State-Funded Homicide? – Manuel Mangani

Just a clump of cells? 

”Just a clump of cells’’ is the cliched mantra which is often intoned by those who describe themselves as pro-choice, when faced with the accusation that abortion is nothing less than the deliberate killing of a human life. But we all know – or should know – that there is a distinct human life within the mother’s womb. We should also know that this life within the womb is equipped not only with its own genetically distinct and unique identity, but also with the ability to develop all those characteristics which form a fully-fledged human.

Does this mean that any deliberate termination of a human life inside the mother’s womb is tantamount to homicide, if and when one intentionally brings about the destruction of that life? If we define homicide as the deliberate killing of human personby another human person we find ourselves immediately mired in the controversy of what constitutes personhood.

Personhood is not a scientific concept. Personhood is a legal and philosophical concept.

On this basis abortion would therefore be clearly and unequivocally inadmissible.

One of the great debates within the abortion controversy is the question of whether, in its early stages, the zygote/embryo is to be considered a person. Personhood is not a scientific concept. If there is a human biological development which unequivocally signifies that the human life is, as from that moment, to be considered a human person we do not know what it is.

Personhood is a legal and philosophical concept. In so far as the law and philosophical ideas are changeable, so is personhood in this sense. Legally and philosophically one may ‘’decide’’ that a human being is to be considered a person right from birth. But human intuition would rebel against such a definition: how can a particular individual be considered a person the moment he or she emerges from within the mother’s womb but not one second before? Or five minutes before, or two hours, or even seventy-two hours, before? And so on.

Some would take issue with the adoption of a definition of abortion on purely legal and philosophical grounds and would ascribe personhood to all human life which is endowed with at least rudimentary brain structures.  The brain starts to form at around the sixth week of gestation which is quite early in the developmental journey inside the womb. However, this position does not quite satisfy the argument that even within the earliest stages of human pre-birth development the individual human life carries within each and every cell the ability to develop all human tissues and organs – what is technically known as toti-potency. What if it is this characteristic rather than a cerebral structure which is objectively the hallmark of personhood?

We simply do not know what objectively, as distinct from ultimately man-made legal or philosophical considerations, constitutes personhood.  Faced with this situation the only morally acceptable position is to apply the precautionary principle:  we must take care to protect all human life which could possibly be a human person. On this basis abortion would therefore be clearly and unequivocally inadmissible.

What Does It Mean to Be Pro-life?

What Does It Mean to Be Pro-life?

The definition of being pro-life, as stated by https://www.thefreedictionary.com/, is “advocating the legal protection of human embryos and foetuses, especially by favouring the outlawing of abortion on the ground that it is the taking of a human life.”

But being pro-life is so much more than that!

Being pro-life is not just about opposing abortion. It is also about being in favour of anything that protects and preserves life at all stages, from the moment of conception until natural death. It involves the promotion of life as being precious and cherished. It calls for the nurturing of life of all human beings, young and old, and providing sanctuary in practical ways to those who need it. It entails offering physical and emotional support to those who are suffering or infirm and safeguarding the life of those who are mentally unable to think for themselves.

Being pro-life means just that—for life!

There are many misconceptions about people who are pro-life in today’s society. When someone states that they are pro-life, others automatically assume that they are:

  • deeply religious and/or influenced by their belief in God
  • anti-science
  • opposed to women and their rights
  • unsympathetic towards victims of rape and incest
  • uncaring about women who find themselves facing an unwanted pregnancy
  • unwilling to help people who are suffering

These and other similar views are a very false reflection of who a pro-lifer really is.

A person who is pro-life can be an atheist or a believer. They can be Catholic, or Hindu, or following any other religion—or even no religion at all. The root of respecting life has nothing to do with theological beliefs or non-beliefs. It actually stems from the simple basic fact that every life is precious because it is alive.

And this remains true whether that life is in the womb or outside it; whether young or old; whether physically or mentally ill; whether sick or dying. There is obviously nothing wrong with being religious or believing in God. But it doesn’t automatically make a person pro-life. Loving and protecting life does!

Being in favour of life does not automatically exclude science from the equation either.

On the contrary, pro-lifers support and promote that which science continues to reveal—the main point being that life begins at conception, and therefore it deserves protection and respect from that very point onwards. The advances in science have also offered us an exclusive view of the baby inside the womb. There is also a better understanding of the side effects of birth control medication and the morning after pill on a woman’s body and her reproductive organs. And these may also be a detriment to the process of life at its early stages.

