Rónán Mullen (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I think at some point, as a committee, we probably need to think more about what is available in terms of the management of pain and discomfort and sedation. I know that does not address the demand for autonomy but it deals with pain perhaps in a way that hedges against the risk of there being unidentified victims of a change in the law, which I think is what we are talking about here, or trying to do so.

On the subject of depression raised by Dr. Doherty, does she think that if, for example, assisted suicide was there and let us even say there was a protocol whereby there was a check for depression – she says it might be difficult to do that – forgive me for using the phrase but could it be like Schrodinger's cat, in that the existence of an option to have one's life ended changes one's perception such that even the desire to go for treatment for depression might be compromised? Is that something we need to consider in terms of unintended consequences of a change in the law?

I would also like to ask another question if there is time. It was claimed by the Dignitas representative some weeks ago that if you change the law, you are at least preventing people from committing suicide in very violent ways. That is characterising what was said very bluntly. Dr. Doherty's study on the relationship between suicide and assisted suicide regimes seems to suggest, however, that it actually does not decrease suicide at all. Did that surprise her? If one takes it as a sometimes unstated assumption that at least it would mean that some people who might otherwise have recourse to suicide will now use assisted suicide, but that does not seem to be happening. Does that mean that more people are committing suicide as a result of some kind of new social messaging or does it mean something else?