DOCTORS yesterday refused to back calls to lift the threat of prosecution from those who accompany terminally ill loved ones to overseas clinics to take their own lives.
A motion discussed at the British Medical Association (BMA) conference in Liverpool urged support for a change in legislation to ensure that people travelling with a patient for an assisted death would not be subject to prosecution.
No-one has yet
been charged with this offence, and yesterday doctors voted against any change in the law after arguments that each case should be dealt with individually and compassionately, as has been the case so far. The vote does not mean the BMA believes relatives should automatically be prosecuted.
Doctors also rejected calls for assisted deaths for terminally ill patients to be allowed in the UK, reaffirming their existing stance on the issue.
It comes as independent MSP Margo MacDonald continues her campaign to legalise assisted suicide in Scotland.
MS patient Debbie Purdy lost her Appeal Court case to clarify the law on assisted suicide in February. She is thinking about ending her life at a clinic abroad, but fears that her husband may be charged on his return to the UK.
In another case last year, the parents of 23-year-old Daniel James, who was paralysed in a rugby accident, were told they would not face charges over his death after he ended his life in Switzerland in September, even though he was not terminally ill.
Now Lord Falconer is tabling a motion to the Coroners and Justice Bill in the House of Lords to give greater protection to people who accompany loved ones when they take their life.
Yesterday Dr Kailash Chand, a doctor from Tameside, also said it was necessary to protect loved ones from the fear of prosecution they currently face if travelling to clinics such as Dignitas in Switzerland, where more than 100 Britons have already been helped to die.
"The terminally ill, we know, are travelling abroad to countries where the right to end life is recognised as lawful," he said.
"We must not prosecute loved ones for encouraging or assisting suicide when they help the terminally ill individual travel abroad to end his or her life."
He urged doctors to think of the pain and anguish faced by the families going to overseas clinics.
"If the laws as written were being enforced, over 100 would have been prosecuted for accompanying their loved ones abroad to help them end their lives. This ambiguity and uncertainty leaves all concerned, including physicians, unprotected."
Dr Chand also argued that wealthy people could travel more easily to countries where assisted dying was lawful.
"Many of us are opposed to legislation that would allow end of life choices, but our concerns relating to abuses and the vulnerable can be addressed by ensuring certain objective safeguards are met prior to allowing terminally ill individuals to exercise their right to die with dignity," he added.
Professor Baroness Ilora Finlay, from Cardiff, said the current law dealing with families travelling to clinics with relatives worked well.
"It has a stern face and a kind heart," she said. "It looks on a case-by-case basis at the facts. If the public good is not served, prosecution is not continued. The law as it currently stands is compassionate.
"To provide immunity from prosecution before an event would allow anything to happen, coercion of any sort, with no fear of having to account for your actions."
Doctors at the conference voted narrowly against any change in the legislation and also against allowing assisted dying in the UK.
Dr Brian Keighley, deputy chairman of the BMA in Scotland, said: "It is clear that doctors do not wish to play a role in assisting a patient's death. Assisting patients to die prematurely is not part of the moral ethos or the primary goal of medicine."
The full article contains 657 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
