THE debate over assisted suicide frequently generates more heat than light, and arguments are often based on anecdotes or appeal to emotion rather than evidence. When people do appeal to evidence, they often do so selectively or in broad terms and it is not always easy to check their sources. What is evident is there are many people who have seen loved ones suffer, (which can be heart-breaking) including myself, with my mother and in-laws, over a long length of time, but with the help of St David’s foundation, the NHS and good palliative care, theire suffering was alleviated, till their demise.
The question we should ask ourselves is where will this slippery slope lead us, as so-called safeguards are a joke, as we have seen with present laws: abortion law 1967 (killing of the unborn child ) for serious cases, now on demand up to 200,000 a year; illegal to have sex with under-age children now facilitated by government departments, the courts in most cases turns a blind eye; drip-feed of hard assisted suicide cases in recent years already condoned by our courts (nobody if ever, rarely prosecuted).
As society will note, that all laws made in Parliament, when challenged, have to be interpreted in our courts of law, and our courts have weakened the law by condoning abuse of so-called safeguards, opening them up to a wider interpretation.
Bearing this in mind, the question MPs should ask themselves if thinking of voting for assisted suicide: “Do we start killing instead of caring?” And: “Where will it lead us?”
I am sure we all know the answer.
 
Norman Plaisted
Vivian Road
Newport