---
title: "British Medical Journal comes out in support of Assisted Dying legislation"
date: "2014-07-03T11:11:07+01:00"
modified: "2014-07-03T11:11:07+01:00"
url: "https://rationalists.org.uk/2014/07/03/british-medical-journal-comes-out-in-support-of-assisted-dying-legislation/"
post_id: 6243
categories: ["Uncategorised"]
---

# British Medical Journal comes out in support of Assisted Dying legislation

In a significant development in the campaign for reform of the law on assisted suicide in England and Wales, the *British Medical Journal* (BMJ), one of the leading academic publications in the medical profession, has [published an editorial](http://www.bmj.com/content/349/bmj.g4349) saying that the practice should be legalised for consenting adults suffering from terminal illnesses.

In the post, which argues that Lord Falconer’s Assisted Dying Bill, which is due a second reading in the House of Lords, should become law, the *BMJ* considers the arguments for assisted dying legislation:

> What are the arguments for such a law? People should be able to exercise choice over their lives, which should include how and when they die, when death is imminent. In recent decades, respect for autonomy has emerged as the cardinal principle in medical ethics and underpins developments in informed consent, patient confidentiality, and advance directives. Recognition of an individual’s right to determine his or her best interests lies at the heart of efforts to advance patient partnership. It would be perverse to suspend our advocacy at the moment a person’s days were numbered.
> 
> As shown by harrowing personal accounts, some terminally ill people want the option to call “time.” And the majority of the British public want the option too. The 2010 British Social Attitudes survey shows that 82% of people are in favour of a change in the law on assisted dying.

It also considers the arguments against:

> What are the arguments against such a law? People opposed to the bill cite the difficulties of establishing that someone has less than six months to live. Yet most studies suggest that doctors consistently overestimate rather than underestimate prognosis.
> 
> Another argument is that individual choice should be limited when it has a profound effect on others. But we already accept people’s decision to reject life saving treatments, if they have mental capacity, regardless of any effects their subsequent deaths may have on those they leave behind. The Falconer Bill allows for the secretary of state to issue codes of practice on the assessment of mental capacity, “recognising and taking account of the effects of depression or other psychological disorders that may impair a person’s decision making.”

The editorial concludes by stating that assisted dying is an issue that needs to be decided by parliament, rather than by doctors, and the *BMJ* expresses its hope that legislators will finally act. You can read the full editorial on the *BMJ* site, and read more about the arguments for and aganst assisted dying reform in [this New Humanist piece by Alex Stevenson](/articles/4602/could-assisted-suicide-be-legalised) from earlier this year.