Assisted dying split leads to two reports from one committee
A NEW report has advised the Government to introduce legislation for assisted dying – but the chair of the committee that delivered the document has launched an alternative report.
The Special Oireachtas Joint Committee on Assisted Dying recommendations are opposed by Independent TD Michael Healy-Rae.
The final report, published yesterday, advocated that assisted dying should be allowed in restricted circumstances, limiting it to those with six months to live, or 12 months in the case of a person with a neurodegenerative disease, illness or condition.
But that report has led to a split in the committee after its chairman, Mr Healy-Rae refused to support its recommendations.
Three members of the committee, Mr Healy-Rae, Fianna Fáil TD Robert Troy and Independent Senator Rónán Mullen have claimed that the case for assisted dying ‘has not been established’.
They launched an alternative report, including a number of their own recommendations. This included Chair: Michael Healy-Rae that carers be robustly supported in their duties; that all healthcare providers develop a model of care and that sufficient funding be provided for suicide prevention programmes, including addressing the causes of suicide among older people.
They also call for studies on ableism in society, on the impact of economic disadvantage and health inequalities on causing people to feel a burden.
They are also seeking ongoing studies into pain management and pain research, as well as for research into the problem of coercion. Mr Mullen said: ‘Any advertising or initiation of conversations around assisted dying could endanger vulnerable and suggestible persons coping with terminal illness. It would also leave them more exposed to the risk of coercion.’
Mr Healy-Rae said: ‘We all need to hear the clear voice of medical professionals who believe that doctor-patient trust would be undermined by assisted dying. Less harmful, even if still high risk, would be a model where applications for assisted dying would be handled by a licensing body, outside of the mainstream healthcare sector, but we should never be presenting assisted dying as a healthcare issue.’
The committee’s final report makes 38 recommendations, advocating that the right to conscientious objection of all doctors and health workers directly involved in the provision of assisted dying should be protected in law.
It also stated that any potential legislation on assisted dying uses clear and unambiguous terms and definitions, to avoid scope for uncertainty, and that any person inquiring about assisted dying, following a terminal diagnosis, should be informed of accessing all endof-life care options.
The report also states that palliative care and the operation of assisted dying should operate separately and that resources and funding for palliative care services should be substantially increased.
It also recommended that anyone who coerces a person into assisted dying will be guilty of a criminal offence under the legislation.
Doctors and healthcare workers involved in the provision of assisted dying should also be trained to the highest level possible to identify coercion when assessing or treating a patient.
It further recommends that if a medical professional has been proven to have acted outside of the permitted regulations or has attempted to coerce an individual, they will have committed an offence.
The report also said that if assisted dying is introduced, an assessment by a qualified psychiatrist should be required in circumstances where the patient is deemed eligible, but there are concerns about whether the person is competent to make an informed decision.
Trained to highest level