Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1530259
14 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 8 DECEMBER 2024 ANALYSIS hit by spending cuts, the pro- posed legislation "puts the poorest, the elderly, and dis- abled people at risk of serious neglect and discrimination." Within the Conservative Party, opinions were also split. Some MPs, like Jeremy Hunt and former Prime Minister Ri- shi Sunak, supported the bill, while others, including new Tory leader Kemi Badenoch, voted against it, citing poten- tial unintended consequences. Despite voting against the bill the new Tory leader immedi- ately made it clear that while she "understands" the reli- gious arguments on this mat- ter, she does not agree with them. "I fundamentally believe that giving people a level of con- trol over how they die can be a sacred thing in and of itself; is the right thing to do and something we must get right," she argued. But she could not support the Bill as proposed arguing that it did not contain enough safeguards. The final vote on the assisted dying bill saw 330 MPs vot- ing in favour, while 275 voted against, resulting in a majority of 55 votes in support of the proposal. Breaking down the vote by party, a majority of Labour MPs supported the bill, with 233 voting for and 147 against. On the Conservative side, 23 MPs out of 121 voted in fa- vour, including former prime minister Rishi Sunak, while the majority of Tory MPs op- posed the bill. Among the Liberal Democrats, the major- ity (61) voted in favour even if party leader Ed Davey and 10 other MPs, voted against. Re- form Party leader Nigel Farage opposed the bill but three of his MPs voted in favour while all four green MPs supported the bill. Expected timeframe for approval While the bill's Second Read- ing marks a significant step, full approval and implementa- tion may take up to two more years. After further committee reviews and potential amend- ments, the bill will need addi- tional votes in parliament. Once passed, it will be enacted into law, with regulations laid out to guide its practical application. Euthanasia across the world Several countries, including the Netherlands, Belgium, and Canada, have legalised assist- ed dying, each with distinct provisions compared to the UK's proposed bill. In the Netherlands, eutha- nasia is allowed not only for terminal illnesses but also for non-terminal conditions char- acterised by unbearable pain including severe psychiatric disorders, a broader scope than the UK bill, which limits eligibility to those with termi- nal conditions. Belgium, like the Nether- lands, permits euthanasia for individuals experiencing un- bearable suffering, but its law is more expansive in that it also allows minors under cer- tain conditions. Belgium is the only country where euthana- sia for children is legal, which contrasts with the UK bill that applies exclusively to adults. Canada's Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) law provides assisted dying to those with serious, incurable medical conditions but also includes more flexible criteria. Cana- da's law has evolved to allow patients who may not be near death but suffer from chronic, irreversible conditions caus- ing intolerable pain. This pro- vision is absent in the UK's proposed law, which restricts eligibility to those facing ter- minal illness. The debate in Malta The Labour Party is present- ly committed to commenc- ing a national discussion on euthanasia. The 2022 gener- al election manifesto clearly stated: "The time has come for a national, mature discussion on the introduction of volun- tary euthanasia for terminally ill patients." Former Labour deputy lead- er Daniel Micallef had open- ly spoken about how he had come to support its intro- duction after his own father's death from a terminal illness. In November 2022, Prime Minister Robert Abela insisted that the debate should even- tually lead to a decision and should not "just be a discus- sion that goes nowhere." The Nationalist Party has stated its opposition to euthanasia. The only organisation actively campaigning for a bill regulat- ing assisted dying is the Malta Humanist Association, while the Catholic Church, in line with its teachings, opposes it. During a ceremonial mass, shortly before President Myr- iam Spiteri Debono took her Oath of Office, Archbishop Charles J. Scicluna used his homily to advise the new pres- ident to, "defend all life from the beginning of its existence until its natural end". A recent poll by Esprimi re- vealed that 62% of Maltese people believe that doctors should be allowed to assist ter- minally ill patients end their life, an increase from the 53% recorded in a 2016 MaltaTo- day survey. CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGE WHAT a complex and moral concern. My initial take on this issue is that we've been postpon- ing it for far too long, and, unfor- tunately, it has rarely featured on our national agenda, aside from the occasional fleeting mention. The debate on euthanasia, from where I stand, hinges on complex questions of personal rights, eth- ical responsibilities, and societal values. Finding common ground requires careful consideration of both individual suffering and the broader implications for society. Opponents argue that inten- tionally ending a life, even to al- leviate suffering, is fundamentally wrong. Added to this, the religious ar- gument slips in, suggesting that it could undermine society's com- mitment to the sanctity of life. Moreover, the potential for abuse is a serious concern. So, any move towards legislating in that direction needs to be airtight, es- pecially when it comes to vulner- able groups (or groups we have labelled as vulnerable), such as the elderly or the disabled com- munity, who may feel pressured to choose euthanasia—whether due to societal attitudes, coer- cion, or family members advocat- ing for the alleviation of pain. This could also potentially lead to a "slippery slope", where eu- thanasia is expanded to less se- vere cases or non-consenting individuals. Safeguards may not be foolproof, leading to misuse or non-voluntary euthanasia. Legalising euthanasia could also shift the role of doctors, changing their focus from preserving life to ending it. This may erode trust in the medical profession among parts of the Maltese communi- ty that still follow the Church's teachings on the matter, with some arguing that it undermines the Hippocratic Oath. Unusually, my stance is some- IT has been quite a while since I followed such a profound, well-researched, and respectful parliamentary debate. Those who followed can attest that we witnessed a very high-level debate in the House of Com- mons—a truly respectful discus- sion focusing on policy, which is what politics should be about. Being a staunch supporter of the introduction of individual rights when it comes to end-of-life de- cisions, I was intrigued not just by the Bill being discussed but also by the contrasting views being put forward. One could deduce a lot of com- mon denominators between the speakers in a debate that cut across party lines, both those for and against. The defining line for those against it was the fear of the Bill being discussed as the begin- ning of a slippery slope. Justified? Maybe if the proper rules are not in place. Eventually, it is the legislator's responsibility—both those pres- ent and future—to ensure that it's not the case. This can be achieved by up- holding the spirit of the law and the integrity of the discussion rather than by refusing to enact much-needed change or, worse, by offering sympathy while over- looking the suffering of terminal- ly ill patients and their families. Unfortunately, it's safe to say that we've all been (or are, or will be...) there. In my opinion, the Assisted Dy- ing Bill, given the nod during the second reading at the Palace of Westminster, strikes a very sen- sible balance with lessons learned from other countries that have introduced such or similar legis- lation. Several safeguards are be- ing proposed, even though some of them I fail to comprehend, It's a Pandora's box, Needs and realities Andrew Azzopardi Daniel Micallef