Letter: Euthanasia requests

Mr D. J. Sarginson
Tuesday 15 September 1992 00:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: An 'enduring power of attorney' (EPA) enables anyone ('the donor') to name one or two people whom they would like to look after their affairs when they are not up to coping themselves, and it would not be a vast step for these increasingly popular and very useful arrangements to give the person or persons entrusted with the power of attorney legal authority to make decisions of the kind discussed in your letters columns (10 September).

The donor's relatives and the Court of Protection are not ousted by EPAs, but it is my experience, as a solicitor, that in practice the donor's wishes usually prevail.

Of course, when it comes to persuading doctors to take certain steps the attorney (we need a better name) may not find it any easier than would the donor personally. The doctor may say that he would not accede to a request for euthanasia if it was made to him by his patient, so why should he feel any different if it is made by one or two attorneys?

The best answer to this would be that the attorney was appointed by the donor when the donor was in a better state of health, and that the attorney carried the donor's positive and declared trust, which is not necessarily the case when relatives feel obliged to take on such responsibilities.

Yours sincerely,

D. J. SARGINSON

Stowmarket, Suffolk

10 September

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in