In February 2010 the NVVE, Right-to-Die Netherlands, supported by other social organizations, started the campaign Completed Life. Interrupting this societal debate again shouldn’t be allowed. The NVVE is of the opinion that the elderly should be allowed to make a well thought-through choice at the end of their lives and that such a choice will be entirely up to them. Of course, people are not forced to make use of assisted suicide, but they should be at liberty to resort to such, if they wish to. When human suffering can be avoided, the NVVE is of the opinion that access to assistance shouldn’t be withheld. Obviously, under all circumstances all forms of due-care should be practiced.
Hospitals in north Merseyside are planning to use the anti-trespass powers used to ban “hoodies” from shopping centres to shift patients who are blocking beds. NHS Sefton board papers say that from this month patients deemed fit for discharge but who refuse “transitional” care home placements will be given 48 hours’ written notice to make their own arrangements. If a patient still refuses to leave, the hospital could seek a court order for possession of their bed. A well-placed legal source told HSJ the primary care trust’s approach would rely on trespass law, which allows owners to regulate the terms on which visitors occupy their premises.
Battin et al examined data on deaths from PAS in Oregon and on PAS and VE in The Netherlands. This paper reviews the methodology used and questions the conclusions drawn from it—namely, that there is for the most part ‘no evidence of heightened risk’ to vulnerable people from the legalisation of PAS or VE. This critique focuses on the evidence about PAS in Oregon. It suggests that vulnerability to PAS cannot be categorised simply by reference to race, gender or other socioeconomic status and that the impetus to seek PAS derives from factors, including emotional state, reactions to loss, personality type and situation and possibly to PAS contagion, all factors that apply across the social spectrum. It also argues that the highest resort to PAS in Oregon is among the elderly and that some terminally ill patients in Oregon are taking their own lives with lethal drugs supplied by doctors despite having had depression at the time when they were assessed and cleared for PAS.
In their critique of our paper "Legal physician-assisted dying in Oregon and the Netherlands: evidence concerning the impact on patients in "vulnerable" groups," I.G. Finlay and R. George claim to challenge our underlying assumptions and methodology with "another perspective on Oregon's data." In our view, however, they miss the point of our paper and address a quite different issue. While we welcome their attempt to further explore issues about assisted dying, we do not believe they have in any way undercut our argument that where assisted dying is already legal (at the time of our study, Oregon and the Netherlands), there is no current evidence for the claim that legalized physician-assisted suicide or euthanasia will have disproportionate impact on patients in vulnerable groups.