Furthermore, science continues to discover new ways of carrying out medical and routine procedures whilst safeguarding life at all times. New treatments and medications are constantly being identified to help those who are at the mercy of a terminal or debilitating disease. Therefore, science does play a very important part in the pro-life movement, especially when it is used to sustain and save life at all cost.

A pro-lifer seeks the safety and security of the life of every other person other than themselves.

This includes all men and women, whether inside the womb or out of it, at whatever age. Opposing abortion therefore does not mean that a pro-lifer is unaffected by the plight of the young girl or woman who is carrying an unwanted child, or that they do not care about the circumstances, such as rape and incest, that led to the pregnancy. It does not mean that the pro-lifer wants only to save the life of the baby, without thinking about its wellbeing after it is born. It does not entail ignoring the adults in the equation either, especially when abuse and violence is involved.

Opposing abortion means that both the lives of the woman and the unborn child are precious. In fact, many pro-life groups offer pregnancy support through crisis centres, counselling services, adoption agencies, fostering, and many other facilities that will aid the mother in practical and financial ways, as well as ensure the safety of the child.

The concept that abortion is perfectly safe for the mother is far from true.

Besides being in itself anything but a simple procedure, abortion leaves the woman with numerous physical, emotional, and psychological side effects that are largely dismissed. The truth is that women do die from abortion. They sometimes risk losing their fertility. They do end up in emergency rooms with massive complications from the procedure.

Additionally, the psychological harm often does not show up until years later. But then, as countless women testify, it often attacks with a vengeance. This is why pro-lifers support women who are dealing with unplanned pregnancies. This is the reason these women are presented with alternatives to termination—and offered counselling if they did opt for one.

This is why being pro-life means being in favour of women and their wellbeing.

As for the rights of the woman over her body, the pro-life movement accepts and respects the fact that she is entitled to them in full. However, once a baby is conceived, there is no longer one person but two, both of which have rights, the most basic being the right to live. The woman needs to take into consideration that the other person—the child in the womb—also deserves to have rights just as much as she does.

Even if the baby is conceived after rape, he or she is a victim just like its mother. That baby certainly does not deserve to pay for someone else’s crime with its own life. When the child is wanted, the mother is ready to fight for its life and for its rights, even when it’s still inside her womb. Why then should it be any different if the baby is unwanted? All of us, from the moment of conception, deserve a chance to live, to be born, to exist…to just be!

And what about the terminally ill, the infirm, and the disabled?

In all these cases, pro-life groups are more than willing to help promote improvements in palliative care and support for those who need it. Pro-lifers strongly oppose the deliberate ending of someone’s life. This is not because they do not care, but because euthanasia gives rise to a culture of death that makes life disposable.

It may be understandable that when a person is in great pain or is unable to look after even their basic needs on their own, they would want it all to end as soon as possible. In fact, a patient has every right to refuse medical treatment which will only serve to prolong their suffering.

But being deliberately helped to die by those who, by profession, should be saving lives is contradictory and anti-life.

And what about all the instances when euthanasia is used to solve depression? Or because something goes wrong in one’s life? Or even to take away the life of someone who is, or has become, disabled? The popular rhetoric is always “Why shouldn’t I do what I like with my own life?”

But this question completely ignores the fact that euthanasia cases represent a very small number of cases, compared to the hundreds of thousands of cherished people represented by disability groups worldwide, who are all in favour of protecting their vulnerable members.

Palmer Williams summed up the whole pro-life concept in the best possible way.

An Associate Counsel with the American Center for Law and Justice—which focuses on government affairs, sanctity of life, and international law—Williams stated:

“Above all, the pro-life movement is deeply rooted in the fundamental belief that all life, no matter how small or poor or unwanted, is worth protecting. 

Those of us who are pro-life fight for the inherent dignity within every human life, no matter what the age or stage of human development. Our advocacy does not end in the delivery room. In fact, that is only where it begins.

To be pro-life is to defend the unborn, the widows, the disabled, and the orphans, like organizations serving those with special needs or helping families adopt orphans. To be pro-life is to serve the least of these in communities next door and across oceans, like organizations who serve the homeless or refugees who have fled war zones. To be pro-life is to build institutions that promote the flourishing of all human beings.”

