Assisted dying is about to
be made
legal in Canada. Professor Boer, one of the most vociferous objectors to
assisted dying, was on television yesterday asserting (as he often does) that assisted
death is not something the Canadians should get into because the most up to
date results in the Netherlands have "seen deaths double in just six years"
as a consequence of legalisation.
His facts are right, but
his reasoning is peculiar, because he mistakenly assumes that an increased
number of assisted deaths is a failure and not a success of the policy. The
professor is looking at the situation the wrong way. If the issue is that the
law prohibits people who want to die from dying, then those opposed to such a law are
opposed because it is a law that forces people to stay alive and suffer against their will.
Contrary to Professor Boer's thinking, rather than the increased
deaths being indication of a failed policy, they may actually be indication of
a successful policy, as it can now mean people are able to die at their own volition.
Or to put it another way, if deaths have doubled in six years since the
assisted suicide law was passed in the Netherlands, then it may well suggest that
before the law was passed an awful lot of people were staying alive when they'd
rather be dead.
It is sloppy thinking to
simply presume that an increase in assisted deaths is a bad thing, particularly
if in endorsing the bill we are endorsing giving everyone who wants to die the
chance to do so. Perhaps it's simply the case that there are more people in the Netherlands that want to die than Professor Boer first thought, and perhaps that is
true of Canada (and the UK and US) too.
