Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Joint Committee on Assisted Dying díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 13 Feb 2024

System for Assisted Dying and Alternative Policies: Discussion (Resumed)

Parliamentary privilege is considered to apply to the utterances of members participating online in the committee meeting where their participation is from within the parliamentary precincts. There can be no assurances in respect of participation online from outside the parliamentary precincts and members should be mindful of this when they are contributing.

This committee discusses dying, including suicide, and supporting information can be found on the committee's web page. Our agenda today is engagement with the topic of examining a system for assisted dying and alternative policies. This is the committee's final public meeting. We welcome witnesses from the HSE and the Department of Health. Our first guests are Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain, Dr. Philip Crowley and Dr. Feargal Twomey from the HSE. They have five minutes for their presentation and we will then move to the witnesses from the Department of Health.

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

I thank the committee for the invitation to discuss the topic of examining a system for assisted dying. I am joined by my colleagues, Dr. Philip Crowley, HSE national director of strategy and research and a GP, and Dr. Feargal Twomey, HSE national clinical lead for palliative care and consultant in palliative medicine.

We would like to provide the committee with the view of the HSE senior clinical team, which is multidisciplinary and multi-specialty. The senior clinical leadership in the HSE is led by the chief clinical officer, CCO, who oversees a wide range of clinical domains. The CCO function ensures that there is multi-specialty and multidisciplinary input into the development of healthcare policy and strategy. The issues raised here cannot be said to represent the entire body of the HSE; rather, they are a representative example of those issues we believe need consideration in the matter of assisted dying. As there is no legislation in place for assisted dying, we cannot give definitive commentary on the exact requirements for implementation. However, we can provide the committee with some of the issues that we, as clinicians, consider and merit further thought. The CEO of the HSE has asked us to confirm that should draft legislation be forthcoming, the HSE will respond in more detail at the committee consultative stages, where invited to do so, and that the executive, as a statutory agency for health and social care services, will implement any legislation enacted in the future in accordance with its remit.

Ireland has a long history of providing palliative care through voluntary organisations and the public health service since the 1870s. Palliative care services provide active and often complex care and support to people with any advanced life-limiting illness, and at any stage of an illness, not just at end of life. Although palliative care services in Ireland are well developed, further work remains to be done to develop the service. My colleagues from the Department of Health will talk in more detail about that matter.

There are a variety of issues for those who may potentially wish to avail of assisted dying and those providing it that merit consideration. Some citizens are especially vulnerable and may be at particular risk of seeing themselves as a burden and of being subject to paternalism or coercion. These citizens may be particularly at risk of feeling undue pressure to consider assisted dying. While this is not an exhaustive list, we do consider that this does include older people, people with chronic conditions and those with physical or intellectual disabilities. These concerns have also been raised by others who have spoken to the committee.

We have also considered the potential impact on healthcare workers, HCWs. We discussed this aspect with representatives of the HSE employment assistance programme, which provides a counselling service for our staff. They have advised us of their experience of working with HCWs when they have been involved in experiences that may transgress their moral or ethical codes. This can negatively impact on the mental health of HCWs and can lead to feelings of self-blame and shame. The psychological impact of being witness to or making decisions relating to assisted dying or, indeed, involvement in the painful and prolonged death of a patient, have the potential to significantly transgress an individual HCW’s core values and their psychological and emotional well-being. That said, we as clinicians, believe we should be able to discuss death, dying and end-of-life care in a sensitive and non-judgmental way. Conscientious objection should be enabled as part of any legislation.

The committee will have heard from Dr. Anne Doherty in November 2023, who described treating people with cancer who have suicidal thoughts. She expressed concerns about how robustly such people would be investigated and treated for a potential mental illness if there was legislation on assisted dying, and these are concerns we share and would apply to other areas of clinical practice, including the diagnoses of other potentially life-limiting conditions such as certain neurological disorders, certain respiratory diseases and many others.

This, in turn, leads us to the issue of patient safety. There is a risk that a person may make a decision to seek assistance with dying, when, in fact, more robust investigation or time to consider the diagnosis, prognosis and treatment options may result in them opting for another or different approach to care.

Robust and commensurate safeguarding issues, drawing on citizen perspectives and research evidence, would need to be in place to support any person who is considering this route. International evidence in other jurisdictions does suggest that where legislation has been introduced, safeguards do change over time to include lower age thresholds, for example, in the Netherlands, and expansion of eligibility criteria.

We do believe that there is the potential for an intergenerational impact of assisted dying and that this warrants further consideration. We know from research that there is an intergenerational impact of suicide by increasing the likelihood of subsequent generations considering, and acting, on suicidal thoughts. There is a risk that assisted dying could have a similar impact. I have added some references, which are in my statement, that may help.

These are some of the issues that need to be considered when looking at the introduction of legislation to support assisted dying. The theme for today’s meeting is examining a system for assisted dying. It is the conclusion of the senior clinical group in the HSE that there are significant supports, both legal and medical, in Ireland to enable people to die in a dignified way.

