If assisted dying bill needs more work, why are MSPs voting on it now?

If it were simply a question of public demand, doctors across Scotland would have been helping people kill themselves for some time, now.

Polling has long shown voters back the legalisation of assisted dying for those suffering from terminal illnesses. It is, in contemporary parlance, the “kind” thing to do.

Next week members of the Scottish Parliament will vote on whether they should begin to make this act of dark benevolence a reality.

Main: John Swinney pictured with his wife Elizabeth Quigley, who has multiple sclerosis. He will vote against the assisted dying bill at Holyrood. Picture: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images

Liberal Democrat MSP Liam McArthur’s proposal to allow Scottish doctors to end the lives of those with no hope of recovery echoes that of Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, currently promoting a private member’s bill in the House of Commons which would have the same effect in England and Wales.

I believe it is essential that both attempts fail.

In a rare instance, I find myself aligned with First Minister, John Swinney, who last week revealed that he will be voting against the proposal when it comes before the Holyrood chamber.

These are early days. A vote in favour of McArthur’s bill at stage one would not change the law immediately but it would, I think, give us a pretty good idea of where things will end up. I sincerely doubt that those MSP’s willing to back assisted dying at this stage are likely to change their minds further down the road.

An impact assessment conducted by the UK Government suggests that, within a decade of the legalisation of assisted dying, more than 7,000 people in England and Wales would seek help to end their lives each year. If these figures are in the neighbourhood of accuracy, they suggest 600 or more Scots would wish to join them in ending their lives with the help of medics.

In advance of the stage one vote in the Scottish Parliament, Holyrood’s health, social care and sport committee has taken evidence on McArthur’s bill. Its recently published conclusions highlight the need for major amendments.

But, rather than suggesting the bill is unworkable, the committee says MSPs should vote on the first stage of the process as a matter of conscience.

This is far from ideal.

If we want good, workable legalisation – and, goodness knows, we could do with some of that – then surely members shouldn’t be voting on a bill that needs much more work?

But we are where we are and, on Tuesday, we’ll learn whether we’re going further.

John Swinney will not be assisting the continued progress of McArthur’s plan.

Interviewed by the BBC last week, the First Minister said he had come to the conclusion he could not support the bill because he was concerned that it would “fundamentally change” relationships between patients and clinicians.

“I'm worried,” said Swinney, “that some of the vulnerable in our society might feel that they are a burden and that they may therefore opt or feel under pressure to end their life prematurely.”

In the First Minister’s case, both his Christian faith and his personal circumstances - – his wife, Elizabeth had multiple sclerosis – have played into his decision. He could not, he said, suggest otherwise.

The current mood at Holyrood suggests that McArthur’s bill will make it through the first stage vote.

It is not difficult to understand why this may be so.

We have – for years now – heard compelling and moving stories about those desperate to be free of the pain of terminal cancer or some other devastating illness. Many of us have watched loved ones go through such turmoil and even those of us who oppose assisted dying in principle can surely understand why others take a different view.

A poll carried out last year by Opinion Research on behalf of pro-assisted dying campaign group Dignity in Dying Scotland showed that 78 per cent of Scots would support a change in the law to allow medical staff to help people end their lives.

That survey of 4,000 people found majority support for a new law among people of all political persuasions.

Among SNP voters, support for legislation to allow assisted dying hits 84 per cent. Swinney really is walking in a different direction from the vast majority of those he leads.

It is to be hoped that, in walking his own path, he changes minds.

Beyond the moral case against proceeding with this bill (and I accept, of course, that there are good and moral people who take the view that allowing someone to end their life early is the compassionate thing to do) there are practical issues.

Scotland’s NHS is in crisis, right now. An ongoing shortage of medical staff and a lack of reform means the health service is on its knees. Waiting time guarantees routinely go unmet while accident and emergency units across the country are stretched to breaking point.

Can we safely introduce into this chaos a new and complex process which would take doctors away from business of saving lives and have them, instead, ending them?

Politicians who back assisted dying promise strict safeguards and I have no doubt they are sincere but, right now, Liam McArthur’s bill falls short.

Take, for example, the bill’s statement that a person should be considered terminally ill if that have a condition “from which they are unable to recover and that can reasonably be expected to cause their premature death”.

This sounds perfectly reasonable but many of us will know people who have outlived, even confounded, prognoses.

Do we really want to facilitate the premature deaths of people who, thanks to modern medicine, could live for years while their conditions are managed?

The instinct to alleviate the suffering of others is a good and decent one but this rushed and poorly considered attempt to allow doctors to end patients’ lives is neither a good nor decent solution.