Source: http://aclj.org/pro-life/what-does-it-really-mean-to-be-pro-life

 

Life Network Foundation worried about bill which may exclude ‘unborn children’, introduce euthanasia

Life Network Foundation worried about bill which may exclude ‘unborn children’, introduce euthanasia

Bill no. 198 currently tabled in parliament is “seriously preoccupying” as Government may change the meaning and substance of words like ‘person’ or ‘life’ in Article 33 of the Constitution and may exclude “unborn children” from the definition of ‘persons’, Life Network Foundation Malta said in a press release.

The Life Network Foundation describes itself as a life affirming organization, where they work to raise awareness on issues related to human life, marriage, and family based on a Catholic ethic of life.

The Bill in question states:

“Where any Act, whether passed before or after this Act, confers a power upon a public authority which exercises regulatory, supervisory, compliance, investigatory or enforcement functions to impose a civil penalty, an administrative fine or other civil or administrative pecuniary or non-pecuniary sanction or administrative measure, such a penalty, fine, sanction or measure may be interpreted as constituting a punishment of a criminal nature and the infringement in respect of which the said penalty, fine, sanction or measure may be imposed may be interpreted as substantively constituting a criminal offence subject to the following provisions of this article.”

The Life Research Unit, which is the Advisory Legal Unit within Life Network Foundation, voiced their concerns over such a bill.

“It is very worrying that this bill may go against and nullify sentences of the Constitutional Court which have established that in all the stages procedures which may lead to administrative fines amounting to thousands of Euros, citizens have the right to appear in a court of justice, rather than in front of a tribunal, officials or public corporations,” the statement read.

The foundation said that the proposed Interpretation Act, the legislator is “trying to change the meaning of the Constitution with a simple majority in Parliament instead of the required two thirds.”

This is a “highly disquieting precedent”, the Life Network Foundation said, as according to them, if such a proposal comes into effect, “a nasty precedent will have been created, whereby in the near or distant future any Government enjoying a majority of one may change the meaning and substance of words” such as ‘person’ and ‘life’.

The foundation also said that the Government “will allow the Equality Board in Bill No 97 (Equality) to inflict large administrative fines (20,000 Euros fine and penalties of 500 Euro daily) on organisations and/or institutions who are deemed guilty by lay persons nominated by government of ‘discrimination’.” They said that, as the Constitutional Court notes, only the Courts of Law can impose fines and penalties like these.

“The Constitution should remain the highest protection for the law in our country. It is very important for people to be aware that this precedent can constitute a threat to the Constitution. Therefore, we call upon all NGOs and others who are conversant with the law to express their concerns as well. We request the highest authorities in the land, including His Excellency the President of Malta to ensure that the Maltese Constitution is not undermined.”

This is www.independent.com.mt opinion piece

https://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2021-03-25/local-news/Life-Network-Foundation-worried-about-bill-which-may-exclude-unborn-children-introduce-euthanasia-6736232063  

Photo sourced from https://unsplash.com/@tingeyinjurylawfirm   

2020 a year of Significant Pro-Life Victories for Right To Life UK

2020 a year of Significant Pro-Life Victories for Right To Life UK

Right To Life UK has had a challenging and busy year, with the abortion lobby attempting to exploit the COVID-19 crisis at every step to seek changes to abortion legislation and policy.

Right To Life UK have been able to put up a strong fight every time they have attempted to advance their campaign in Parliament, the media and amongst the wider public.

Alongside this, we have been able to secure a number of key victories and achievements, here are the main achievements:

1. Defeat of major attempt to introduce extreme abortion law to England and Wales

In July the abortion lobby staged a major attempt to introduce an extreme abortion law to England and Wales by hijacking the Domestic Abuse Bill.

The attempt to hijack the UK Government’s flagship Domestic Abuse Bill with two extreme abortion proposals failed, in a major pro-life victory.

To put in perspective how embarrassing a defeat on this amendment would have been for the abortion lobby, if they had taken the amendment through to a vote and lost, this would have been the first time that a pro-abortion amendment or Bill had been defeated in a vote in UK history.

Thank you to the thousands of people that rallied friends and family to email their MPs. MPs received more emails ahead of this vote than they have ever received ahead of an abortion vote.

Thank you also to our supporters who gave so generously to enable us to have the resources in place to run a very large campaign against these amendments.

We spent 18 months preparing for this battle. This project has included building a large network of relationships with active pro-life MPs in Parliament. This helped to ensure that there was a very strong case made to the Speaker from this network of pro-life MPs to identify the most extreme abortion amendment as out of scope, and to help mobilise MPs across Parliament against the remaining abortion amendment.

