We must heed Canada example

I READ with alarm Mark Mcgeoghegan’s article on the assisted dying issue (“Assisted dying issue can’t be weaponised”, The Herald, April 12). He states: “We have been able to navigate the opening of this sensitive, nuanced discussion of assisted dying with the dignity, intelligence, and openmindedness that it deserves.” He welcomes, as I do, the fact that this is a debate which is not a bitter, polarised, political conflict. He then does exactly what he wishes to avoid by calling those who discuss what is happening in Canada as the far right and presumably not to be considered useful in this debate.

MSP Liam Mcarthur is reported as saying that his bill is a “restricted” model in line with Oregon and Australia rather than that of Canada. However he fails to talk about the political landscape in the USA where there is fierce opposition in other states and even among the Federal Government, not the most favourable conditions for extending the safeguards, although Oregon has done so. In Australia not all states have introduced assisted suicide so the situation there is not the same as Scotland. Our political situation is more akin to that of Canada. So, it is legitimate to argue that what happened is Canada in terms of extending the safeguards is an unintended but predicable consequence of a bill based upon autonomy of the person.

In addition, no parliament can promise that others who follow will not alter what they agree. No other jurisdiction has managed to keep the safeguarding promises due to legal and political challenges. How can Scotland be different? Within seven years of it being made legal in Canada, the poor and vulnerable are being offered assisted dying instead of social care. Canadian Federal Minister for Disability Inclusion, Carla Qualtrough, has been reported as saying: “In some places in our country, it’s easier to access MAID [Medical Assistance in Dying] than it is to get a wheelchair.”

John Brown, Clydebank.