The importance of will and preference is now enshrined in law. People do have a right to refuse life-sustaining treatment and there is access nationally to palliative care services. The draft palliative care policy will further enhance and embed palliative care across the spectrum of healthcare provision in Ireland. Also of note is the fact that there are legal protections in place in other areas of clinical care, such as the Mental Health Act.

This concludes our opening statement. My colleagues and I will endeavour to answer any of your questions. Go raibh míle maith agaibh.

I thank Dr. Ní Bhriain. Next is Ms McArdle from the Department of Health and she has five minutes.

Ms Siobhán McArdle

I thank the Chair and members for their invitation to assist the committee with its important discussions on this sensitive and complex issue.

I am the assistant secretary with responsibility for social care, mental health, drugs policy and unscheduled care at the Department of Health. I am joined today by my colleague, Mr. Paul Rowe, principal officer for older persons strategy and palliative care.

The Department of Health’s Statement of Strategy 2023-2025 supports us in achieving the vision of a healthier Ireland with improved health and well-being for all, and with the right care delivered in the right place at the right time. This builds on the principles and objectives of Sláintecare which includes supporting good health throughout the life course, including at the end of life. The Department develops and implements health policies that align with this overarching strategic position, and in line with overall Government policy.

As highlighted through the work of this committee, there is currently no legal basis for assisted dying in Ireland. As a result, the Department of Health does not have a policy position currently on this matter as it falls outside of existing health policy. The Department acknowledges the important work of this committee, and awaits the outcome and recommendations arising from its deliberations on this difficult and complex issue.

The Department of Health has not commissioned research in the area of assisted dying at present. Research is commissioned to inform policy development when a particular policy has been requested by Government. The Department works, in collaboration with the Health Research Board, to provide a range of research products to support evidence informed decision-making in health policy development. This includes examination of models of care from other jurisdictions to inform the development of an Irish policy.

Part of my remit in the Department of Health includes responsibility for palliative care policy. I am going to outline the aims of palliative care and give an overview of palliative care in our country today.

I would like to emphasise, however, that palliative care should not in any way be conflated with assisted dying. One of the central aims of palliative care is to improve the quality of life of people with severe and chronic illnesses, and life-limiting illnesses, and their families. This is achieved through the prevention and relief of suffering by means of early identification, high-quality assessment, and the treatment of pain and other physical, psychosocial and spiritual problems.

A key aspect of the World Health Organization's definition of palliative care is that it neither hastens nor postpones death. Palliative care can be provided not just at the end of someone’s life but at any stage in a severe and chronic illness. It is often delivered jointly with other treatments which are aimed at extending the patient’s life. Palliative care excludes any action designed to cause a patient’s death, and instead focuses on alleviating suffering and restoring dignity.

The Department is currently finalising a new palliative care policy for adults to update the 2001 policy.

The new policy will reflect the many developments in end-of-life care and international best practice, as well as setting out a vision and roadmap to meet future service needs. This is, of course, particularly important given the projected increase in Ireland’s older population and the number of people with severe and chronic illnesses who would benefit from palliative care. The new policy will provide for a better integration of services in a patient-centred manner, reducing anxiety and stress during illness and death for our most vulnerable citizens. Services will be developed to shift care provision to the community in line with Sláintecare. Geographic variations in the provision of specialist palliative care services will be addressed. This new palliative care policy for adults is a programme for Government commitment and a ministerial priority. It aligns with the Sláintecare implementation strategy and action plan and the Department of Health’s statement of strategy. The new policy is expected to be published shortly.

Specialist palliative care services are those services whose core activity is limited to the provision of palliative care. Specialist palliative care services are involved in the care of patients with more complex and demanding care needs. They require a greater degree of specialist training, staff and other resources. In Ireland, specialist palliative care services are delivered by the HSE in partnership with voluntary agencies to provide integrated, high-quality and accessible palliative care to patients and their families. Specialist palliative care is provided by multidisciplinary teams in acute hospitals and hospices and in community settings by community palliative care teams. Consultants in palliative medicine work across all three settings, ensuring seamless transitions and integrated services for patients and their families.

I note that we are running short on time, so I am just going to point out that we have reason to be very proud of our palliative care sector in Ireland. In the last cross-country comparison analysis conducted in 2021, Ireland was placed second out of 81 countries for the quality of its end-of-life care. The Department is committed to the provision of high-quality, accessible palliative care services, ensuring that the best care is available to everyone where and when they need it.

In conclusion, to return to the work of this committee, the Department of Health recognises that the issue of assisted dying is a complex matter. We acknowledge the important work of this committee and await the outcome and recommendations arising from its deliberations on this sensitive issue. I am happy to answer any questions that will further assist the work of the committee.

I thank Ms McArdle. Next we are on to the members. Each member has seven minutes, and that includes questions and replies from the witnesses. To begin is Deputy Alan Farrell.