Alongside this, we worked to place a large number of positive pro-life articles in the mainstream media to provide the right momentum in the public eye for our side over this period.

The final key component has been building a very large base of grassroots supporters in every constituency in the country. This meant that when we asked people like you to email their MPs, it became crystal clear that a large number of people in their constituencies did not want these extreme changes.

None of this would have been in place in order to help achieve this amazing victory without your generous financial support. Thank you.

2. Continued strong opposition to assisted suicide

We have taken the strategic, media and digital expertise that we built up from working with a large group of allies to defeat the Marris Assisted Suicide Bill, to continue to ensure assisted suicide is not legalised.

The decisive win has meant that it has been difficult for the assisted suicide lobby to bring forward legislation on this issue. They have therefore been working quietly behind the scenes to try and grow their numbers ahead of another attempt to change the law. During 2020 we have focused on defensive work in Westminster to help limit their advance.

We have also faced an onslaught of activity from the assisted suicide lobby targeting the Royal Colleges, British Medical Association etc. to attempt to get them to drop their opposition to assisted suicide. This tactic is being used as it will make it easier for the assisted suicide lobby to pass legislation introducing assisted suicide if it does not face opposition from the medical establishment. We have been working with allied organisations to block these attempts.

In 2021, we expect the assisted suicide lobby to make a new attempt to introduce assisted suicide and continue their work to move the Royal Colleges from their current stance of opposing assisted suicide. We will be working hard to oppose them at every step along the way and will need your help with contacting MPs and other activities.

3. Abortion (Cleft Lip, Cleft Palate and Clubfoot) Bill launched

Currently abortion is allowed up to birth for babies with disabilities including cleft lip, cleft palate and club foot.

This year a cross-party group of MPs from the three largest parties in the UK Parliament have brought forward the Abortion (Cleft Lip, Cleft Palate and Clubfoot) Bill to raise the profile of this issue in Parliament. This Bill would change the law to clarify that cleft palate, cleft lip and club foot are not grounds for abortion in the UK.

This Bill seeks to address the disability discrimination inherent in our abortion law: currently abortion is permitted beyond the 24-week standard limit (which is already far beyond the time limit in most European countries of 12 weeks) to birth if a baby is diagnosed with a cleft lip, cleft palate, or club foot – all of which can be treated with surgery and therapy following birth.

Alongside the launch of the Bill, we worked with people with these conditions and their families to launch the Stand Up and Smile campaign to raise the profile of this issue outside Parliament.

As a result of the campaign, thousands of people have written to their MP asking them to support the Bill and a large number of MPs have signed an Early Day Motion supporting the Bill. The Bill has also been covered extensively by the mainstream media including articles in The Guardian, The Times and the Mail on Sunday.

The Bill is due for a second reading on 21 March 2021. We will be in contact ahead of then with details on how you can help build further support for a law change in this important area.

4. New digital news platform launched and now the most visited pro-life website in Europe

We have just launched our Right To Life News digital news platform. This has been launched so that we can reach a far wider audience of people with pro-life news that will keep people informed and help change even more hearts and minds on life issues.

Our website is already the most viewed pro-life website in Europe and the fourth most viewed pro-life website in the world – and this digital news platform has been built to enable us to reach even more people. 

Our digital team has spent a number of months building the platform from the ground up so that it provides visitors with the world-class user-driven design experience that they would expect from a platform run by a major global media outlet. We have also designed the platform so that it is easily viewable across desktop, mobile and tablet, as increasing numbers of people are accessing content on their mobile phones and tablet devices. 

We are concerned that some media outlets are moving to position themselves as journalists ‘campaigning’ for abortion access; the most recent example being the changes to the Guardian’s guidelines on how they report on abortion, a move which follows long-term bias from the BBC in their language guidelines. If this trend continues, it will become increasingly difficult for the mainstream public to be informed on the pro-life side of debates on issues such as abortion.

Right To Life News ensures that we have a platform where reliable pro-life news is accessible to everyone in the UK and beyond – and that we are not limited by what editors in major newspapers choose to publish. 

Thank you to the many supporters who have regularly used the news service and shared the articles: you have played a big part in making this news service a success. 

This is only the beginning. In 2021 we will be rolling out further plans to increase the number of people we are reaching through the news service. This includes the further roll-out of our syndication programme, where we form relationships with media outlets and allow them to republish our articles free of charge. This has already enabled our articles to be republished by a number of major media outlets with very large audiences – this all helps to ensure we reach many more people and change many more hearts and minds on life issues.

