Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Endinburgh Council
 
 
Monday, 2nd November 2009 Change Date Latest Issue

Margo secures MSP support to debate 'right to die' Bill

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 24 April 2009
MARGO MACDONALD has won the right to have her controversial "assisted dying" Bill debated in the Scottish Parliament after securing the support of fellow MSPs.
She required 18 signatures to allow the proposed measure to be considered by the parliament.

Today, the Independent Lothians MSP revealed a total of 21 members from across all five parties had given their backing.

Now parliamentary officials wi
ll help her draft the formal legislation before it is handed to a Holyrood committee to scrutinise and invite evidence on. Then it will be debated by the full parliament.

Under Ms MacDonald's proposals, people for whom life had become "intolerable" through a terminal illness, loss of function or a progressive, degenerative condition would be able to ask a doctor to help end their life.

However, there would be stringent safeguards. The patient would need to be registered with a doctor for "a considerable period of time" before they could request help to die, and they would also have to make two requests for such help, at least 15 days apart.

The Bill is opposed by churches and the British Medical Association, but Ms MacDonald said she was pleased the issue would now be debated by the parliament.

She said: "I'm not claiming everyone who signed it agrees with me because the whole purpose of having the Bill is to take one step at a time – getting the Bill, having it properly investigated, analysed and decided on.

"That's quite a long process – and it should be because it's a very serious new law I'm proposing. I'm not trying to make it fluffy or anything like that."

Former Wester Hailes GP Dr Ian McKee, an SNP Lothians MSP, is one of those backing the Bill, but he said he envisaged the "ultimate choice" would only be exercised by a few patients whose suffering could not be eased by medical treatment.

He said: "If people can benefit from palliative care that's great, but there is a handful of people for whom, for one reason or another, palliative care is not working."

Dr McKee said he understood the concerns of medical colleagues, but believed most of the objections could be overcome by ensuring adequate safeguards.

Lothians Labour MSP George Foulkes said it was essential to have clear safeguards, but described it as a "humane" proposal.

He said: "It's really cruel to force people to go through the agony of a long and lingering death."

He said it would be "very sad" if the Bill was scuppered by people with religious objections. He said: "That would mean people, because of their own religion, were forcing the tenets of that religion on everyone."

Ms MacDonald, who has Parkinson's disease, has said she wants the reassurance of knowing she can end her own life if the condition becomes intolerable.

A similar Bill was introduced by Liberal Democrat MSP Jeremy Purvis during the last session of the Scottish Parliament, but failed to secure enough backing.





Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 24 April 2009 9:41 AM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Euthanasia
 
1

It's Leith for me!,

24/04/2009 11:54:33
well done Margo - no doubt the first decent thing the parliament has done!
2

Duncan in Edinburgh,

24/04/2009 11:57:21
Excellent news - no doubt the religious right will be out in force to talk this down, but there is a lot of support in the country for this humane approach to personal choice.
3

alfonsa pedrosa,

embra 24/04/2009 12:00:21
Margo,you are a very brave woman and well done.
4

jdships,

Edinburgh 24/04/2009 12:00:41
2 Duncan in Edinburgh
Well put !!
Excellent news indeed - good luck MM !!
5

Russell339,

Edinburgh 24/04/2009 12:14:59
In a time of recession and with a large number of jobs at risk, perhaps Margo should concentrate on doing what she is paid to do which is to represent the views of her constituents and champion the cause of the Lothians economic plight. This is a shameless use of her position in order to promote her own interests. Surely there must be rules regarding conflict of interest cases such as this.
6

Eric Muldownie,

London 24/04/2009 12:24:42
I always enjoy listening to her being interviewed ,her searing honesty and her sense of humour is a welcome relief from the usual cagey crepe the most politicians spout.If anyone can make a change in the law it's her. Good luck and good health Margo.
7

im brian and so is my wife,

edinburgh 24/04/2009 12:31:33
i remember attending a shelter meeting in dundee ,after the 79 snp conference
margo was there and she had this knack of being able to answer everyones questions ,with honesty
shes always been a tireless fighter for those less fortunate in society,and not afraid to speek her mind
i wish you good luck and good health
scotland will be poorer for the loss of such a fighter
8

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 24/04/2009 12:32:59
#2 Duncan in Edinburgh

Totally agree, time for the 'Bible Bashers' to take a backseat on this question. #5 Russell could be one?