Good morning. I thank the witnesses for coming before us in our final meeting, or so I read on RTE.ie this morning. I only have a couple of questions, and my first one is a point rather than a question. With respect to the Department - this is not really a criticism; just an expression of disappointment - we have been aware that this committee was to be formed since 2020, and for the Department and the HSE not to have conducted research into what the Oireachtas flagged that it might do is kind of disappointing. A majority of people voted for this committee to be established. A majority of people voted for Second Stage of a Private Members' Bill alongside the Minister for Justice at the time. It is kind of disappointing that the witnesses have not come with research that might have been helpful and informative to the committee's workings. I accept the point that they have made but I do not think there is any bar from them carrying out research, at least on a provisional basis. That said, it is not a criticism. It is just an expression of disappointment.

I would like to pick up on two things. First, I wholeheartedly agree with the statement that the Department and the HSE should be proud of the palliative care system that they provide. I want to put that on record straight away. The only real questions I have regard conscientious objection, and the protection of employees - for example, nurses, doctors, consultants and others - should this be provided for in law. Probably one of the only areas I am aware of where there is a provision for conscientious objection is that with regard to abortion services.

Could the HSE and inter alia, the Department, indicate the numbers, or perhaps percentage might be more appropriate, of healthcare workers on the payroll of the HSE who are objecting to the provision of that service within the framework of those who are qualified to provide either the service itself or counselling services associated with it, if there are those who are conscientiously objecting to that sort of provision?

The second question I have relates to the protection of individual staff members. There have been issues with protests at certain facilities. I know of GP practices that have been targeted by those who do not agree with the provision of abortion services. Might it be assumed, for the purposes of discussion, that if the Oireachtas were to legislate for this particular matter of assisted dying, there might be an impact on service providers, up to and including public service providers, in providing this particular service?

Would the witnesses consider this matter to be the provision of healthcare? That is perhaps the most difficult question, but I will direct it first to Dr. Ní Bhriain and then to Ms. McArdle.

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

On the issue of whether this is the provision of healthcare, we have done a little bit of research and background reading on this. The position around the world differs. As the Deputy knows, in Switzerland it is not regarded as part of the provision of healthcare. Whether this will form part of healthcare will be a matter to be addressed in the legislation rather than for the HSE to decide. As we have indicated, we are certainly very happy to come back and discuss that further when we get to the pre-legislative stage of this matter.

On the issue of the numbers of people objecting to providing termination of pregnancy services, I do not have the figure to hand but I can certainly get it and provide it to the Deputy.

If you could, please. That would be very helpful.

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

That is no difficulty. On the issue of provision of protection for individual staff members, I am not involved with the women and infants health programme. However, if there are issues, they have not been brought to my attention. Again, I will find this out for the Deputy.

I thank Dr. Ní Bhriain. What is Ms. McArdle's view on this?

Ms Siobhán McArdle

I concur with Dr. Ní Bhriain. It will depend on the legislation whether assisted dying, if introduced, is a healthcare matter. We await the outcome of that. The others are operational matters, so we will be asking the HSE for information on the numbers of staff who step away from being involved in those kinds of services.

I thank Ms McArdle. That is fine.

I thank the witnesses for their participation this morning. It has been an interesting nine months. I do not think the next part of the process will be easy. I agree with Deputy Farrell's point about the Department that no one needs to be told about the importance of palliative care in Ireland. They are things we know. We have supported families through those services. I feel that sometimes people have come here to advocate for palliative care without addressing the issue of assisted dying. That has not helped me to be able to consider what assisted dying may look like, whether we agree with it or not. This is what has left me still unsure about how to move things. People have come here with the intention to defend a status quo in some way without necessarily stating that fact bluntly. That has not really given us the information to be able to move around what a potential model could look like, should it be introduced. That is where I am still stuck.

To Dr. Ní Bhriain, I am curious about the intergenerational impact of assisted dying. The two reports she provided us with are about suicide. Does Dr. Ní Bhriain believe that suicide, as we understand it, is the same as assisted dying?

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

It is not, but we know more about the impact of suicide through research because we have known about it for longer. These is less research available on assisted dying. That is all we are saying.

That is my question. It says in Dr. Ní Bhriain's opening statement that there is a belief that there is a potential impact of assisted dying, but that research is not out there. Obviously, other jurisdictions have had assisted dying for a long time, and you would imagine they would have potentially accumulated some sorts of insights and research on whether there is a correlation between intergenerational trauma or intergenerational harm and assisted dying, but that is not there. I am concerned about the conflation of those two things because I am acutely aware of the impact of intergenerational trauma as regards suicide, the ripple effect of suicide within communities and households and the impact of suicide ideation being compounded by somebody else's suicide within a community. I think they are different things, and I would be concerned about making them out to be the same in this conversation. I am not saying there is no intergenerational impact, but another part of Dr. Ní Bhriain's opening statement says, "The importance of will and preference is now enshrined in law", that is, that people have a right to refuse sustaining treatment as if that is potentially the alternative to assisted dying, or that if assisted dying is not implemented, we have this. Is Dr. Ní Bhriain as concerned about the potential intergenerational impact of this process?

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

Is the Senator referring to will and preference?

Yes, in terms of people refusing treatment. I would be more concerned about the intergenerational impact of watching someone starve or watching someone choose pain to die without medication. Is Dr. Ní Bhriain as concerned about that? Does she see that potentially a more caring system in very limited circumstances would actually have less of an intergenerational impact than the only option being the refusal of treatment?

