definition of individuals thought eligible to die, as dictated by people who manipulate public view. We need to uphold the value of a human life, perform to relieve suffering and honour the health care profession’s part in preserving existence, not destroying it.

I proceed to phone Lord Carey a buddy and I hope he will continue to see me as a friend too, but for the sake of the weakest in our society, we cannot permit the announcement of his support for Lord Falconer’s Bill to go unchallenged.

There is speak of setting up a Royal Commission to take into account this complete matter. This could be a optimistic improvement as it would allow all sides to contribute. Such a commission must be genuinely representative of professional opinion in this region –and it will have to consider account of what the Judaeo-Christian tradition teaches about the human man or woman. It is on this that our values are based. Oh that Lord Carey had attended to it more totally than he has.

Lord Carey"s judgment on assisted dying is un-Christian