Assisted Dying

Lord Ribeiro Excerpts

Monday 13th February 2012 Lords Chamber

[Lord Ribeiro]

My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness for bringing this very important debate to the House. I declare an interest as a past president of the Royal College of Surgeons. In 2005, we made it clear that we did not support assisted suicide. In evidence to the Commission on Assisted Dying in April 2011, the Royal College made two clear statements:

“The law as it currently stands should not be changed and no system should be introduced to allow people to be assisted to die”,

and:

“The College does not recognise any circumstances under which it should be possible for people to be assisted to die”.

I understand that the policy for prosecutors issued by the Director of Public Prosecutions does not indicate a change in the law, but for me there appear to be ambiguities that require clarification. Under the heading:

“Public interest factors tending in favour of prosecution”,

in paragraph 43(14),

“the suspect was acting in his or her capacity as a medical doctor”,

or, “nurse”, may be seen as being in danger of prosecution. That seems at odds with the, “factors tending against prosecution”, in paragraph 45(2) where,

“the suspect was wholly motivated by compassion”.

I hope that my noble friend will be able to clarify this point as it is bound to put doctors and nurses in considerable doubt as to the interpretation of their actions. A good doctor knows when he or she should,

“not strive officiously to keep alive”,

and that doctrine should be maintained.