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

I did have a look to see if there was any evidence or research available on the impact of assisted dying. It is not there long enough for us to understand it in the same way as suicide. Certainly, there is no intention to conflate the issue of assisted dying and suicide, just to be clear about that. That is very fair point.

On the issue of will and preference and supporting people to make healthcare decisions, when we talk about the refusal of life-sustaining treatment, that does mean that people can say, "I am now at a stage where I no longer want treatment for A, B, C, D or E." If I may refer to my experience as a clinician, most of my time has been spent working with older people, and I have worked with many families at end of life, and that is something that takes a long conversation with families. It is certainly not one conversation with a patient or a family. The intention is not that anybody would suffer but, rather, that people would not be subjected to treatments that may cause them to suffer. I feel very strongly as a clinician that these are conversations we all need to be able to have with our patients and that they are iterative conversations that take place over time.

In terms of the question, though, does Dr. Ní Bhriain believe that the intergenerational impact of the only option being the refusal of treatment is potentially more harming than a much more dignified, managed death - with those long conversations, not just some impulsive decision but the same process?

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

I see Dr. Twomey wants to come in on that.

Dr. Feargal Twomey

At one of the very early hearings, the committee had witnesses from the Department of Justice to discuss what is legal around people who are dying in this country. One of the things that is legal is for somebody to decline to have treatment they do not want. It is also legal for healthcare professionals and individuals to discuss treatment that is appropriate or not going to help or be more harmful and to come to a shared decision. It is also legal for people to refuse to eat or drink, but that happens extremely rarely, from my experience in practice, particularly in people with advanced illness who are very close to the end of their lives anyway. There is definitely evidence of the impact on healthcare workers from Holland and Canada, medical and nursing staff predominantly but also social workers, of their involvement in assisted dying, which comes in various forms, as outlined in the draft Bill that we are-----

Is there any research relating to healthcare workers watching a patient refuse treatment?

Dr. Feargal Twomey

No. The evidence I am speaking about is the impact on healthcare workers of being involved in assisted dying.

Even though one is legal and one is not, and one expresses a positive right to refuse, I think we just imagine them as a dying process without placing them in the legal context.

In the view of clinicians, is there not potentially a nicer way to die than by refusing treatment?

Dr. Feargal Twomey

I will make a few points. A lot of the international legislation started for people who were close to the end of their lives and who were dying. Many people who are dying, in my experience working in palliative medicine for longer than I would care to mention, lose their appetites. We have all known people who are sick or dying of all illnesses, cancer and otherwise, who lose weight. Not eating and drinking as much is part of normal dying. There would be a difference if, for example, I decided to stop eating and drinking today. That would be a very different setting. This is not directly within Dr. Ní Bhriain's experience but in terms of the role of psychiatry and people with eating disorders, that again is a very different situation. There is an exception in the law whereby someone who has made a decision not to eat and drink as a result, for example, of severe anorexia nervosa can be fed against their wishes. Much of the dying I see in Ireland has dignity all the way through and patients have a lot of choice and say in respect of the care they receive as they are dying.

I thank our guests for coming in. Reading between the lines of Dr. Ní Bhriain's statement, one might sum up page 1 by saying, "Don't do it", sum up page 2 by saying, "Please don't do it" and sum up page 3, as a lay reader, by saying, "Oh God, please don't do it." The clear subtext of this paper is to point to the many concerns we, as members of the committee, have heard about week after week, including the risk of people feeling a burden, the impact on healthcare workers about which we have been speaking, and the potential interconnection with suicidality where people have a cancer diagnosis, which is something Dr. Ní Bhriain has highlighted as something we need to consider in the context of other conditions. Patient safety and safeguarding measures are also referred to. I must ask questions for Dr. Ní Bhriain's professional judgment. If the committee were to decide to recommend a change in the law and the introduction of assisted suicide or euthanasia in certain cases, and if the Oireachtas persisted with that intent, is it Dr. Ní Bhriain's professional view that safeguards could definitely prevent all the unhappy outcomes she is warning us about in this paper?

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

I thank the Senator. The position of the HSE is neutral. We are simply here to point out the concerns we have or, if not concerns, the issues we think need to be addressed as part of any legislation. Could the safeguards protect? In other areas of care, safeguards are protective and helpful. We are simply suggesting that should this come to a consultative stage, we are absolutely happy to engage and consider those matters.

Is Dr. Twomey confident that safeguards could address what is, let us face it, a long list of risk issues?

Dr. Feargal Twomey

Dr. Ní Bhriain has stated the HSE's position in respect of the detail of this matter. In different jurisdictions, access to assisted dying in its various forms has expanded and in other areas it has not. The committee has reviewed submissions and has heard from voices from different parts of the world, including areas where there has been less expansion, areas where euthanasia is not permitted and areas where healthcare has less to do with the process. In respect of any legislation before this Dáil or any previous Dáil, can 100% of problems be prevented in every situation? I do not think that is realistic in any sense.

