Pratchett's Lecture on Assisted Death
Yesterday's news articles announcing Terry Pratchett's lecture that night felt a little premature, I think because they relied heavily on "he will say this", "he will say that" while quoting parts of the intended speech. It was more premature than I realised because Terry technically didn't say those things, it was a "Stunt Pratchett", Tony Robinson, of whom no previous mention had been made. The Stunt Pratchett did a wonderful job, despite being hatless.
For those who have followed Terry's comments on assisted dying, the lecture contained a lot that was familiar, e.g., questioning the idea of life at any price and reflecting on his father's own death. By the way, I watched the lecture this morning on iPlayer (UK only) and there's an edited text extract.
A couple of new things jumped out at me. First is his suggestion of tribunals to decide if assistance with dying is warranted. His idea that these tribunals should contain both a lawyer and a doctor is not unreasonable, though I'm happy to see what the ethicists and experts come up with. Second, when he addressed the problem of the God argument, he cited the British Social Attitudes Survey which showed that that 92% of non-religious people and 71% of religious people supported the concept of assisted death. That last stat is particularly interesting because the religious objectors seem to be presented as speaking for a majority of their fellow believers, whereas that absolutely isn't the case.
"If I knew that I could die, I would live. My life, my death, my choice.”
Hear, hear.
For those who have followed Terry's comments on assisted dying, the lecture contained a lot that was familiar, e.g., questioning the idea of life at any price and reflecting on his father's own death. By the way, I watched the lecture this morning on iPlayer (UK only) and there's an edited text extract.
A couple of new things jumped out at me. First is his suggestion of tribunals to decide if assistance with dying is warranted. His idea that these tribunals should contain both a lawyer and a doctor is not unreasonable, though I'm happy to see what the ethicists and experts come up with. Second, when he addressed the problem of the God argument, he cited the British Social Attitudes Survey which showed that that 92% of non-religious people and 71% of religious people supported the concept of assisted death. That last stat is particularly interesting because the religious objectors seem to be presented as speaking for a majority of their fellow believers, whereas that absolutely isn't the case.
"If I knew that I could die, I would live. My life, my death, my choice.”
Hear, hear.