By Wendi Wicks, The Guardian, 14th November 2019
“How can any MP be able to agree to a measure that endangers a whole community that they are not a member of?”
MPs have voted for a public referendum on the euthanasia bill, asking the vague question, “do you support this bill?”
“It’s to be hoped that the population at large can do a sound job, but that depends on the quality and range of information they get. MPs had a huge range of sound, factual information. But judging from their voting record, many clearly disregarded heaps of it.”
“Yes, there are many individual stories both for and against this bill. All deserve respect because telling them takes effort. But there’s more to good law than basing it on individual stories. It’s about the collective impact on our community. It should be good, safe law for all. That’s what MPs are there to do but didn’t.”
“The opposition we express is consistently based on concerns that society is full of negative, biased and discriminatory attitudes and behaviours, so that people think disabled lives are less worthy. Given this attitude as a basis, the state provides really limited support for us to live well. So it’s disturbing when laws are put up that mean the state will provide the means to die, not live. But that’s where we are now. We aren’t dead yet and we don’t want state-sanctioned death support.”
“A friendly QC commented on my vulnerability to the law thus: “You’re toast.” Me and how many other disabled people?”
Read the full article here.