Has Dr. Twomey a professional view as to whether, if assisted dying were to come in, it would be better to keep medicine and medical professionals out of the process?

Dr. Feargal Twomey

Speaking as part of the HSE delegation, the options that have been presented to this committee vary from not changing legislation at all or not legislating in any way for assisted dying to legislating fully for assisted dying.

There are two different types of it. Euthanasia is where another person, such as a healthcare worker or a technician, takes the final act and ends the life of somebody, most often with the person’s permission. The other is where someone is provided with assistance to end their own life. In the jurisdictions where the latter is the only option available, I am minded to suggest that the committee consider that as an important safeguard.

Proponents of assisted suicide from other jurisdictions have suggested that this can be done as part of palliative care and it should sit alongside it. Palliative care experts have said it holds back and would interfere with palliative care. Is it Dr. Twomey's view that it would interfere with palliative care and the way it can be delivered? Does it bring about a fundamental change of attitude towards what palliative care might otherwise be able to offer?

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

I wish to come in on that and Dr. Twomey will come in on it in a second. There is still considerable research ongoing in this area of care. I think some of the issues the Senator is raising would be a matter for consideration during the consultative stage or pre-legislative stage. We cannot answer here whether this should be a healthcare matter or whether it should be outside of healthcare. We think that needs further scrutiny, depending on the recommendations of this committee.

I am trying to get to whether the witnesses have any knowledge or sense that, in principle and by definition, an assisted suicide or euthanasia regime could interfere with the ability to deliver high-quality palliative care.

Dr. Feargal Twomey

I think the Senator is referring to people who have been before the committee previously. Members will have heard arguments – as I have - on both sides in answer to that question. In Australia and New Zealand, where practice is relatively new, they have quite considerable confidence that, for example, there has not been any expansion of access or weakening of safeguards and, in some cases, it works comfortably alongside palliative care. The evening I was here on 17 October, colleagues from Canada were before the committee remotely and directly. They probably could not have been coming from two further ends of the spectrum with regard to their perspectives. Providers said it was absolutely harmonious with end-of-life care and colleagues in palliative care and law expressed concern that it was harmful and so on. I do not have a particular view to express today except to say that the committee has had clear guidance from previous contributors.

Ms Siobhán McArdle

With regard to the Department of Health, the Senator raised some valid and interesting questions, but they would have to form part of the consideration in terms of the research looking at what is happening in other jurisdictions to ensure that, should it become legal in Ireland, the learning around those safeguards could form part of the model of care. It is clear that once there is legislation, one needs to then consider what the model would look like in Ireland and, within that model, to take learnings from other jurisdictions to support the development of an Irish model, should that be the decision of the Dáil or the Government.

As Senator Fiona O'Loughlin is not online, our next speaker is Deputy Pa Daly.

I thank the witnesses for coming in and for their presentations. I have one or two questions, the first of which is to Ms McArdle. She mentioned two things of interest about psychosocial, spiritual and physical problems. Is she happy with the psychotherapy provision around the State? In Tralee, for example, in UHK, it is quite good. Is Ms McArdle happy with it? She stated in her opening statement that “Geographic variations in the provision of specialist palliative care services will be addressed.” To me, that reads she is happier with it in some areas than in others. I have a final question for her. She said new policy is expected to be published shortly. What does she mean by “shortly”? Is there a big discrepancy in the variations that she mentioned? Is she happy with the psychotherapy that is given to palliative care patients?

Ms Siobhán McArdle

The approach to palliative care in the community is to have multidisciplinary teams. That involves a range of different disciplines or healthcare workers who support the individual and families. In some services that may include access or linkages to other services. Palliative care does not just sit on its own but also works alongside, depending on the patient, family or geography, as the Deputy said, or links in with mental health services, if required, or other broader supports. Are we happy we have enough? We could always say we could do with more. I know the services in the areas might say that a very important part of the multidisciplinary approaches is to have access to both psychology and psychotherapy at points in time. Is it sufficient at the moment? I would say there is room for improvement.

What parts of the country need most improvement?

Ms Siobhán McArdle

I do not have that detail to hand. I would have to get that.

What parts have the best linking in with services and care provision in the community?

Ms Siobhán McArdle

I will pass that to Dr. Twomey or Dr. Ní Bhriain.

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

On psychotherapy for people undergoing palliative care, psychological support is a very important part of what all of us clinicians should be doing. With that support for people who are at end of life, we often liaise with palliative care colleagues. I am a consultant in psychiatry for older people. I would frequently bring palliative care colleagues in to support and help me with the end-of-life care for my patients, but I would expect that my team would do most of the psychological support. Equally, I would support a palliative care team. It is very hard to say specifically about psychotherapy but more that it should be part of what we do as part of our palliative care delivery. I was involved in the development of the policy and that is very much part of the policy that we as healthcare workers should be able to deliver. Again, general practitioners would also be very skilled at this.

Is Dr. Ní Bhriain saying it is better in some parts of the State?

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

What I am saying is that as a person who provides these services, I would expect us as teams to be able to provide psychological supports for patients. That would vary among the teams in the country, which we have more information about, but generally as part of the provision of palliative care, general practitioners do it, we as psychiatrists do it and lots of other clinicians do it. It depends on who has the primary relationship with the patient as well.

