We support patient autonomy and work to protect patients from the imposition of other people's personal religious views.
There is widespread support amongst the public for a compassionate law that permits assisted dying under certain circumstances.
But religious lobbying exerts a disproportionate influence on the debate on assisted dying, frustrating much-needed reform.
Assisted dying (AD) is when a person chooses to be given help to die, usually because they are terminally ill and suffering unbearably.
AD is legal in a growing number of countries around the world. In all these jurisdictions there are strict guidelines and safeguards to ensure AD is not misused. Where AD is an option, it complements palliative care rather than replacing it.
AD is not explicitly legal anywhere in the UK. Terminally ill people who wish to end their suffering more quickly have very few options.
Travelling to a country where their death can be assisted legally isn't a viable option for most, due to the high expense and the difficulties in travelling with a terminal illness. What's more, friends and relatives who accompany or help someone travel abroad for AD may be prosecuted.
Terminally ill people in the UK may therefore resort to taking their own life, leading to botched suicides, or asking the help of loved ones. This puts friends and relatives in a horrendous position: either they must watch their loved one suffer, or they must help them die and risk jail in the process.
The largest poll ever conducted on assisted dying found 84% of people in Britain support a change in the law. This includes 82% of Christians and 90% of nonreligious people.
Many regard refusing people a final relief from unbearable suffering as a harmful act. But strong opposition to AD comes from religious leaders who think AD goes against the will of their gods.
We support the democratic right of all people to contribute to the debate on AD. But policy decisions should be guided by evidence, compassion and respect for the principle of patient autonomy, rather than religious dogma. The views of the general public, professionals and relevant organisations should be fairly reflected at policy level.
Within the National Secular Society, individual members hold a range of views about AD. All are agreed that religious privilege should have no place in the decision-making process.
Take action!
1. Write to your MP
Ask your MP to support properly regulated assisted dying.
2. Share your story
Tell us why you support this campaign, and how you are personally affected by the issue. You can also let us know if you would like assistance with a particular issue.
3. Join the National Secular Society
Become a member of the National Secular Society today! Together, we can separate religion and state for greater freedom and fairness.
Latest updates
Dignity in Dying demonstration on Friday 7 November in support of the Assisted Dying Bill
Posted: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 12:01
The campaign group Dignity in Dying (DiD) will be demonstrating outside Parliament next week on Friday morning 7 November (9am-1pm), to coincide with the House of Lords debate on the Assisted Dying Bill. DiD say they need "as many supporters as possible to show peers they want Parliament to act on assisted dying".
If it becomes law, the Bill would reduce unnecessary suffering of terminally ill people at the end of their lives. Two doctors would have to certify that numerous criteria had been satisfied before prescribing lethal drugs which only the patients themselves could administer.
The NSS's executive director, Keith Porteous Wood, spoke at a meeting in Parliament on Thursday (30 October 2014) to explore any ways in which the Bill could be improved. It was co-chaired by the Bill's principal sponsor, Lord Falconer, and NSS Honorary Associate Baroness Murphy and many of those attending were leaders in branches of medicine and patient care. Mr Wood was told that the Bill had been drafted so as to secure the maximum possible support of health professionals.
A recent YouGov poll found 73% of adults in England and Wales support the proposals" in the Assisted Dying Bill, but many religious groups oppose the Bill and few medical organisations are supporting it.
The National Secular Society has expressed its supports for the right to choose an assisted death. In June when the Bill was first debated in the Lords, NSS President Terry Sanderson said: "The time has now surely come for the law to reflect public attitudes and wishes on this matter. The religious bodies that are agitating to stop the legislation must be told that they cannot have the final word. Few people agree with their stand as one poll after another has shown".
DiD have asked volunteers to "come out in force, once again, to back the Bill". Volunteers can confirm their attendance at the demonstration online here. Dignity in Dying are providing posters and placards and have asked volunteers to wear pink clothing for the demonstration, if possible.
The previous debate, on 18 July ran for almost ten hours of debate with 126 speakers, a record.
