The Hardest Decision of All

A groundbreaking decision by the House of Lords to back MS sufferer Debbie Purdy in her fight to clarify the law on assisted suicide has re-ignited the debate on whether people should be given the right to die. Here Katy Kennedy talks to people on the street about their views on the subject and asks herself what she would do if she had to make the hardest decision of all.

Hi everyone, this week I’d like to talk about something different.
Over lunch I was reading in the newspaper about the decision by the House of Lords to back MS sufferer Debbie Purdy in her battle to clarify the law on assisted suicide. Five Law Lords unanimously backed her call for the Director of Public Prosecutions Keir Starmer QC to state the circumstances in which a person such as her husband might face jail for helping a loved one end their life abroad.
I decided to ask the young couple on the next table a question. They had two lovely sons, and were very friendly.
The question I wanted to ask was a very personal one and is about something I’ve thought over on many occasion, should I find myself with a terribly painful and terminal illness.
Should an individual be allowed to choose an Assisted Suicide (in Switzerland, or wherever it was available) and have their loving family accompany them to help them take this journey with love yet without risking prosecution by the authorities?
I know it’s not an option for many people on religious or moral grounds, but the question is, should we as individuals have the option to choose? Mr and Mrs Cockcroft from Bradford (ages between 30 and 35) both immediately said “Yes” when asked.
Another lady told me about her father. He has Motor Neuron Disease, and is wasting away. He is fed by tube, and has lost the ability to speak. He faces many years of agony trapped in a body that has, in reality, died, yet with a mind that is razor sharp.
He was a brave and dedicated soldier for many years reaching the rank of Regimental Sergeant Major and later served with distinction in the SAS. His wife died some years ago, and he relies on carers.
His daughter feels it is a form of human torture that he must endure this terrible disease. He struggles for breath, and is living in his own hell, and she would be happy to be with him and gently and lovingly set him free from the burden of life, which for him, has no quality. Yet he cannot chose to be free of it all, as it would put his children in a terrible position as they could well be prosecuted and sent to prison if they helped him.
He also has concerns about his insurance. This is the only inheritance he has to leave for his family. Apparently most policies dictate that suicide would nullify the contract.
In Britain, it is possible to write a Living Will and ask not to be resuscitated if you suffer a heart attack or stroke, but in the end, the physician has the ultimate decision.
The same agonizing decision must be made if someone was on a life support machine and their family was advised to turn it off as the patient was brain dead. Many people have quoted this as an example of hypocrisy; if you can do this, then why can’t you choose to die?
The difference is that once the machine is switched off, or the patient is not resuscitated, then nature takes its course, and the patient either recovers or dies naturally.
Mr and Mrs Williams from Surry, are in a different age group of 50 to 60 years, and queried why vets were allowed to put a suffering animal out of its misery, yet doctors were not able to do the same for humans. They said it should be allowed, though under strict supervision and legalities.
Barry and Gordon, both aged 24, and their two girlfriends, Lindsay and Sian, also in their twenties, from London, thought they probably would go along with it if one of their parents wanted it, if there was absolutely no hope and no cure. However, they did not agree that it was a good thing for a young person who may not know their own minds. In these cases, they wanted the opportunity to be able to explore other choices.
Mrs Rita Hollingsworth and her friend Tina Jackson from Devon , both in their forties, that I met in Alcala, were staunch Catholics, and said it was definitely against the teachings of the church. But Rita conceded that if she should be diagnosed with terminal cancer and faced months of horrendous pain with only death at the end of that time, she might be forced to reconsider her beliefs. She said she thought God would understand that not everyone had the courage to endure such pain, or face the prospect of the family also having to suffer.
The Royal College of Nurses recently withdrew its opposition to the concept of helping terminally ill patients to commit suicide. Almost half of the RCN’s who responded to a survey said they supported assisted suicide while another forty percent were against it with the rest being neutral. The RCN had opposed assisted suicide since 2004, but now have changed that to a neutral stance.
The shift in their thinking comes after lengthy consultation with their members, and plans to issue guidance to their members. However, allowing staff to provide patients with drugs to end their lives is still illegal.
Most of us hope and `pray never to be in that situation, but I can’t help thinking and wondering what I would do if it arose. I feel that I couldn’t put my family through a long and painful process whereby they would have to put their lives on hold to care for me; and could I suffer the indignities of being totally helpless and need bathing and changing? Could I stand the agony of a dreadful disease knowing I was going to die soon anyway?
I feel I could not. I don’t think I have that kind of courage. I would like to have a choice, and maybe God would give me the strength I need to see it through to the end, but if He didn’t, I also feel that He would understand if I chose to meet Him sooner rather than later.
I think often about Stephen Hawkin, that miracle of a man, living and working within the confines of that terrible condition known popularly as Lou Gehrig’s Disease.
In 1985, while Hawking was working on his first book A Brief History of Time, he fell ill with pneumonia while at CERN (a large particle accelerator) in Geneva, Switzerland.  It was suggested that Hawking be taken off life support, but his family chose against this.  He was flown to Addenbrooke's Hospital in Cambridge, England where a tracheotomy was performed.  The tracheotomy saved his life, but left him without use of his voice.  As a supplement, he uses a computer system equipped with an electronic voice.
He is of course the exception to the rule. He was already a brilliant physicist and world famous by the late sixties, and has been given every possible help to enable his brilliant mind to continue to give us new insight into the cosmos. He is currently working on his Theory of Everything, but fears he may die before he has solved it. He is a remarkable human being and is respected throughout the world.
But he is unique, and while so many of us admire his iron will and brilliant mind, we are just ordinary people and have to cope as best we can.
The more I ponder this dilemma the more confused I get. I still have doubts that I would have the courage to go through with it even though I think I should have the right to choose.
So thank you to the people who took the time and trouble to speak to me about such a controversial and very personal subject, and let’s pray none of us are put in the position of having to make such a heart wrenching  decision.
Until next week, take care of yourselves, and of each other.