That this House notes the Government's persistent promises to oppose euthanasia and Ministers' repeated commitments not to introduce legislation to enshrine in statute law the Bland judgement; further notes that this defined assisted food and fluid as treatment which was withdrawn from Mr Tony Bland bringing about his death by dehydration and starvation; regrets that the White Paper on 'Making Decisions' now reverses this promise by putting forward the Bland judgement as a basis for medical practice; further notes that nothing in the paper would protect patients from doctors withdrawing life sustaining food and fluid or from proxy decision-makers refusing medical treatment, including assisted food and fluids, on behalf of the incapacitated; and calls on the Government to make good its promise to oppose euthanasia by the immediate introduction of a Bill to outlaw doctors bringing about death by deliberate omission or commission in patients who are not dying.

That this House notes the Government's persistent promises to oppose euthanasia and Ministers' repeated commitments not to introduce legislation to enshrine in statute law the Bland judgement; further notes that this defined assisted food and fluid as treatment which was withdrawn from Mr Tony Bland bringing about his death by...

That this House notes that the judgment in the case of Mr Tony Bland stressed the need for a body of experience to be established through the courts in cases of withdrawal of treatment including food and fluids; notes the judgment stressed it should apply only to patients in a persistent vegetative state and that for the foreseeable future all such cases should be brought before the courts; notes that in the case of 'S', the first case following Bland, there was some question as to whether or not the patient was in a persistent vegetative state and that while his mother supported the application the father had doubts; further notes that nonetheless the court refused to demand a second independent medical opinion and time for full investigative procedures necessary in accumulating the body of experience called for in the Bland judgment; recognises that while there may be complications in re-siting gastrostomy tubes, patients can be maintained comfortably with intravenous nutrition for sufficient time to allow proper investigations, thus protecting the basic rights of helpless patients and allaying public fears; further questions the suggestion put forward by the Appeal Court in the case of 'S' that in further such cases where emergency treatment is required, application to the courts may not be necessary; and calls on the Government to introduce legislation to outlaw the gradual practice and acceptance of euthanasia.

That this House notes that the judgment in the case of Mr Tony Bland stressed the need for a body of experience to be established through the courts in cases of withdrawal of treatment including food and fluids; notes the judgment stressed it should apply only to patients in a...