Ms Rachel Woods:

I thank Deputy Lahart. He asked first about the context for decriminalising suicide. The 1993 Act was obviously 30 years ago. Prior to that, it was a common law offence, which had existed for a long time in the past. I cannot profess to be an expert on the rationale for the introduction of the law 30 years ago, but it was a move towards recognising that people have a right to make that decision for themselves and that people who are contemplating, who attempt or who commit suicide are in a place in their own lives where they are making very difficult decisions. It was a recognition that it is a matter of help and support, rather than a criminal matter. That was the general rationale for decriminalising suicide.

The rationale for retaining the offence to assist somebody with that was very much driven by the possibility of abuse. While a person may make a decision in relation to their own life and their own bodily autonomy, when another person becomes involved in that, it is a very different decision. This committee will grapple with the very complex issues around when or if a person should be allowed to assist somebody yet we have to recognise that there will be a possibility that people will seek the suicide of somebody else not for the benefit of that other person, but for their own benefit or for other reasons. That is why the criminal law remains an important factor in this. In the absence of a very carefully considered regime - should it be a decision of the Oireachtas to introduce one - the safeguards that will be needed cannot be overstated. I say this because there are people who could and would abuse a loophole or the legalisation of assisted suicide. There is a significant difference between a decision a person makes entirely on their own, and a decision somebody else is involved in making about another person's life.

The second question Deputy Lahart asked was about the distinction in the language. Different people in this debate who have different perspectives will use different language. That language can be very emotive. It is a good question. There are definitions of assisted dying and assisted suicide that I myself have looked into and am working from. The term “assisted dying” tends to be used as a broader term. It refers to helping someone else to die. It includes both euthanasia and assisted suicide. There is a distinction between those two; euthanasia tends to refer to an intervention that is taken to end another person's life, where a doctor or the other person involved takes the final act. On the other hand, in assisted suicide, while there is an intervention by another person to assist a person, the final act is taken by the person themselves. That is generally the distinction and the language the Department works from. As I mentioned in my opening statement, we will also use the language in the Statute Book when referring to that.

The Deputy asked about the intention of the Supreme Court in the decision in the Fleming case. I am very reluctant to tell him what was in the minds of our Supreme Court justices at the time. Yet, two things are very clear from that judgment, namely, that the Constitution does not guarantee a right to suicide or to assisted suicide, and also that it does not prohibit the Oireachtas from legislating. That was the key point that the court wanted to make clear. There is scope within the Constitution to provide a legislative framework for assisted dying and, if the Oireachtas were to choose to do that, it needs to be very careful about the safeguards and the framework it puts in place.