The Joint Committee on Assisted Dying recommended that Ireland proceed with the introduction of Assisted Suicide / Euthanasia. Three members wrote a dissenting opinion [the “Minority Report”] opposing that recommendation:
We believe that the Government should not introduce legislation for assisted dying. The case has not been established, whereas the case against any change is overwhelming. There are no lives not worth living. We recommend that the existing ban on assisted dying be maintained without exceptions. We recommend that no change be made to the Criminal Law Suicide Act 1993.
The 3 dissenting members are the Chair/Cathaoirleach, Michael Healy-Rae Independent TD, Robert Troy TD and Independent Senator, Rónán Mullen.
JCAD PREJUDGEMENT?
Having watched some of the proceedings it was clear from the get-go that several JCAD members were biased in favour of Assisted Suicide / Euthanasia and that a minority were generally opposed.
What caught my eye in the Minority Report was the JCAD’s immediate decision in favour of AS/VE, before any discussion of the evidence or review of expert opinion took place:
“At the first private meeting to discuss this draft Report, the majority of members decided to vote on the first recommendation that ‘the Government introduces legislation allowing for assisted dying, in certain circumstances as set out in the recommendations of this report.’ That vote was held and the Recommendation passed despite calls for prior consideration at Committee level of the evidence heard…Thus, without any committee discussion of the over seventy hours of oral testimony or of the many private submissions, there was an early vote on the substantive issue of whether to recommend legislation for assisted dying. At that point the Committee members had not fully clarified for themselves as a Committee what was meant by assisted dying, as evidenced by one proposed amendment to the draft Report not discussed until much later.”
A LAW UNTO THEMSELVES?
In a criminal trial, the jury should: “review all the evidence and decide which witnesses were credible…look for inconsistencies in the evidence and decide its importance…study the exhibits and decide how much weight to put on them.”
I presume an immediate verdict would be rejected by a presiding judge.
(From https://www.criminalcodehelp.ca/)
Such deliberations did not happen with the JCAD — indeed they did not even provide any definitions of the terms they used in the report!
This might be acceptable within their mandate and normal proceedings of the Oireachtas, but it is clearly inappropriate for a decision which will change the foundation of Irish Society and require modification of the criminal code.
I CRY FOUL.
Kevin Hay
You can follow Kevin on 𝕏 @ kevinhay77