Families Unable to Challenge Assisted Suicide

Another very grave flaw has emerged in UK plans to legalise euthanasia. Lawyers are warning that under the assisted suicide Bill currently being debated, once a ruling has been made that a person meets the criteria for assisted suicide, it cannot be challenged by relatives.

As Kim Leadbeater’s Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill proceeds through its next stage, legal academics have been highlighting the asymmetry in the proposed legislation between the patient’s right to appeal a decision if an assisted suicide is not approved, and the fact that there is no corresponding right of appeal for a family member to challenge an application that has already been approved.

Dr Yuan Yi Zhu, an Assistant Professor of International Relations and International Law at Leiden University, said “Firstly, if the High Court approves the application, there’s no right to appeal from that decision”.

“There is a right of appeal if an application is refused, but there’s no appeal if the application is successful. So, already here you have a very troubling asymmetry”.

He added “Kim Leadbeater says that anorexia and bulimia would not be qualifying conditions under her legislation. However, it is a fact that with eating disorders, especially anorexia, if you stop eating, you can bring your life expectancy to six months or less”.

Dr Zhu explained that the judge’s powers are limited because a judge is under no obligation to hear from people, although he/she “may” choose to do so.

Former Government Minister Ann Widdecombe also identified this as one of the Bill’s “horrors”, saying “Appeals work only one way: one can appeal against a refusal but a relative, concerned about suspected coercion, for example, cannot appeal against an affirmative decision and coroners cannot investigate”.

The lack of family involvement or input in the assisted suicide Bill was a subject of intense controversy even before the Bill was debated. In November, former head of the High Court’s family division, Sir James Munby accused Leadbeater of promoting a “profoundly unsatisfactory scheme” open to abuse. He was particularly concerned the Bill appears to permit judges to decide if a patient meets the criteria for an assisted suicide “without hearing from the patient and with no input of any sort from the patient’s partner or relatives”.

“In short, an application could be dealt with: In accordance with a wholly inadequate procedure, and without the public knowing anything about it – not even the name of the judge”.

“The fact is that judges are kept up to the mark by two things: having to comply with proper procedure and being exposed to the public gaze” he added.

Munby said his concerns were made worse by the fact that the Bill does not allow appeals in cases where assisted suicide has been approved, which he said was an “extraordinary” omission. This, he said, could leave a patient’s loved ones unable to challenge a decision for assisted suicide once made.