AIBU to question why assisted dying laws require self-administration?

78 replies

Holdinguphalfthesky · 22/03/2026 08:14

I have always been broadly in favour of assisted dying, based on the argument that we put our pets to sleep when they lose their joy and dignity, that people should have absolute authority and autonomy over their lives and bodies, and that many illnesses make dying an awful, painful experience.

However, with recent wider political debate about the concept, I have started to wonder why there is such emphasis on the person being able to administer the fatal medication themselves? Surely that leaves the patient more likely to suffer manipulation and guilt tripping, because they’re doing it themselves and still have consciousness and rationality; whereas if the decision were to be made by NoK alongside a couple of doctors once the person is in so much pain or has lost consciousness it would be more safeguarded. And potentially easier for all concerned.

The question is informed by my experience caring for a parent and for a friend, both of whom died from cancer. I have also held a pet while they passed from a pts injection. Interested to hear others’ thoughts on why the legislation debated insists on making it possible only for people to self-administer, potentially doing it before they are ready to stop living.

OP posts:

ReignOfError · 22/03/2026 08:26

I am firmly in favour of assisted dying, and furious at the House of Lords (again). I’m also married to someone with a life-limiting illness who has every intention of choosing when to die.

I can think of several reasons for self-administration: relying on others to decide what’s best for a terminally ill person opens the door to all sorts of potential abuse and coercion, regardless of whether the final arbiter is medically qualified or not;,it’s an unfair burden to put onto medical staff; it removes autonomy from the dying person.

BMW6 · 22/03/2026 08:21

Well I'd have thought because another person giving the injection could be accused of murder, whereas suicide is not a criminal offence.

DaffodilTuesday · 22/03/2026 08:20

I am sorry, I don’t follow your logic as to how to someone who has lost consciousness can consent? This is a basic principle of medical ethics.
Secondly, someone administering it would mean that someone’s job is basically ending people’s lives.
Not that I really want to have a debate about this, my view is that money and resources need to be put into palliative care and health care (we basically have a system where people can be waiting hours to even get seen in A+E, and weeks to see a GP, so there are many cases where better early treatment would save lives).

Unflip

1 2 3 4