There are many reasons to be against the death penalty and one of them is the risk of wrongful execution. According to reports, there is reason to believe that around one on twenty-five executions in America involves an innocent person. In those United States, for the time being, the powers that be are obviously willing to tolerate that error rate.
i suggest that, in this country, our tolerance would be somewhat lower. We don’t permit the state to execute criminals at all, of course, even if they massacre dozens of people. And the risk of getting it wrong would surely figure strongly in any hypothetical debate about bringing the death penalty back.
So the question arises: what is our tolerance for wrongful deaths under David Seymour’s End of Life Choice Bill which, Parliament having passed the buck, is to be put to us in a referendum next year?
If the voters approve, a legal framework will be created that will permit doctors to help people kill themselves in certain situations. Once a person has jumped through the hoops, they can choose from a number of means of poison delivery. After the lethal intervention is administered and the patient has been successfully killed, the doctor will notify the Ministry of Health.
There are various safeguards in the law designed to discourage coercion and abuse. But even if these are strictly adhered to, they will not be foolproof. Nothing designed by humans ever is. And, setting aside the substantive debate on the issue, the history of abortion in this country sets the template for divergence between law and practice in such matters.
So, at some level, we will be trading some number of “justified” suicides against “unjustified” ones. It is probable that the law will also set the stage for murders - even if it’s a very occasional occurrence. Of course, we just won’t know the ratio and might never have a good grip on it in precise terms. Practices are likely to change over time and probably vary by geography and demography too. The regime seems to rely heavily on self-reporting which will detract at least a little bit from official records.
Now you might well say that all activities involve the risk of tragic mistakes. We commend our life to fate every time we get behind the wheel of a car, for example, or any time we undergo a general anesthetic for an operation. Mistakes happen and we cannot avoid putting our lives in the hands of fallible people from time to time.
For me, however, the intentional act of killing another human being is something for which I have a very low tolerance for error. Administering a lethal poison is a very final thing to do and, as with the death penalty, the risk of even a handful of wrongful homicides troubles me greatly. Your mileage may vary, of course, but it is one reason I intend to vote against the law in the referendum.