‘Not all suffering can be relieved’: A debate on assisted dying

As Kim Leadbeater’s private member’s bill comes before the Commons, the former justice secretary Lord Falconer (who introduced a similar bill to the Lords) and The Spectator’s chairman Lord Moore debate assisted dying.

‘When people talk about the moral overreach of the state, they are blind to the fact the state is already there’

CHARLIE FALCONER: The law has effectively broken down. If you assist anybody to take their own life, you’re immediately guilty of an offence, irrespective of motive, and you can be sent to prison for a maximum of 14 years. Even the authorities no longer think that’s enforceable. The Director of Public Prosecutions, the chief prosecutor in the country, has introduced rules that say there are certain circumstances in which he will not prosecute, particularly where somebody assists another to die motivated by compassion and is not a medical professional. That indicates the law is failing and needs to change. When people talk about the moral overreach of the state, they are blind to the fact the state is already there.

CHARLES MOORE: Is that really what this is about though? I don’t believe that what you’re really saying is we just need to clean up a thing in the law. I think you’re saying we need to change a very big thing in society, which is that we now want to help people kill themselves. It is a factual misnomer to call it ‘assisted dying’. This is assisted suicide. And you’re in favour of it.

CF: I’m in favour of somebody taking their own life, which legally is often called suicide, where they are dying already. I am strongly in favour of a situation where, if I have a terminal illness, I am entitled to make my own choice as to the moment of death.

CM: Why are you so nervous of the word suicide?