Rónán Mullen (Independent) | Oireachtas source

If one considers the idea of "intention" in law, where one presumes to intend the natural and probable consequences of one's actions, it strikes me that from what Dr. McKeown O'Donovan is saying is that she wishes that there might be empirical evidence to show that attitudes do not change. We heard from Professor Theo Boer last week who spoke about the social pressure which seems to have come on people because of euthanasia laws in his country. What one sees is a transformation of attitudes in society. It seems to me that what Dr. McKeown O'Donovan is actually saying is that there is a slippery slope in that people's attitudes change once one introduces this in some form. Is that not what we have to try to consider? People, for example, are more likely to feel a burden where they have severe illness or families may feel, really and truly, that there are better ways to deal with a long and lingering illness.

We must also consider the people who fund healthcare. We have heard of the case in Canada where a formerly elite Paralympian athlete sought a chairlift for her house and was offered euthanasia. Is this not what Dr. Finegan is talking about? Things change once you admit the principle that some people's lives can be ended and that the State is less interested in supporting some people in continuing to live. Is such a change of attitudes not the slippery slope?