Public equally divided on Liam McArthur's assisted dying bill

Early analysis of public views on Liam McArthur’s assisted dying bill has shown a near-equal split between those that support the legislation, which would give the terminally ill the right to choose when to die, and those that do not.

Introduced by the Liberal Democrat MSP earlier this year, the bill aims to give people with “an advanced and progressive disease, illness or condition which they cannot recover from” the choice to lawfully request assistance from health professionals to end their own life. 

Prior to lodging the bill McArthur ran a consultation on its proposals that received 14,000 responses. Of those, 21 per cent said they did not back the plan while a majority – 76 per cent – did.

The subject has also divided political opinion, with MSPs including Liberal Democrat leader Alex Cole-Hamilton, former SNP minister Elena Whitham, Labour member Monica Lennon and former Tory leader Jackson Carlaw supporting McArthur’s bill while former first minister Humza Yousaf, Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar and outgoing Conservative leader Douglas Ross all indicating they would oppose it.

Earlier this year parliament’s Health, Social Care and Sport Committee issued two calls for views on the bill itself, the first asking people for their general views and the second asking people to comment on specific aspects of the bill.

It received 13,821 responses to the former and 7,236 responses to the latter, with the vast majority coming from individuals.

Scottish Parliament Information Centre (SPICe), which is in the process of producing a detailed analysis of the responses, has released a summary of its initial findings, which show that 10,120 strongly oppose it while 10,380 fully support it.

In its report SPICe noted that a majority of those expressing views on the bill as a whole – 74 per cent – were supportive while a majority of those commenting on specific aspects – 93 per cent – were opposed.

The authors of the report noted that there is “strong evidence to suggest that a significant number of individual responses to both calls for views were the result of organised campaigns”.

Among those that opposed the bill, the main areas of concern were that vulnerable people could be coerced into ending their lives, the lives of vulnerable groups could be devalued, the safeguards included in the bill could be watered down over time, and the sanctity of life could be eroded.

The main reasons those that supported it gave for doing so were ‘reducing suffering', ‘personal dignity’ and ‘personal autonomy’.

When he published the bill McArthur said he was doing so because he believed the fact assisted dying is illegal in Scotland is “failing too many terminally ill Scots at the end of life”.

“Naturally, the provisions I am proposing would be robustly safeguarded to ensure the process works as intended,” he said.

“Similar laws have been safely and successfully introduced in other countries and continue to enjoy strong public support.”

In response to the SPICe report, he said: “Our current laws on assisted dying are failing too many terminally ill Scots, often leaving them facing an undignified and sometimes painful death despite the very best efforts of palliative care. It is clear that a new compassionate and safe law is required.

“The committee is right to note that responses to this call for evidence will be self-selecting and members will need to decide what weight to attach to the different submissions. However, I would like to thank those organisations and individuals that have taken the time to respond to the committee’s call for evidence.

“I was pleased to see a majority of respondents declaring their support for my bill and rightly emphasising the importance of reducing suffering and upholding personal dignity and autonomy.

“The bill I have put forward will give terminally ill, mentally competent adults the option to control the manner and timing of their death. It will introduce practical measures that make end-of-life care safer and fairer for all. It is based on evidence and grounded in compassion. Safety is woven into the fabric of the bill with measures to assess eligibility, protect against coercion, ensure rigorous medical oversight and robustly monitor every part of the process.

“We can see from some of the harrowing testimonies to the consultation that what we have right now does not work to keep dying people, their families and other vulnerable people safe. I look froward to making the case for greater choice and compassion to the committee as they undertake their detailed scrutiny of the bill.”

In an interview with Holyrood earlier this year McArthur stressed that his aim was to ensure that assisted dying is one option among several that are on the table for those forced into making difficult choices about their end-of-life care.

“This isn’t instead of palliative care but for people who are having palliative care – we can’t play one off against the other,” he said.

“The evidence from other countries shows that assisted dying can have a palliative effect as well. Lots of people get the most out of the days, weeks, months they still have to live.

“I went to California, which has introduced a similar law to the one we’re looking at, and about 30 per cent of those that applied for assisted dying didn’t use it because the palliative care did what it was expected to. It’s about having that choice.”

The bill is currently being scrutinised by parliament’s Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee and will be debated by MSPs once the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee publishes its stage one report.