Philosopher Kathleen Stock Presents Measured Case Against Assisted Dying Laws
Kathleen Stock's Argument Against State-Sanctioned Euthanasia

Philosopher Kathleen Stock Presents Measured Case Against Assisted Dying Legislation

In her new book Do Not Go Gentle, philosopher Kathleen Stock delivers a clear and cogent argument against state-sanctioned assisted dying. While her immediate focus is the end of life bill currently before the House of Lords, her opposition extends to the principle in general. This is a polemic, but a polite one, with Stock expressing hope that readers will come to share her objection to what she terms the "institutionalisation of death."

Swimming Against the Current of Public Opinion

Stock begins from an unpopular position. Recent polls consistently show approximately three-quarters of Britons support assisted dying for terminally ill individuals. However, Stock has never been afraid to swim upstream. In 2021, she resigned from the University of Sussex following protests by some staff and students over her views expressed in her previous book Material Girls, where she argued that sex is binary and immutable and should form the basis of laws protecting women rather than gender identity.

The title Do Not Go Gentle comes from Dylan Thomas's 1951 poem urging his ailing father not to accept death without a fight. Stock insists she is not an unfeeling ascetic who believes bodily suffering is somehow beneficial. Rather, her primary objection centers on the inevitable expansion of eligibility criteria once rules and protocols for managing assisted death are established.

Evidence from International Precedents

Stock presents substantial evidence supporting her concerns about mission creep. Canada has had Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) since June 2016. Initial eligibility was confined to individuals with a "reasonably foreseeable" natural death, but has since expanded to cover those with serious and incurable but not necessarily terminal diagnoses. Legislation has also been passed—though implementation is delayed until 2027—to allow MAID for individuals whose sole underlying condition is mental illness.

In Benelux countries, it is already legal for doctors to assist the death of people suffering unbearably from psychological illnesses without underlying physical deficits. More chillingly, laws that initially restricted euthanasia to adults have expanded to allow euthanasia for extremely ill babies and children in some jurisdictions.

The Practical Realities of End-of-Life Care

In her measured and reasonable approach, Stock does not dwell excessively on extreme cautionary tales. Instead, she concentrates on more typical and imaginable cases of individuals with terminal physical diagnoses seeking assisted suicide. While this might initially seem like an obvious good, Stock argues that if patients had automatic access to expert palliative care and pain relief, they might not feel compelled to seek artificial death.

Hospice treatment in Britain remains patchy, expensive, and relies on an insecure mix of charitable donations and NHS funding. Stock questions whether assisted dying is being proposed as a way to relieve the state of additional financial burdens rather than as a genuine expansion of patient autonomy.

Vulnerable Populations at Risk

Evidence from Canada reveals that disabled people who are not terminally ill are increasingly seeking death because necessary services for sustaining a decent life at home are unavailable. Additionally, family members might pressure elderly relatives to exit early to avoid care home fees or hasten inheritances.

While this might sound like scare-mongering, Stock reminds readers of the numerous instances of mortgage, pension, and benefit fraud that come before courts annually. People are not always good or kind, and she urges society not to endorse a system based on muddled thinking that places vulnerable people—a category that will eventually include most of us—at the mercy of potential coercion.

Do Not Go Gentle by Kathleen Stock is published by The Bridge Street Press. The philosopher presents a carefully reasoned case that challenges prevailing assumptions about assisted dying while highlighting practical concerns about implementation and protection of society's most vulnerable members.