I read Dr Chula Goonasekera’s letter (18 November) with interest. I too am a doctor and have had a very fulfilling career. I agree that doctors are trained to save lives, but I fear we were never so well trained to recognise when a life could not be saved, and the phrase “not to officiously strive to prolong life” is well worth bearing in mind. The law is a very blunt instrument. Having seen many very unsatisfactory deaths over the years, I am not at all sure we are doing the right things all the time at the moment.
My second point is purely semantic. I very much agree that the use of the word terminal is problematic; to me it means the end is nigh (the proposed law defines nigh as under six months), but the term is being increasingly used for incurable. Chris Hoy’s recent disclosure of his own situation led to headlines along the lines of “his terminal cancer diagnosis”, but the articles I read mostly said he had been given up to four years to live.
I am not belittling his situation, but in this debate, it is right to be pedantic about terminology, as there will be some who would rightly say that the new law would include people like him. Obviously, it may, and this goes for all the other people in his situation.
Andy Thurston
Redbourn, Hertfordshire
• As a doctor for more than 40 years, I would put it another way: we help people into the world and should help them leave it when they need to. We form multidisciplinary teams for cancer care, and could do this for end-of-life care, which could include lawyers, social workers and palliative care experts. Even gold-standard palliative care can sometimes be inadequate.
Denis Jackson
Glasgow
• Dr Goonasekera’s letter talks of someone with a terminal illness opting for “comfort care” rather than assisted dying, allowing the disease to take its course. There is no comfort care available for someone like my husband, who died from bulbar onset motor neurone disease. The disease did indeed take its course, but the suffering this caused in his last three weeks was unbearable, despite the great care offered by a hospice. It still haunts me seven years later. Adults with capacity should be able to make the choice to die. Life cannot be preserved at any cost, nor should it be.
Helen Keats
Brighstone, Isle of Wight
• Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
