Rónán Mullen (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Maybe I will pick up on where Mr. Curran left off. We are all trying to do our best here. One talks about people sitting on the pot, so to speak. Mr. Curran did not mention the pot but if there is that sedentary dynamic, it is because people are afraid of the consequences of what they might open up. It is not just Ireland that has not legislated; most jurisdictions in the world have not. Britain, which many would call a very liberal country in many ways, has been wrestling with this and there is still a concern.

In a way, the phrase "slippery slope" is not nice because it sounds very imprecise and associated with some kind of glib argument, but if one tries to put flesh on it one concludes it reflects the concern that things will change in a way that goes beyond just acceding to the person's choice. If we could address an individual's choice and be sure of no consequences for others whose lives might pan out differently if this step were not taken, the argument would be much more clear-cut in people's eyes. However, the concern is that things do change. There are people who do not want to pay for complex health treatments and there are bean counters in the system. There are reported cases, in places like Oregon, of where people have been told by their insurance companies that their cancer healthcare would not be covered but that assisted dying was facilitated and paid for under their plan. Therefore, at its essence this is a discussion about whether what is proposed could be implemented in a way that would never impact upon other people or whether there are people who would opt for assisted suicide who would not do so in other circumstances. I do not believe anybody is coming at it from a dogmatic perspective.

I agree with Deputies Lahart and Pa Daly. Everybody is entitled to their deepest beliefs about the meaning of life. Insofar as people have a faith reason, it is often down to the pastoral. It is about how to pursue the common good and help people's welfare in the final analysis.

Mr. Curran is strong on choice. In Switzerland, a reason is not asked for so for that reason, there is no change in the Swiss situation. A person has it for the asking. If I am not mistaken, they only verify consent to see that there is no vested interest in the party bringing it about. For that reason, we are not going to have the social slippage and the issues Professor Theo Boer worried about whereas if we bring it in and we talk about safeguards, the first thing to go might be the safeguards. That is the problem. If we bring it in without safeguards, we need not expect slippage because we have gone to a full choice model and, therefore, the person who has depression or a disability cannot be denied the request.