Best of luck to Margo, I hope that the debate ends successfully and in your favour.

9

Tonto43,

Midlothian 24/04/2009 12:49:58
I am against voluntary Euthanasia in priciple. It just doesn't seem right to take ones own gift of life.

Yes, it is easy for me to say this. I am not suffering a terminal illness and subject to excruciating pain. I wonder how I would really feel if i was in this position.
I guess that is the question everyone has to ask themselves.


Me, well I just don't know now..............
10

Mercutio,

FALKIRK 24/04/2009 13:31:06
I disagree with Margo on this but she is a bonny fechter, which is more than I can say for most of the oleaginous creeps who inhabit the political world.
11

It's Leith for me!,

24/04/2009 13:53:24
#7 well said Brian(s) - that's why she was forced out of the SNP

#43 - so you're against freedom of choice?
12

Linmal,

Livingston 24/04/2009 14:36:26
#2 & #8 - Euthanasia is just a fancy word for murder. It is in the ten commandments "Thou shalt not kill", remember? There, so I am a Bible basher and proud of it. I just wish people would realise that there really is no need for this. There are many ways of making people comfortable and letting them die in dignity. I would be appalled to think that Christians (or any other religion) would deny people dignity in their final days. This just is not the case. The Hospice movement, to name but one remedy, do a wonderful job and I and many people in Edinburgh have firsthand experience of it. Good palliatave care negates the need for assisted suicide or murder.
13

DRZ400,

24/04/2009 14:36:36
#5 Lots of people suffer in this area stop being so selfish!
This lady is a credit for raising something like this. So many people suffer for a long period of time with no life, crying in pain and wanting the end to come to get away from the constant pain. This is also torture on the relatives who can only view with even more grief than they should be subjected to.
I for one support Margo and wish her all the very best. This is not just a right to top yourself, this is something that would be backed up by expert medical opinion before anything was carried out. Better that than someone walking off into a wood or the hills and dying there.

#7 Yep stands for integrity, how many politicians are in that boat?
Good luck Margo.
14

Linmal,

Livingston 24/04/2009 14:44:48
I should add that I have a lot of respect for Margo Mcdonald but disagree with her on this issue.

And #13 if people are dying in pain they are not getting the support they are entitled to and deserve. There should be no need for anyone to suffer any pain nowadays. It is this kind of misinformation which causes these kind of highly emotive comments.
15

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 24/04/2009 14:53:32
#12 & #14 Linmal,

No, you are wrong (unfortunately), there are cases all too frequently where terminally ill people do not have a pain-free, dignified end.

I, for one, support assisted termination and that those involved should not be subject to persecution/prosecution.

Euthanasia is most certainly not a fancy name for murder.
16

Linmal,

Livingston 24/04/2009 15:10:57
#15 If I am wrong about this, then that is abysmal. But there are so many wonderful places where care is given. There is no need to die a horrible death. It is not given to us to choose the time of our death any more than we can choose the time of our arrival. And sorry, it is just a way of making it sound more palatable. To take a life is murder, plain and simple and it is, and I hope always will be, against the law.
17

DRZ400,

24/04/2009 15:11:41
#14 In the perfect world yes. This is not the perfect world. You are obviously a lucky person who has never had to view someone with a terminal illness. In view of you incorrect comments about them not suffering it is no wonder that bills cannot be brought through Parliament as a result of ill informed people jumping on the band wagon and voting against same.
How much medication would it take to rid someone of the pain.
The medical staff in instances like this are exteremly dedicated to reducing the pain and your comments are something that I doubt they would disagree with.
18

Xena - Warrior Princess,

24/04/2009 15:28:01
Linmal you are wrong unfortunately - it would be lovely if everyone had the choice of a hospice and a dignified death but there are so many that do get to a hospice. Bed blockers waiting for a hospice bed, people being cared for at home and in pain and crying. I have first hand experience of this so I say Good Luck Margo - we don't let our animals suffer and we shouldn't let human beings suffer either.
19

Linmal,

Livingston 24/04/2009 15:41:50
#17 You are way off the mark. I have had first-hand experience of death many times. I used to care for elderly people and I also lost both my parents some years ago now. My mother had her first stroke when I was 17 and died when I was 23 and my father had lung cancer and died when I was 27. He was cared for in St Columba's Hospice and the care he received there was second to none. His was a peaceful end and I sat with him to the end.