Yes, but are there parts of the country that Dr. Ní Bhriain knows may be lacking or where there is a shortfall of psychological services?

Dr. Feargal Twomey

As Dr. Ní Bhriain has outlined, we liaise closely with mental health services for patients with complex mental health needs. The provision of psychological support within specialist palliative care is largely provided by social work teams, pastoral care services and all of the other individuals. Without disclosing anything, the policy that will be launched imminently includes a move towards developing psychological services within palliative care. They currently exist in one service only in Dublin.

As for imminently, when will the policy be out?

Ms Siobhán McArdle

The first half of 2024, as in the next couple of months at most.

Deputy Alan Farrell took the Chair.

I thank the witnesses for coming before us today. People who have come to the committee, such as disability advocates, have told us we should be focusing on enabling them to live a better life now as opposed to helping them end their lives due to the perceived lack of supports or the perception that they are a burden on family or wider society. I would ask those present as representatives of the HSE and the Department of Health how we can ensure we are supporting people to live life fully, whether it is in respect of disability services or older persons.

For example, I was contacted by a constituent last night whose mother resides in Meath.

She is being discharged from hospital and cannot get access to home help hours. Many of my constituents are finding it challenging to get access to home help hours. These are critical services to ensure people can live a high quality of life in their later years. We are talking about bringing in a system and offering people an opportunity for assisted dying and one of the concerns that has been raised, not only today but by many contributors over the long list of public sessions, is the perception that one is a burden on somebody else. How can the HSE ensure the level of supports, be it in palliative care, be it help to the elderly in terms of home help hours or be it from a disability perspective, that regardless of where one resides in this country one is getting the level of care that one needs to live a full life?

Ms Siobhán McArdle

I agree absolutely in terms of the requirement to support people to live and age well and live their best lives in the community. One of the pieces of service is the access to home support hours. There has been an increase in investment in home support. In excess of €700 million is allocated in the budget for the provision of home support hours. Then there is extra allocation for home support for people with a disability because there are slightly different models. People with a disabilities may access or require personal assistants, maybe to support them in employment in addition to care in the home.

It is unfortunate when people have to wait for home support. One of the challenges that we identify is access to recruiting home support workers. Within the Department and in combination with the HSE, we have established a strategic working group looking at workforce, particularly for our home support workers and our healthcare assistants in providing care. One of the initiatives has been to support the investment, but also to make some changes to employment, for instance, encouraging or supporting the use of the living wage, increasing the number of visas to attract workforce from overseas to come to Ireland and ensuring that we have timely access to home support.

The Deputy will have noticed that there has been a reduction in the numbers waiting for home support. It is not easy when any individual has to stay in an acute hospital or is delayed in being discharge, but we have seen a significant improvement in those delays across the country. However, I accept that it is hard for individuals.

I will come back on one point and then maybe move over to the HSE in relation to palliative care. What percentage of home care support workers are direct employees of the HSE versus people who are contracted in through private healthcare providers?

Ms Siobhán McArdle

In HSE services, approximately 30% are directly employed by the HSE. The other proportion are a combination of voluntary providers, that is, the not-for-profit sector, and the private sector. It is a mix across all parts of the country.

Was there not an aspiration that it would be the other way round, that direct employees would make up 70% and 30% would be from the private sector and not-for-profit? I genuinely believe, if we are talking about assisting people, that if we do not put in the necessary supports, whether we introduce this or not, we are subconsciously helping people make a decision that we may not wish to be helping them make. I just want to make that point.

I am conscious that I have only two minutes left. I want to ask a similar question in relation to the disparity of services in the palliative care setting. I note the care strategy is due to be published in the next number of months. What can be done to ensure, regardless of one's geographical location, that when it comes to the end of life the right care from a palliative care perspective is in place? There are regions that are doing it with the same funding as regions that are not doing it. Why is that the case?

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

The aim of the policy will be, as the Deputy knows, to have the services provide the right care, at the right time, in the right place.

That is a principle, as the Deputy knows, of Sláintecare. That is what we are aiming for. There is historical precedent usually as to why services are developed in certain areas and grown organically. The point of Sláintecare is to try to diminish that inequality of access around the country. Does Ms McArdle wish to come back on this point?

Ms Siobhán McArdle

With regard to disadvantage and the growth in the community specialist palliative care teams, we have 32 of those specialist multi-disciplinary teams now around the country. They work very closely with the GPs and acute hospitals and also with hospice or specialist inpatient services. There has been expansion in the capital investment for hospice or specialist inpatient services. We currently have 14 hospices around Ireland and plans in development for three more which, when they are built, will mean that every region and area in Ireland will have access to both community specialist palliative care which is currently available but also inpatient services. We find that people are travelling, perhaps, to access those inpatient services where they are not available as close to the community as they should be currently.

Dr. Feargal Twomey

To address Deputy Troy's point, there are disparities around the country. I cannot obviously go into the details of the policy but it seeks to address a number of those, alongside what Ms Siobhán McArdle just said. The key issue will be that when the policy is launched funding will come from the Government to implement it.