Supreme Court decision on assisted dying “encouraging”, say campaigners
Posted: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 17:25
A decision handed down from the Supreme Court today, in the cases of Nicklinson v Ministry of Justice, puts significant pressure on both Parliament and the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to reconsider the law and prosecuting policy on assistance to die, says the campaign group Dignity in Dying.
While the appeals of Nicklinson, Lamb and 'Martin' were unsuccessful, today's judgment makes clear that both Parliament and the DPP should look again at the issues.
With Lord Falconer's Assisted Dying Bill to be debated in the House of Lords on Friday 18th July, the Supreme Court has issued a clear warning to Parliament that if it does not address the issue of assisted dying, the courts may.
Though divided on the issue of whether the Suicide Act's universal prohibition on assisted suicide is incompatible with the human right to private and family life (protected under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)), a majority of the justices ruled that the Court could in theory declare the universal ban on assisted suicide incompatible unless Parliament acts to reform it.
Lord Neuberger, President of the Supreme Court, said in his judgement:
"Parliament now has the opportunity to address the issue of whether section 2 [of the Suicide Act] should be relaxed or modified, and if so how, in the knowledge that, if it is not satisfactorily addressed, there is a real prospect that a further, and successful, application for a declaration of incompatibility may be made."
Similarly, whilst the Court refrained from ordering the DPP to clarify the prosecuting policy on assisted suicide in relation to healthcare professionals, it is clear that she is expected to look again at her policy in the light of comments made in the judgment.
In relation to this issue, Lord Neuberger stated: "If the DPP's policy does not mean what she intends it to mean, and this has been made clear in open court, then it is her duty…to ensure that the confusion is resolved."
Commenting on the decision Sarah Wootton Chief Executive of Dignity in Dying said
"The Suicide Act is now over 50 years old and is out of touch with the problems facing dying Britons in the 21st Century. Public opinion is resolutely in favour of change and now the Supreme Court has clearly indicated that it is only a matter of time before the law is reformed. If Parliament is unwilling to address the issue, then ultimately the Courts will.
"The House of Lords has the opportunity to begin the process of reform when Lord Falconer's Assisted Dying Bill is debated by Peers on 18th July. Ultimately a law passed by Parliament, with clear criteria and upfront safeguards is preferable to decriminalisation by stages. Parliament can provide both greater choice and greater protection; we need a compassionate law that can safeguard choice for those at the end of life."
Dignity in Dying's intervention in the 'Martin' case was supported by Margaret John who has terminal ovarian cancer. Margaret commented:
"A change in the law will not come in time to help me have the choice of an assisted death, but I am happy to have lived to see the Supreme Court giving Parliament the kick it needed to ensure this issue gets the time and attention it deserves."
Roch Maher who is terminally ill with Motor Neurone Disease commented:
"The Supreme Court's decision says that Parliament and the DPP need to face up to the reality of the impact the current law has on people in my position, our families and doctors. I think the Courts have given Parliament its first yellow card, if they don't act then this issue will be back in the Courts so that they can decide a fair way forward for dying people who want choice at the end of life. I hope Parliament will take this very seriously and act now."
Lord Falconer's Bill, supported by Dignity in Dying, would allow terminally ill mentally competent adults the choice of an assisted death. This Bill would not cover people with locked in syndrome, or any other chronic illness or disability, who are not also terminally ill. Subject to passing its Second Reading on 18 July, the Bill will go on to be scrutinised by a Committee of the Whole House where the safeguards and criteria will be reviewed and debated clause by clause."
Terry Sanderson, President of the National Secular Society, said: "The time has now surely come for the law to reflect public attitudes and wishes on this matter. The religious bodies that are agitating to stop the legislation must be told that they cannot have the final word. Few people agree with their stance as one poll after another has shown.
"The debate has been had, the courts have recognised that it would be better for Parliament to put things right and now it is time for a law that is compassionate, safe and in line with the whole of British opinion, not just religious opinion."
Those supporting a change to the law are asked to make their voice heard by emailing party leaders.