#18 No-one should need to suffer in this way. If this is indeed happening, then the GP and local nursing service have a lot to answer for. There are many organisations who can help - McMillan Nurses, Nurses from the Hospices, Marie Curie and St Columba's so no-one should ever have to go through any form of indignity or suffering.
20

THE BPRENTICE,

24/04/2009 15:46:43
I think Margo is fantastic - normally I'd be against this idea full stop, but:

When I read that its for people for whom life had become "intolerable" through a terminal illness, loss of function or a progressive, degenerative condition"

Then I thought - fair dues - coz if the game (i.e. life) is a bogey ... why not be able to ask a doctor to help your life?
21

THE BPRENTICE,

24/04/2009 15:47:33
I menat to say "why not be able to ask a doctor to help your life end?
22

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 24/04/2009 15:47:38
#18 Xena - Warrior Princess,

"I have first hand experience of this so I say Good Luck Margo."

Again I am in agreement with you on this point and like you (although I did not want to state it) I too have quite literally,first hand experience of very close loved ones suffering a 'bad end'.

#16 Linmal,

"To take a life is murder, plain and simple and it is, and I hope always will be, against the law."

Yes, I would agree, but only if the 'victim' does not want to die.

It is a great pity that Hospices cannot cater for every terminally ill person and there are therefore many unfortunate cases where a mercy killing should not be illegal allowing that the dying persn has requested assisted termination.



23

Duncan in Edinburgh,

24/04/2009 16:08:49
#19 "no-one should ever have to go through any form of indignity or suffering"

Sadly that rosy vision of a perfect world is completely at odds with the one we live in. For a start, good palliative care is expensive, and provision is patchy. Many people simply can't access it.

More importantly, some people want to choose not to prolong their lives. The default medical position is to prolong life for as long as possible. Why shouldn't I be able to say, if I get a degenerative disease, where I know I will have no quality of life past a certain point, that I choose to end my life at that point? Who has the right to deny me that choice? I'm an atheist, so I have no qualms about sin or ethereal consequences. So why should I be denied the right to choose?
24

Linmal,

Livingston 24/04/2009 16:15:45
#23 "palliative care is expensive". Palliative care is provided free of charge to who-ever needs it. The Hospice Movement is a charitable organisation who rely on donations, but they do not charge those who need their help. The NHS also provide care and unless I am missing something, healthcare in this country has been "free" since 1948.

It is not a rosy view, it is a view from experience not only from losing family and friends but from working with the elderly and from friends who have worked in oncology wards and other facilities where care is given for terminally ill patients.
25

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 24/04/2009 16:25:11
#23 Duncan,

Again I am in complete agreement with you.

"So why should I be denied the right to choose?"

That is the crux of the matter and while I do not wish to offend Linmal (or anyone else who opposes euthanasia), I think the answer is because a number of self-righteous people would want you to be denied that choice.

26

Duncan in Edinburgh,

24/04/2009 16:36:49
#24 I can only suggest that you have been extraordinarily lucky in your experiences.

Nonetheless, what if my choice is not to receive palliative care, but to end my life?

Why should I not be allowed to exercise that choice?
27

calum,

24/04/2009 16:36:49
#2 - Duncan, one would almost think that you are theophobic. Religion is a source of comfort and solace to millions all over the world.
On this subject, however, and in spite of the fact that in my experience Margo MacDonald is a vindictive bully, I agree with her.
28

THE BPRENTICE,

24/04/2009 17:37:25
in the 80s ... I was flying back to Edinburgh from london with my work ... one big plane was unable to fly at the last minute - so they put on 2 smaller ones: my colleagues and I were lucky enough to be on the first plane so I went on the plane ...

Margo was sitting there taking up 2 seats - she wasn't sitting on both - she had sprawled her papers and books on the seat next to her. I tried to find another seat, but I was the one person left that that didn't have a seat because soemone had sneaked on that should have been on the 2nd plane.

I agreed to board the 2nd plane - they lied to me and said there would be no time delay: there was about an hours diff, some of my colleagues had to wait for me because we had a pool car waiting.

