Three GPs give their views on assisted dying

When you ask these three doctors about their experiences as GPs, their responses are surprisingly alike.

“It can be the most rewarding profession,” one shares. “It’s a privilege,” another adds, speaking fondly of their interactions with patients and families.

Yet, they hold differing perspectives on assisted dying.

Currently, the law is unambiguous: doctors are prohibited from assisting patients in taking their own lives. However, that may soon change.

The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill is under consideration in Parliament. Should it pass, it would allow some terminally ill patients in England and Wales the option of an assisted death.

Here, three doctors—Abdul Farooq, Susi Caesar, and Gurpreet Khaira—who hold varying views on assisted dying, share their thoughts on the proposals. They were among over 1,000 GPs who answered a BBC questionnaire regarding assisted dying.

Dr Abdul Farooq, 28, is relatively new in his career as a GP.

We meet at his residence in east London. He tends to his baby’s needs before heading to the mosque.

His religion significantly influences his stance on assisted dying.

“Life is sacred. As a Muslim, I view life as a divine gift, and taking it away is not anyone’s right,” he asserts.

Dr Farooq believes that assisting someone in ending their life would be “immoral,” and therefore, he wouldn’t participate in such actions, even indirectly.

If the law were enacted and a patient approached him seeking assistance to die, he would refer them to another physician.

He emphasizes that anything more would constitute “a boundary I will not cross.”

His concerns are also informed by his experiences in the healthcare system, particularly in hospitals where he has witnessed “undignified deaths” of patients in busy wards.

He argues there is ample opportunity to make patients comfortable if proper resources are available.

“Palliative medicine exists to support individuals nearing the end of life. Why aren’t we investing fully in that to alleviate the fear associated with death?” he questions.

Dr Farooq raises concerns about the proposed law’s stipulation that doctors must determine if terminal patients are expected to live for six months or less for them to be approved for assisted death.

He believes that while the final moments are predictable, some patients thought to be near death can unexpectedly survive for much longer.

Could anything change his stance on assisted dying?

“No,” Dr Farooq answers firmly. “I oppose it on both personal and professional grounds. It’s simply not right for patients.”

Dr Susi Caesar has been practicing for 30 years and feels she might not have been so vocal in her support for assisted dying in the past.

Today, she expresses her readiness to “take a stand.”

Recently, she lost her cherished father, Henning. We meet by a lake close to Cirencester, a place that holds memories of him.

“My father was extraordinary, and this setting brings back wonderful memories of what he loved,” she reminisces. “The outdoors, sailing, walks, and swimming.”

She believes her father would support her for openly discussing her views, as he was always a staunch advocate for assisted dying.

Following his terminal diagnosis, Dr Caesar recalls that he became “terribly anxious about how he would pass away.”

“My father was very proud, and losing control at the end of his life—over his body or mind—was something he found unbearable,” she reflects.

In the end, Dr Caesar notes that her father’s “medication couldn’t adequately manage his symptoms.” For her, the conversation around assisted dying revolves around the principle of patient choice.

“Everyone will eventually die, and every person deserves the comfort of deciding how that will happen. I want that for myself,” she asserts.

Dr Caesar recognizes that many of her colleagues have “very valid concerns” regarding assisted dying. However, she believes “we have the capability to develop systems that effectively address these issues.”

I inquire if her support would prompt her to work in this field.

“I’ll be the first to assist those in achieving the death they desire,” she responds. “The true joy in my role is accompanying individuals through the entirety of their healthcare journey.”

Dr Gurpreet Khaira finds herself less assured than Dr Farooq and Dr Caesar.

She describes her stance on assisted dying as “quite conflicted.”

Dr Khaira, a GP in Birmingham, has also endured the patient experience firsthand.

In 2017, she received a breast cancer diagnosis. She struggled through the chemotherapy and fears facing it again if the cancer returns.

“I was adamant that I should have the right to decide whether to endure intense treatment, or to choose ‘enough is enough’,” she recalls.

She felt it was imperative to exercise control over the conclusion of her life.

Now, she enjoys robust health, demonstrating agility as she walks effortlessly on hillsides.

As a seasoned GP, she has concerns that vulnerable patients may choose assisted dying out of a desire not to burden their loved ones, or that families might improperly influence such choices.

“This aspect evokes significant personal conflict for me. Despite initiatives aimed at ensuring safeguards are in place, a doctor may be unable to detect instances of coercion or manipulation.”

She grapples with a fundamental disconnect between her personal sentiments and her professional responsibilities.

Nevertheless, she concludes: “As a practitioner, I would be very hesitant to assist a patient in making that choice.”

Navigating these opposing views puts her in “a place filled with guilt,” she reflects, but she believes maintaining an open mind is not a weakness. For her, the decision-making process is in continual evolution.

Talking with Dr Farooq, Dr Caesar, and Dr Khaira highlights how their viewpoints on assisted dying closely mirror their fundamental beliefs.

In many ways, GPs are much like everyone else.

If this bill proceeds into law, doctors will need to determine their willingness to engage in the realm of assisted dying. They might be involved in preliminary discussions or in prescribing substances for individuals wishing to end their lives.

Those who choose not to participate won’t be obliged to do so.

They will have adequate time to contemplate their position. Should MPs support the bill next month, implementing it might take several years.