I thank Dr. Twomey and Deputy Troy. I call on Senator Hoey to speak. She is joining us online. She will be followed by Senator O'Loughlin.

I thank the Cathaoirleach Gníomhach. Hopefully, everybody can hear me okay.

Great.

I thank all of our guest speakers for their presentations this morning. The theme is to examine a system for assisted dying. I am struck that in an opening statement, a section reads: "It is the conclusion of the senior clinical group in the HSE that there are significant supports, ... legal and medical, in place in Ireland to enable people to die in a dignified way." Is there a feeling, therefore - I am just trying to read between the lines here - that our current system is adequate and that there is enough in place to support people in their end-of-life care? Is it the conclusion of the senior clinical group that the position, as is, is that we have enough in place to do that and that this is perhaps an aside? I am not sure if this is a somewhat contradictory sentence, a conclusion or a response, or if it is just that these two sentences happen to be together.

I tend to ask all my questions in one go. I am also wondering about the resistance which we may see from various medical quarters. I know that our witnesses have outlined some of the areas which we need to look at and whether we stay within the medical system or outside of it. Do our witnesses believe, given their overview of the personnel and so forth within this area, that there would be an enormous amount of resistance to the extent that it could stymie any sort of roll-out, should there be a recommendation from our committee to introduce a system of assisted dying in Ireland? In the opinion of our guest speakers, do they think that should assisted dying be introduced, should a legislative recommendation be made that that can coexist with our current systems of palliative care? I know Ms McArdle said that they would like to have more roll-out and access. Do our witnesses believe there is a way to develop so that the two approaches can exist in harmony with each other or that, due to the ethos held between them, there will always be a butting of moral heads or ethos, so to speak? Those are all my questions.

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

We will try to answer the Senator's questions as best we can. On the issue of our conclusion, we wanted to point out that there are already ways in which people can die with dignity and that there are certain entitlements enshrined in law. This is not intended to comment on whether or not legislation is introduced but simply to comment on what exists today, in that people can die in a dignified way. I think Dr. Crowley and Dr. Twomey would be happy with that conclusion.

Then, on the issue of resistance, it is very hard to judge at this point in time how much resistance there would be. We have not done a survey of all of our staff and I believe it would be premature to look at that until we have a sense of what legislation would look like. We are equally mindful that our role as healthcare and social care providers is to engage with the Legislature and to do what is in our remit, which is to enact and support legislation, if and when such happens.

Dr. Twomey and Dr. Crowley may want to comment further on that.

Dr. Feargal Twomey

As in other sectors within the health service, there are different views on resistance. As we have stated very clearly and will continue to outline, we are not here to give an opinion or a stronger review. The Deputies and Senators present, as legislators and members of this committee, are probably as informed as anyone in the country on this because they have been listening to these hearings for nine months. Reading through all the submissions and watching all the recordings has shown me that the members have really done that. I do not envy their having to make a decision on this. It is hard to quantify what resistance there would be. Some people would be vehemently against the concept while others would welcome considering it. Others are not well enough informed to decide.

Dr. Philip Crowley

It is a very important question. We can predict that there will be some resistance. In the past, we implemented legislation that resulted in some resistance. We are committing to implement whatever the Oireachtas passes on this occasion as well.

On the emphasis on palliative care, it is very important to have good palliative care, whatever we decide in the area of assisted dying. That is why there is an emphasis on it in our submission, why we are developing policy on it, why we have invested in it and why we need to continue to do so.

Let me follow up with one point. I suppose the moral question will be further down the line, when there is pre-legislative scrutiny or other such scrutiny. There is a stance to the effect that there currently are ways in which people can die a dignified death or exit this life in a dignified way. That is what I take from these statements. Obviously, the move towards having a discussion on assisted dying has come from somewhere. There is, perhaps, a disconnect between what those in the medical field believe provides a dignified palliative end to life and what people believe to be a dignified end to life, because this conversation has not come out of the blue. Saying this does not discredit the work done in this area and the incredible support people can get, but this conversation has come from somewhere. Do the witnesses believe it has arisen because there may be a disconnect between what people believe about having a dignified end to their lives and a different position, or do people fear the unknown because they do not know what the options, including palliative ones, are? This is a hypothetical question.

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

From my clinical experience, the end-of-life experience is unique to each person. I often find that when you introduce the idea of palliative care services to families of patients, they are quite surprised, even if it is the end of life. My clinical experience has been that there is a different experience for every patient. I cannot answer the Senator's question directly but I hope that helps. I do not know whether Dr. Twomey wants to reflect on that.

Dr. Feargal Twomey

Senator Hoey's question is good and broad-ranging. Deputy Daly mentioned physical care for physical problems and care for psychological, social and other problems. That care is available. On requests for dying, many people I look after wish to die. They may have a passive death wish or may be open to dying soon. Those who are not naturally close to the end of their lives often come from a position of distress. Then it is a question of leaning into somebody and finding out what can be done to help with their distress. It may be unrelated to physical illness or even mental health. There might be societal pressure; it is hard to know.