Now this story might seem obtuse, but believe me, I was not a Margo MacDonald fan ... I thoguth she was just a selfish bighead taking up 2 seats.

But over the years - I've warmed to her a lot - through her actions as a politician. More power to your elbow Margo - but I hope you don't still take up 2 seats anymore.
29

Brodric,

24/04/2009 22:13:24
Linmal - sorry to tell you that Duncan in Edinburgh is right about there not being sufficient palliative care.

Just look at how many hospice beds there are in Edinburgh (57), not to mention even less access in rural areas. There are only 3,000 MacMillan nurses and around 3,000 beds in hospices in the UK. There are 150,000 deaths per year. There are not enough day care centres.

Further, hospice beds are not fully funded by the NHS - donations fund almost half of these - and thousands of volunteers across the country give up their time to assist, without whom there would not be enough care.

When my mum died of cancer she was unable to be placed in a hospice, as were other patients in the hospital. I have to say that the staff could not have been better, but my mum didn't want to die in a hospital and it was already too late to bring her home.

I can't help but think that the whole approach to terminal illness is wrong-headed. Quality of life and freedom from suffering is much more important than another six months of absolute hell and torment.
30

Julian.,

edinburgh 25/04/2009 01:03:44
Linmal,

Sorry, but I've heard numerous doctors and nurses state that for a small proportion of people palliative care is not effective. It's a well known fact that certain conditions in certain people can't be treated with pain medicine.

As for murder being the same thing as this, just plain wrong. Try looking up the definition of murder. Are you really trying to say that someone who hands a lethal drugs cocktail to someone who is terminally ill, in extreme pain and begging for it is a murderer in any sense of the word?
31

Em,

25/04/2009 01:58:50
The slick terminology adopted regarding this issue is applied in order that euthanasia may become not only acceptable, but considered the compassionate choice.
In order to better understand where such a change in legislation may lead us perhaps we should look at countries that have adopted such policies.
Right-to-die advocates often point to Holland as the model for how well physician-assisted, voluntary euthanasia for terminally-ill, competent patients can work without abuse. But the facts indicate otherwise.

In 1991, the results of the first, official government study of the practice of Dutch euthanasia were released. The data indicate that, despite long standing, court-approved euthanasia guidelines developed to protect patients, abuse has become an accepted norm. According to the Remmelink Report, in 1990 2,300 people died as the result of doctors killing them upon request (active, voluntary euthanasia)

400 people died as a result of doctors providing them with the means to kill themselves (physician-assisted suicide)

1,040 people (an average of 3 per day) died from involuntary euthanasia, meaning that doctors actively killed these patients without the patients' knowledge or consent.
14% of these patients were fully competent.
72% had never given any indication that they would want their lives terminated.

In addition, 8,100 patients died as a result of doctors deliberately giving them overdoses of pain medication, not for the primary purpose of controlling pain, but to hasten the patient's death.
In 61% of these cases (4,941 patients), the intentional overdose was given without the patient's consent.

According to the Remmelink Report, Dutch physicians deliberately and intentionally ended the lives of 11,840 people by lethal overdoses or injections--a figure which accounts for 9.1% of the annual overall death rate of 130,000 per year. The majority of all euthanasia deaths in Holland are involuntary deaths.

I don't doubt that should legi
32

Em,

25/04/2009 01:59:47
contd..

I don't doubt that should legislation be changed in order that a patient may determine their own death it will not be long until we are facing situations similar to that of Holland.

Another point I would like to highlight is that of palliative care. Where euthanasia is an accepted medical solution to patients' pain and suffering, there is little incentive to develop programs which provide modern, available, and effective pain control for patients. It is not beyond the realms of possibility to treat terminal patients so that pain and suffering remain a minimum, unfortunately providers of such palliative care are underfunded and in limited supply, it may be that restricting such care facilities further enables those who wish to bring about a euthanasia policy.

Right-to-die advocates often argue that euthanasia and assisted suicide are "choice issues." The Dutch experience clearly indicates that, where voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide are accepted practice, a significant number of patients end up having no choice at all.
33

Julian.,

edinburgh 25/04/2009 04:22:43
#32 You never mentioned Switzerland.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.