MPs who vote for ‘assisted dying’ will have blood on their hands

It’s such a clever euphemism: ‘assisted in dying”. It all sounds so nice and helpful, doesn’t it? Much more fun and less gloomy than ‘assisted suicide’. Or, for that matter, “an exciting and perfectly legal opportunity to scare that crazy old bat, save on her expensive nursing home costs and collect your inheritance early.”

Yes, “assisted dying” is certainly a much more pleasant term than either of these alternatives. Unfortunately, it is also a lot less fair. That’s a serious problem. Because, as a result of campaigners, commentators and MPs constantly using this soft euphemism, an alarming number of people don’t know what it really means. Many assume that it means, for example, palliative care, or the right to refuse life-prolonging treatments (a right that patients already have).

Opinion polls make this problem all too terribly clear. On Sunday, a national newspaper devoted its front page to a poll that said almost two-thirds of the British public want MPs to legalize ‘assisted dying’ if the issue is voted on in the House of Commons on Friday.

Yet a subsequent poll, released on Tuesday, showed a very different picture. Once respondents were explained what “assisted dying” entailed, support for it plummeted – to just 11 percent. But if so many people don’t actually know what “assisted dying” means, how can it be said that the public wants it legalized?

However, proponents of ‘assisted dying’ continue to make this dubious claim. Yet we should not be surprised. Because much of their campaigning was naive at best – and downright misleading at worst.

To take the disgusting advertisement plastered all over the London Underground Dignity in Dying, a lobby group demanding legalization. It shows a healthy-looking blonde woman dancing joyfully around her kitchen – as if assisted suicide is a delicious treat she can’t wait to try.

Then there is campaigners’ gleeful insistence that the proposed new law is not a “slippery slope” because “assisted dying” would only apply to terminally ill patients who have been told by two doctors that they have less than six months to live. This statement ignores two crucial points.

First, studies have shown that doctors’ predictions are far from infallible when it comes to remaining life expectancy. And second, legalizing “assisted dying” has indeed proven to be a “slippery slope” in other countries. Take the Netherlands, where there is a physical A healthy 29-year-old woman received assisted suicide simply because she was depressed. And in the US state of Oregon, people with anorexia, arthritis and even a hernia have been given assisted suicide.

All this shows why MPs should not fool themselves into thinking that if they vote for “assisted dying” they are simply giving the public what it wants, or simply being “compassionate”. Because if, once this bill becomes law, stories emerge of vulnerable elderly or disabled people being successfully forced to commit suicide, these MPs will be blamed. Amid the public horror and anger, they will be told that they have blood on their hands. Are MPs really prepared to take that risk?

But maybe this whole, horrible debate is academic. After all, ‘assisted dying’ would be the responsibility of the NHS. And we all know what the NHS is like. The waiting list will be so long that you will have already died by then.

Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 3 months with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.