Lynn Ruane (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome all the witnesses and thank them for their contributions. People talk about how long it has taken to deal with this matter but I believe people have been grappling with it since the beginning of time. It is just a case of what happens when you try to legislate for it. It is a matter of life and death and people's decisions. It is quite existential in and of itself. Many of my questions will probably verge into that existentialist space because that is the only way in which I can engage initially with the question of one's subjective sense of life, living, value and dignity and all the words we place in the law and associate with people's implicit rights. Behind these concepts is the subjective experience of them. It is really interesting to try to engage with these so I will try to tease some of this out.

Ms Woods referred to committing the State to valuing equally the lives of all persons. What do she mean by that? Is the value-based merely on existence itself or is there something else? Is it suffering, freedom from suffering, the ability to flourish, the ability to live well or the ability to die well? When statements are made in this regard, are they based on conversations that have been had on what "valuing equally the lives of all persons" actually means?

Another question is on the protection of, or the right to, life. On a very philosophical level, I struggle to uncouple death from life. Regardless of the naming of an implicit right, the mere fact of being born implies you are going to die, so the right is inherent in the very meaning of being human. For me, although there is nothing specific in this regard, it is a case of how we determine the right time to die.

To return to the question of disability, we are saying that people with disabilities should be fully respected and empowered to make decisions in all areas of their lives. This is based on having a disability in and of itself. Of course, we want to meet all the conditions but I am referring to where people see only one option because they do not have access to all that is required to live well with a disability. I wonder whether we are putting forward ideas on the rights of people with disabilities and then somehow diluting them. I struggle to understand what we mean by "coming towards the end of life". We are coming towards the end of life every day, so we are then measuring on the basis of how long we have got left to live. Is that not just arbitrary in and of itself? How do we make such a decision? Somebody with an acquired disability may be expected to live with it for ten years but will say, on having explored all the other options, that is just not what he or she wants. In some cases, disability alone may be the condition on the basis of which a person wants to die. This is not nice and uncomfortable to think and talk about but that might be the reality for some. Do we risk refusing them their right to engage in full consent and their rights to autonomy and agency because the expected lifespan is ten years instead of ten months? How do we begin to say what coming to the end of life is and determine the time period?

I have many more questions but since those I have asked were quite big, I might leave enough time for responses.