The upcoming debate in the UK Parliament on assisted dying has reignited a complex and emotionally charged issue: should individuals, particularly older people in later life, have the right to choose how and when they die when faced with terminal illness or unbearable suffering? This debate raises profound ethical, legal, and societal questions, and it places a spotlight on the importance of independent advocacy for older adults to ensure that their needs and wishes are fully understood and respected.
The Importance of Independent Advocacy for Older People
At the heart of the discussion is the concept of autonomy — the right of individuals to make decisions about their own lives. For older people, particularly those nearing the end of life, independent advocacy is crucial. Many older adults, particularly those with complex health needs or those who are isolated, can find themselves without a clear voice in critical decisions about their care and treatment. Independent advocates can help to ensure that their desires are clearly communicated, whether it is for continued treatment, palliative care, or, in some cases, assisted dying.
Advocacy plays an essential role in supporting the elderly to navigate the often confusing and overwhelming healthcare system. It ensures that older people are not only heard but that their decisions are based on their true desires, not influenced by external pressures, whether from family members or the medical establishment. This is vital for maintaining their dignity and quality of life in their final years, as well as supporting a death that aligns with their values and wishes.
The Argument in Favour of Assisted Dying
Proponents of legalising assisted dying argue that it provides individuals, particularly the elderly and terminally ill, with the ultimate form of autonomy: the right to choose how and when to end their suffering. Many see this as a compassionate option that allows people to avoid prolonged pain, loss of dignity, and the erosion of quality of life.
Supporters also highlight the importance of control. For many older people, particularly those with degenerative illnesses, the fear of losing independence and becoming a burden on their families is overwhelming. Assisted dying, they argue, offers the comfort of knowing they can make decisions about their own fate, on their own terms. It respects the dignity of individuals who wish to avoid the indignity of a slow and painful decline.
Countries such as Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Canada, where assisted dying is legal, are often cited as examples where regulated frameworks can work to balance the right to die with safeguards against abuse. Advocates argue that with the right legal framework in place, including assessments of mental capacity and access to independent advocacy, the risk of coercion can be minimised.
The Argument Against Assisted Dying
Opponents of assisted dying raise significant ethical and practical concerns. A key argument is the potential for vulnerable individuals, particularly the elderly, to feel pressured into choosing death — not because it is their true desire, but because they feel like a burden on their families or society. Even with independent advocacy, there is concern that older people might internalise societal expectations to “make space” or “not be a burden,” which could lead to decisions that are not truly autonomous.
Furthermore, opponents argue that the focus should be on improving palliative care, ensuring that no one feels the need to choose assisted dying due to a lack of proper support. They contend that with better pain management, psychological support, and comprehensive end-of-life care, the desire for assisted dying would diminish. They fear that legalising assisted dying could weaken the resolve to improve these services and instead create a societal shift where death becomes an accepted solution for suffering, rather than a focus on life until the very end.
Ethical concerns also loom large. Religious groups, in particular, often oppose assisted dying, believing that life is sacred and that no one has the right to end it prematurely. Some philosophers and ethicists argue that legalising assisted dying could lead to a slippery slope, where the criteria for eligibility could expand over time, potentially including those who are not terminally ill but suffering from chronic conditions or even mental health issues.
Striking the Balance: Advocacy and Dignity
Whether one supports or opposes assisted dying, both sides agree that older people deserve dignity, respect, and support as they approach the end of life. This makes the role of independent advocacy even more critical. An advocate ensures that an older person’s voice is central to decisions about their care, helping to safeguard their autonomy, dignity, and well-being.
For those in favour of assisted dying, advocacy ensures that an individual’s decision to die is genuinely their own, free from external pressure. For those opposed, advocacy helps ensure that the person receives the care and support they need to live out their final days in comfort and dignity.
As the UK Parliament prepares for this landmark debate, the importance of ensuring that older people can make informed decisions about their end-of-life care is paramount. Whatever the outcome, it is essential that the legal and healthcare systems work to protect the most vulnerable while honouring the values of autonomy and dignity that underpin the debate. Whether through improved palliative care or regulated assisted dying, the focus must remain on fulfilling the needs and wishes of those approaching the end of their lives, ensuring they have a say in how they live and how they die.
If you or someone you know wants to have one of these difficult but vital conversations about the end of life, then our free checklists could help.
I’d like to talk about my advanced decisions
I’d like to talk about the arrangements after my death