A New Zealand lawyer has spoken out in opposition to the pending End of Life Bill, saying it could victimise vulnerable Kiwis. But ACT Leader David Seymour, who authored the legislation, has dismissed the criticism as "misinformation" that could cause people to needlessly suffer.
Richard McLeod from Lawyers for Vulnerable New Zealanders told TVNZ1's Breakfast today the euthanasia bill is "not workable".
"As a group of lawyers, we think that this bill is hopelessly flawed," he said. "It's probably the worst, most dangerous, half-baked, poorly thought through piece of legislation we've seen and it's going to lead to the deaths of a lot of vulnerable New Zealanders."
READ MORE:
Euthanasia bill 'not workable in its present state' says Parliamentary committee
Prime Minister voices support for ACT leader's End of Life Bill - 'this is a deeply personal issue'
Widower of euthanasia campaigner Lecretia Seales gives 'best gift' on what would have been her birthday
‘Your Bill seeks to kill people’ – Maggie Barry slams David Seymour’s euthanasia proposal during debate
Mr McLeod said some members of his group were not opposed to euthanasia in all forms, but he described Mr Seymour's bill as "a wolf wrapped up in sheep clothing”.
"There's a big difference between what it promises to deliver and what it actually delivers. It promises choice for a few New Zealanders who are not vulnerable and then it goes and delivers to large numbers of terminally ill, chronically ill, mentally ill and disabled New Zealanders the same choice."
He said the bill would apply to people in vulnerable situations, including people who were elderly, live alone or are lonely, victims of elder abuse, had been rejected by whānau, and people who had been failed by the state.
"When you look at the safeguards against coercion, for example, you just see that this is going to give the greenlight to granny abuse."
The ACT Leader says people shouldn’t miss out on freedom of choice because of misinformation. (Source: Other)
However, Mr Seymour pushed back on those claims, saying people's harmful misinformation about the topic could mean people suffering without freedom of choice.
"Frankly, I don't know where you find these people," Mr Seymour said during an appearance on Breakfast immediately after Mr McLeod was interviewed. "I thought lawyers were supposed to read."
Changes had been made to the bill to make it workable, he snapped back, adding the bill was consistent with the Human Rights Act.
"We're going to see a campaign of fear, uncertainty and doubt, and all the extreme language that you just heard [from Mr McLeod]. I'd rather focus on the facts."
Throughout the world, 150 million people live in jurisdictions where assisted dying is legal and, after extensive research, there is no evidence to suggest coercion is an issue, he said.
Mr Seymour said in his bill there are strict criteria in place for people to meet, as well as two separate doctors' assessments on a patient wanting to end his or her life this way - specifically to avoid those concerns.
"The idea that grannies are going to be sort of abused and dragged out of home and somehow euthanised because somebody didn't like her, I mean give me a break."
He said extreme language from opposing parties was not helpful to the debate.
"If we end up with this bill failing - and New Zealanders who are at the end of their life, who do want choice, who are suffering, have to keep suffering because some people have gone and put about that sort of misinformation - I think would be a real shame.
"I'm committed to getting this bill passed by my parliamentary colleagues so New Zealanders who want choice can have it."
There have been 38,000 submissions on the bill, and while 90 per cent of submissions have opposed the bill and the topic has divided the select committee, Mr Seymour said he was quietly confident it could pass if he is able to get backing from MPs.
"It's going to take a lot of work to get MPs to side with the majority of New Zealanders, 70 per cent in most polls, who do want choice in this area," he said.
Mr Seymour needs to persuade a minimum 61, to make majority of 120, parliamentary members to vote in favour of the bill.
There are three votes on a piece of legislation. In the first vote the bill received 76 votes in favour over 44 opposed.
SHARE ME