Why could my dog have a good death … but not my mum?
This was the question on a small poster held by a campaigner outside Parliament as MPs debated the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill.
It was a striking thing to ask. Shocking, even. But it was just one of the highly personal stories that had led supporters and opponents of assisted dying to travel across the country and be part of this historic debate.
Holding the banner was Caroline McKiddi, 55, from Kirriemuir near Dundee. When her mother was dying from cancer, Caroline arranged a family holiday to ensure her final memories were happy ones.
“It was perfect,” she said. “The grandchildren were there and we had laughter and games.
“That is when my mother’s life should have ended”.
But it wasn’t to be. Once the holiday was over, her mother endured “two weeks of hell”. Despite the “wonderful” care of her doctor and Macmillan nurses, she died in pain.
Caroline was struck by the contrast when her beloved dog fell ill and had to be put down.
“It was very peaceful. I just can’t understand how we can do that for an animal but not for a human being.”
Other campaigners had stories of their own. One woman said her husband had planned to travel to Dignitas to die in peace, but suddenly became so ill that the trip was impossible. He also suffered before he died.
Another spoke of her agony watching her twin sister experience a painful death,
Their tales were a stark reminder that MPs were making a decision with profound implications for the people they represent. It was a vote that really mattered.
Opponents of the legislation were also out in force, and had their own tales to tell. One young woman in a wheelchair spoke about her struggle just to travel into central London, after waiting half an hour for a bus equipped to allow her on board. She argued that politicians should focus on making life better, not ending it.
Another opponent of the legislation described it as “dangerous” and feared the consequences of allowing the state to take lives.
What they had in common was that they all expressed themselves with determination and quiet dignity. Campaigners sometimes broke out into chants – crying “assisted dying now!”, for example – but other than this there were no raised voices.
Supporters and opponents of assisted dying mingled peacefully outside the gates of Parliament, holding banners which did their talking for them.
MPs debating the proposed law inside the historic Palace of Westminster generally rose to the occasion with thoughtful and sincere contributions to the debate. The same was true of those who stood outside, waiting to learn what the politicians would decide.
