Mr. Michael O'Neill:

Much depends on the model that will be considered. The debate to date has largely been on individuals who reach end of life by virtue of a condition. Through medical assessment - we all appreciate that is a complicated scenario - and a reasonable judgment by qualified clincians, an assessment is made that there is a limited period of life likely for that individual, as opposed to the broader piece which now exists in some jurisdictions with regard to individuals who are not nearing end of life but who feel that for whatever reason, be it through physical or psychosocial condition, life is unbearable. The discussion is largely around a situation whereby an individual reaches end of life because of a condition, or an assessment that there is a window or time and they wish at that stage to access a service. There is a legislative framework around that discussion. It comes back to the kinds of issues Deputy Troy raised with regard to the need for very clear criteria for how one assesses that period of time and, as the Senator mentioned, the issues with regard to how this issue comes on the table for individuals; as to whether they make a declaration they wish to explore this; the kind of informed consent and making sure the individuals have capacity, etc.