From a comment piece by Terry Pratchett in today’s Times:
Earlier this year a commission of the great and the good was set up by myself and another gentleman of means, to look at practices in other countries where assisted dying is commonplace and to report on how it could be evolved to suit Britain.
It looked for abuses — there were none. The countries that allow assisted dying are careful democracies, just like us. It’s not a free for all. There are rules, rules everywhere. Some time ago I set out with Rob, my assistant, to track down every rumour of assisted dying abuse on the planet and I have to say that when electronically cornered, people making allegations of abuse lamely said that it was on the internet.
Why is it that opponents of change don’t want to engage with concrete evidence that answers their concerns?
Evidence of a slippery slope and relaxing of practice is not supported by the evidence from the Netherlands or from anywhere else where the law is more compassionate.
Full article here (£)
‘Why is it that opponents of change don’t want to engage with concrete evidence that answers their concerns?’
Because, Terry, they have no concerns about this matter: their so-called ‘concerns’ are in fact prejudices, which of course brook no rational challenge.
“I don’t want it, ergo I won’t consider it.” Ring any bells?