5. Growing network of MPs and peers to further our proactive political strategy

In the run up to the General Election at the end of last year, we ran the Vote for Both Lives campaign, a major initiative that we rolled out throughout the country in the lead up to election day.  The campaign resulted in hundreds of thousands of emails being sent to MP candidates along with people visiting their candidates in person to encourage them to sign the Both Lives Pledge.

Over 200 MP candidates signed the Both Lives Pledge making a commitment to support pro-life legislation in this parliament.

This election campaign has meant that there are a number of new MPs who have committed to support pro-life legislation in this parliament. The campaign was also part of a wider shift in the make-up of parliament, which saw a large number of pro-abortion MPs either step down or lose their seats.

This left us with a new parliament with considerably better numbers in place to fight the push from the abortion lobby to introduce extreme abortion legislation along with a larger team of pro-life MPs to support positive pro-life legislation that is brought forward during this new parliament.

In 2020, our Public Affairs team has worked to offer support to the large number of new pro-life MPs who entered Parliament after the General Election, and grow their network further.

This has built on the already large number of MPs and Peers we have a direct relationship with, and has enabled us to work with them to defeat the introduction of an extreme abortion law to England and Wales along with a number of other initiatives.

This work ensures that life issues stay on the agenda in Parliament and that we are building a better political situation for the unborn child and pregnant women.

6. Shining a light on the millions spent from the UK’s international aid budget on abortion

Over the year, we have been working to expose the enormous amount of international aid funding that is going from the UK to provide abortion services in developing countries.

This work has focused on putting pressure from within Parliament on the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office on this issue. We have also helped raise the issue in the mainstream media so that the wider public is aware of the negative impact that this spending is having in developing countries.

The biggest single donor to international abortion giant Marie Stopes International (now rebranded as MSI Reproductive Choices) is the UK taxpayer, through the UK international aid funding that is given to the organisation each year. UK international aid funding is also given to a number of other organisations that provide abortions in developing countries and lobby Governments to introduce extreme abortion legislation to these countries.

Attempts backed by international abortion organisations to introduce extreme abortion legislation to Kenya and Malawi have thankfully both been stalled in 2020 due to strong opposition.

In 2021, we expect there to be many more challenges on this front. MSI Reproductive Choices has set a goal of vastly increasing the number of abortions that it is performing in developing countries over the next ten years – and the new US adminstration is likely to reverse the previous administration’s restrictions on funding abortions overseas. 

This will mean that international abortion providers will likely see a large increase in the amount of funding they receive to spend on abortion along with lobbying teams dedicated to attempting to change legislation on abortion in developing countries.

7. Our digital strategy is changing even more hearts and minds of a new generation online

In 2020 we have worked on growing our digital strategy to reach an even larger audience online with smart, relevant and viral-focused content.

Our social media channels across Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, Pinterest, LinkedIn and TikTok have reached a new generation of people on a massive scale allowing us to reach tens of millions of people across these platforms during the year.

We have further built our in-house capability to produce world-class digital content – all of this has been produced in-house for a fraction of the cost of hiring leading agencies.

Alongside our social media strategy, we have further developed our website with a focus on making it the go-to tool that any member of the public can use to easily contact their MPs and access the latest information on life issues.

This year, within hours of a key development in Parliament, thousands of emails have been able to be sent directly to MPs. This ensures that MPs are aware that there is a very large and active grassroots movement in their constituencies who are pro-life and care about how their MPs vote on these issues.

The feedback we have had from MPs has been overwhelmingly positive as they have felt that there is real momentum for positive pro-life change from within their constituencies.

8. Our media strategy continues to help shape the mainstream media narrative on life issues

Concrete policy change on life issues can only happen in conjunction with wider cultural change outside parliament.

A key part of our work to change the wider culture on these issues is ensuring that pro-life messaging is heard in the mainstream media on a regular basis, and is supporting positive changes that are being brought forward in parliament.

In 2020 we have further grown our media reach with a big focus on getting positive pro-life messaging regularly featured in the mainstream media.

Our focus on mainstream media has been so important because this allows us to reach a large middle ground of people on this issue, with a focus on areas where research shows the majority of people are very open to seeing a positive political and cultural change to our abortion laws.

