The Guardian’s view of death with the help of: a very important bill that needs more attention Editorial

R.The central issue before the deputies, where they decide how to vote on the latest version of the death bill with the help of Kim Leadbeater, is how to assess individual self -government in relation to the collective responsibility of the vulnerable community members when providing regulations at the end of life. Should I have hidden diseases to end their lives with medical help? If so, under any guarantees? The question remains morally and complicated by a medical and legal point of view.

Technological and social changes that enable people to live longer than that have created challenges on care resources, aging and death experiences. There are deep questions about how to manage the final stages of life – and what we owe to those who live through them.

Mrs. Lideptere, the Labor Party Labor Organization, has taken the challenge of directing this law through Parliament with a principle and sympathy. The past nine months have witnessed an enthusiastic discussion, which was truly liquidated, beyond Parliament and the media in daily life. From the beginning, as this newspaper noted, the public opinion was stopped with supporters of the bill.

However, this general support reduces due to dangerous concerns. Earlier this week, Gordon Brown cited a survey by the sponsorship in which two -thirds of the respondents are not killed that the government should “sort in tilted and social care first.” This anxiety is not in place. Many people do not receive sufficient care at the end of life. There is a risk that has helped death, if it is provided without sufficient protection or investment, they can feel more choice and more pressure.

The codification of death will not open the door for something completely new – it will lead to the insertion of the open a phenomenon This is already in the shade. In Britain today, the decisions of life and death depend on the approved estimated power. Those who help a member of his family die, often gently, they face the prosecution of murder or unintended killing. Or may not. The prosecution service was decided to crown, after the police that could be shockHouses that are treated as a scenes of crime, and the seizures phones, and the sad families are interrogated. For many, it is not the verb that delegates, it is the next ordeal.

As for the bill’s preachers, the goal is simple: people spare an unnecessary suffering. Some of their loved ones have seen the dead deaths; Others, like the TV presenter Esther RantzenYou want to control their own. Some doctors see death as a human option. Many supporters of the draft law are motivated by sympathy, but questions remain about whether the necessary guarantees and public investment have been seriously addressed.

While many believe that the choice about death is their right, it is necessary to carefully think about the effects of this important change on people who have a lower agency and lower resources. For parliament less than a year, this is a moment of political maturity and testing its ability to deal with one of the most emotional charged questions of our time.

MPS may pass the draft law on Friday, but there is no doubt that the legislation will need more improvement in lords and guarantee the government to ensure that sympathy is not exposed to low costs, that vulnerable people do not leave vulnerable to hidden forms of coercion, and that the values ​​of care and dignity are essential in how they support them at the end of life.

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you want to provide a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered to be published in our messages section, please click here.