Letters: why we need assisted dying

A doctor writes

Sir: I have seen a lot of dying in my career as a doctor. Your leading article (‘Licence to kill’, 16 March) shows astonishing naivety about the state of dying pain-free and with dignity in the UK. Outside of a hospice, where only 5 per cent die (well-supported), there is much terrible suffering. Until 2000, GPs and hospitals used opioids in many forms, from syringe drivers to Brompton’s cocktail, to ease death. However, since Harold Shipman the rules have changed and doctors outside of specialist services for the dying are terrified of prescribing the slightest hastening dose. My mother-in-law had an agonising death with terminal cancer in a care home, while a doctor tried and failed for hours to find any relief as he was unable to carry morphine at all. This situation will not change and in my view the only solution is to allow assisted dying within tight rules, as Switzerland has managed for some time.

Tim Manners, retired consultant surgeon

Sutton on the Forest, York

More care needed

Sir: The lead article in last week’s edition is spot on. Assisted dying is a hugely contentious issue and if there are such strong views on both sides, surely we should err on the side of caution.

One of the arguments in favour is the prevention of painful and undignified deaths. But there are better ways of dealing with pain than hastening the end. Improving care should be our priority. There is no need for anyone to die in pain and distress – we already have the means to prevent that. Legislating for assisted dying would, as the article says, lead to a degree of ‘mission creep’. What starts as an option becomes a suggestion, maybe progressing to an expectation. How close are we then to compulsion?