Wherever possible, we have ensured that the spokespeople we use as the voice on these issues in the media are most likely to connect with mainstream audiences. This has included women who have been personally affected by abortion, people with disabilities and medical experts.

9. Our education & training programmes are developing a new generation of pro-lifers

We have continued our work to develop a new generation of pro-lifers who are equipped to effectively communicate an evidence-based case for positive change on life issues.

This includes our Media and Communications Training Programme which provides young pro-lifers with an understanding of key pro-life issues and the ability to communicate these issues in the media. The programme equips participants with the necessary skills and techniques to deliver strong interviews, control difficult and hostile questions and to deliver an authentic perspective on life issues. 

Our Internship Programme has been designed to introduce student right-to-lifers and new graduates to the world of the right-to-life movement and its work across the media, politics, education and grassroots engagement. In 2020 we have seen more of our graduates go on to a number of important roles in a variety of sectors. 

Together with our wider digital outreach, these programmes work to enable us to educate and develop a new movement of young people who are passionate about achieving positive change on life issues. In 2021 we will be expanding our education and training programmes further.

Ref: www.rightolife.co.uk 

UK Government rejects pressure from assisted suicide lobby to review law

UK Government rejects pressure from assisted suicide lobby to review law

The Government has announced it has no plans to review the law on assisted suicide or to issue a call for evidence.

In response to a Parliamentary question, the Government announced that “any change to the law in this area must be for individual Parliamentarians to consider as an issue of conscience, rather than a decision for Government”.

The announcement came after a question from assisted suicide supporter, Andrew Mitchell MP.

Assisted suicide campaigners have been putting pressure on the Government to undertake a review of the current law on assisted suicide.

The Government’s response is consistent with the continued Parliamentary rejection of assisted suicide legislation at the beginning of this year.

Through the courts

Parliament has consistently rejected attempts by the assisted suicide lobby to introduce assisted suicide. The Marris-Falconer Bill was defeated in 2015, with 330 to 118 voting against introducing assisted suicide.

Assisted suicide supporters have since attempted to pass assisted suicide legislation through the courts. All such attempts have so far failed. Last year, the high court said the courts were not the place to decide moral issues. In a ruling concerning a man with motor neurone disease who wanted to be assisted in suicide, the court said: “In our judgment the courts are not the venue for arguments that have failed to convince parliament”.

Similarly, at the beginning of this year, the Lord Chancellor Robert Buckland QC confirmed the Government has “no plans” to introduce assisted suicide legislation.

Support among Parliament, the courts and doctors for changes in assisted suicide legislation, which protects the most vulnerable, remain low. A recent BMA survey found that 84% of doctors in palliative medicine would not be willing to perform euthanasia on a patient should the law ever change.

Pushing the boundaries

Calls for the legalisation of assisted suicide come at the same time as a global pandemic and lockdowns, which are having an adverse effect on many people’s mental health. In October of this year in Canada, a 90-year-old woman was euthanised because she said she couldn’t cope with another lockdown.

Countries, like Canada, which have already legalised the practice, reveal that the motivations for assisted suicide are largely social and not medical. For example, in 2019 Canada reported that more than a third (34%) of those who opted for “medical assistance in dying” cited concerns of being a burden to family or carers. A further 13.7% cited “isolation or loneliness” as their reason for procuring an assisted suicide.

While proposed changes to assisted suicide legislation would likely not permit an assisted suicide under these circumstances, other countries which have introduced supposedly restricted assisted suicide and euthanasia legislation, have seen an expansion of their laws as medical professionals and activists push the boundaries of acceptable practice.

Euthanasia has been legal in the Netherlands since 2002. The law permits voluntary euthanasia for anyone over the age of 16, and children aged 13-15 can be euthanised with their parents’ consent. Earlier this year, the Dutch government said it would be changing the regulations to allow doctors to end the lives of terminally ill children between the ages of one and twelve. Non-voluntary euthanasia is already available for Dutch babies before the age of one.

Right To Life UK’s spokesperson, Catherine Robinson, said, “This latest Government rejection of calls to change the law on assisted suicide is welcome news. Throughout the COVID-19 restrictions, many people are suffering and sadly, some have ended their own lives. To introduce assisted suicide in England and Wales at this time would have particularly disastrous consequences for the most vulnerable in our society”.

 

This is a RightToLife.org opinion piece

Ref: https://righttolife.org.uk/news/government-rejects-pressure-from-assisted-suicide-lobby-to-review-law