Assisted dying

Have your say

Martin Conroy (Letters, 27 May) says: “Allowing assisted suicide would … no longer defend the intrinsic value and dignity of every human life.”

Neither are the intrinsic value and dignity of human life defended by compelling every dying person to suffer needlessly when they opt for an assisted death.

He says: “The drive to change the law comes from a small group of determined individuals who view life as something that can and should be under our absolute control.”

And why should it not be? Mr Conroy appears to believe our lives belong to a god, but the law should not enforce his belief on everyone.

He says: “It is very common for people who cavalierly swore in their impregnable youth that they would rather die than lose their mobility or faculties to realise, when it actually happens to them, that they fiercely want to live.”

This is irrelevant. The bill before the Scottish Parliament requires repeated requests for assisted suicide. You would not be committed by something you signed up to years ago.

He says: “The law must uphold life as well as protecting the vulnerable.”

To argue that some people must be compelled by law to suffer needlessly and terminally in order to protect others from pressure is like arguing that torture is all right for the benefit of others.

He says it “will never be limited to those who choose it voluntarily”. This is dark fantasy and a refusal to acknowledge very real safeguards built into the bill.

Paul Brownsey

Larchfield Road