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

I am grateful to Senator Ruane for reminding us that there are some fundamental philosophical choices and outlooks in play here. I compliment her on that. I have to say that I see a huge distinction. For me, it is about human dignity. Medical intervention is obviously good. It is part of the gift that has evolved through the millennia that we can do these great things to alleviate pain and suffering, to enable people to enjoy life for as long as possible, and to live well for as long as possible. Human dignity demands that one would never violate people by forcing medicine on them. At the same time, it seems to be that the lesson of today's exchanges must surely be that human dignity also demands that one would never deliberately bring about the death of another person, even where that person requested it, because to do so is to compromise good medicine. It has implications not just for that person but for all the other people.

I find it very easy to understand, if a person decides, unusually, to refuse medical care, that other people do not necessarily follow, because it is not seen as a normal thing to do. The whole point is that if you legalise euthanasia, you make it a more normal thing and impact how people see it. It is for another day, Senator Ruane, and I do not call it care, but I will happily show the Senator how the change in legislation following the 2018 referendum has led to vastly expanded numbers of people making decisions. I think there is clear evidence that when you change the law on how the State sees a human life, it changes people's behaviour. I would not have thought that would be hard to argue.

I meant to ask if the witnesses can say more about those other jurisdictions.

I think the claim has been made that there is palliative care in Belgium and the Netherlands and I heard it said that the money has not improved. I would argue that it is very hard to draw any lessons from New Zealand and Australia because it is also very new, but does Professor Watson have any comment on what is happening in those jurisdictions?

I have heard it claimed that it is the middle class and the well-off who will make this decision, and yet when we think about who might be affected by their decisions it is the vulnerable and maybe those who cannot advocate for themselves so effectively. Over time, what cohorts within society do Professor Watson see as being most affected by this?