Roger Crisp, DPhil, Professor of Moral Philosophy, at the University of Oxford, in a Sep. 17, 2015 blog post, "Assisted Dying and Protecting the Vulnerable," available at, stated:

“The most widely accepted argument in favour of rejecting the [assisted dying] bill seems to have been that doing so would protect the vulnerable.

This also seems somewhat paternalistic… If people are competent, should we not allow them to make their own decisions about the shape and direction of their own lives, even if we think those decisions will sometimes be mistaken?

Data from places where assisted dying has been legalized, such as Oregon, suggest that the fears of these opponents of the bill are anyway largely unjustified… [T]he most significant vulnerability in many of the terminally ill is that to agonizing, chronic, and unrelievable pain. Because of the MPs who opposed the bill, thousands of people in the UK will have to continue to bear this pain against their will. For these MPs to describe their vote as protecting the vulnerable is grotesque.”

Sep. 17, 2015