Seymour offers to alter bill

Significant changes to the End of Life Choice Bill have been proposed by ACT MP David Seymour.

The bill’s strongest supporter in Parliament has suggested limiting legalised euthanasia solely to cases of terminal illness.

He has sought to exclude mental illness and disability from the bill’s provisions; to send it to a public referendum; and to incorporate aspects of a palliative care bill drafted by his loudest critic, National MP Maggie Barry. Seymour’s concessions are a bid to earn votes from his parliamentary colleagues and allay concerns among the 37,000 who submitted on the End of Life Choice Bill.

The suggested narrowing has drawn both praise and ire – often in equal measure – from advocates and opponents of the prospective law.

Seymour, who is the bill’s sponsor, has published a report detailing a raft of amendments he expects Parliament’s justice select committee to consider.

The suggested removal of permitting assisted death in cases of grievous and irremediable illness was a ‘‘shame’’ and would come as a disappointment to many, he said.

‘‘If we didn’t have a clear way forward, then you could end up in deadlock and chaos.

‘‘Right now it’s up to me to make sure there’s a majority in Parliament to consider this bill.’’

Beyond fundamental changes, he has addressed nuances such as: explicitly eliminating advanced directives; clarifying the required capacity for informed consent; allowing pharmacists to conscientiously object to involvement; and ensuring medical professionals aren’t liable for criminal prosecution. Many of the specifications, such as the removal of mental illness, were already implicit in the bill, he said.

‘‘I’m not saying the bill was flawed but some people want things spelt out, so I’m happy to do that.’’

Seymour said detailed discussions with MPs made clear certain changes were required.

A public referendum was a condition required for the support of the nine NZ First MPs, while the eight Green MPs wouldn’t support the bill’s coverage for those without terminal illness due to fears held by the disabled community.

A bill restricted to terminal illness and headed for a public vote was also more likely to gain support of individual Labour and National MPs, he said. ‘‘Those are the political considerations. But also, everything in my report is a result of public feedback.’’

Seymour has mentioned Barry specifically, suggesting her proposed Access to End of Life Palliative Care Bill be incorporated into his own – a suggestion the National MP says is ‘‘ridiculous’’.

Roslyn Metcalfe, who has a rare genetic connective tissue disorder considered a grievous and irremediable condition, said she was pleased Seymour’s suggested amendments would allow for a more politically acceptable bill.

‘‘If accepted, it will relieve a great deal of suffering,’’ she said.

‘‘Unfortunately, neither my situation nor that of my brother will be improved ... regardless of whether or not this bill is passed, the choice facing my brother and me is to either endure many years, possibly decades, of suffering or to end our own life much sooner than we want to but while we are still physically capable of doing so.’’

The proposed alterations were met with intrigue by some antieuthanasia groups including Family First NZ and Right to Life, with Family First national director Bob McCoskrie urging politicians to ‘‘move on’’. ‘‘[Seymour’s] latest statements should be an indication to politicians that they should give New Zealanders a real Christmas present and move on from the current political push for assisted suicide, and focus on what New Zealanders really need and want – a focus on providing the very best palliative care and support for vulnerable people.’’

The justice select committee is expected to report back after March next year.

Ruby Macandrew Thomas Manch