Deputy Gino Kenny resumed the Chair.

I thank the witnesses. I appreciate their patience with my philosophical wanderings.

I thank the witnesses for attending. We are nearing the end of a long process and there have been difficult contributions and difficult learning. A common thread is that the point at which someone dies is important but the way in which they die is equally important. We have all had experience of bereavements within our families and circles, and the difference between those who have a good palliative care experience and those who do not is very stark. There is no doubt we need to have a better palliative care system in this country, regardless of where we go with this. I cannot praise enough St. Brigid's Hospice in the Curragh, which gives the most incredible palliative care for those who are, it is strange to say, fortunate in this way. Obviously, nearing the end of life is not a fortunate place to be in, but places are very limited, so at least in Kildare we have that facility. Deputy Troy was talking about palliative care in the midlands, and while there are plans for a palliative care centre in Tullamore that is going to cater for four counties, there is nothing at the moment. We definitely need to go a lot further.

Dr. Ní Bhriain might clarify something. She was talking about how in cases where a patient with cancer has thoughts of suicide, their mental health needs to be checked. I understand that, but it threw me somewhat because in some of our discussions, there has been a lot of talk about whether people with mental health issues should be in a position to ask for assisted dying if it were in place. Was Dr Ní Bhriain suggesting that if assisted dying were in place and somebody felt they could not deal with their present situation and the prognosis, and if it were diagnosed that they had a mental health issue because they had suicidal ideation, that be used to block their request? It is a hypothetical question.

I fully appreciate that the Department and the HSE are in the business of policy implementation and that they cannot really at this point have a view on the matter, but have they carried out any research on assisted dying? The committee has had a lot of interaction with a lot of areas but I wonder whether they have had any. Moreover, while assisted dying will be seen primarily as a health issue, justice and equality will also come into it. Do the officials feel, therefore, that this should be spread among other Departments, from an holistic point of view, to have a whole-of-government approach, assuming it is brought in?

One issue we have been grappling with and for which we have been examining all the different models relates to the eligibility criteria and the safeguards that would be in place if assisted dying were introduced. The two main models are based on either a terminal diagnosis within six months or another specified timeframe or unbearable suffering that is not going to change.

Is there a position regarding what model would fit best in Ireland?

Who is going to address that question first?

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

I will. I thank the Senator. There was a lot in her contribution, but I will try to come back to her. To give a very quick answer regarding whether we have done any research, we did a review of assisted dying in other jurisdictions to inform our views. The senior clinical leadership team met, undertook a review and had a discussion about this aspect. Obviously, we have not commissioned any specific research, but we have certainly reviewed existing work in other jurisdictions. We looked at this aspect as part of our considerations in this regard, for sure.

Turning to the issue of other Departments being involved, this is obviously very much a matter for the Legislature. Ms McArdle might wish to comment on this point. On the issue of suicidality, which I will mention specifically, I am a psychiatrist and I know that anyone presenting with suicidality is something we would clearly discuss with them, investigate and look at generally. With the vast majority of people I have seen who have had suicidal ideation, it has been very much a part of a mental health disorder, which we have been able to treat. This is important. The point we are trying to make here is that we would not like people not to get treatment for something that is treatable.

On the issue of eligibility, this is a very difficult question. I think this would come back to the legislation rather than to us, but we will be very happy to engage when it comes to that pre-legislative stage. I hope this answers the Senator's questions.

Ms Siobhán McArdle

From the Department's perspective, research has not been commissioned, or not commissioned yet, on this topic. If we commission research or begin to look at the policy implications, we would absolutely have to work with our colleagues in the Department of Justice. This is because at the moment the legislation precludes the provision of assisted dying or dying in that context. We would, therefore, have to work closely with that part of the Government to ensure all those services align.

Would anyone else like to contribute? No. We move to Deputy Cullinane now.

Go raibh maith agat. I will start with Dr. Ní Bhriain. For the purposes of clarity, she said the HSE does not have a policy position. I think we can all accept this because it would be a matter for government anyway. There is no government policy now. Dr. Ní Bhriain also said that there is no commissioned research, but that through the Health Research Board, if I understand her correctly, and maybe from her organisation's own analysis, other jurisdictions have been looked at. To ensure we are very clear, has the HSE looked at other jurisdictions specifically in relation to assisted dying?

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

When we were organising our response for today-----

I refer to outside of the response for today.

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

No, we have not.

The HSE has looked at other countries and jurisdictions in terms of assisted dying only for the purposes of today's session.

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

Yes, we have.

That is it. What was that process? Was it undertaken over the course of a day or two days? Were there discussions among those who are witnesses? Was there a wider team involved in that discussion?

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

Wider teams were involved in that discussion. As I said, it was a discussion among the senior clinical leadership. We had a half-day meeting about it, and then we had subsequent discussions about it as well.

In the course of those discussions, was any consideration given to what sort of safeguards and issues would have to be examined in a context where legislation of this type was to come about?

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

Yes. The feeling is very much that there would need to be safeguards in place.

I understand that, but I am looking at the HSE's opening statement and it very clearly sets out safeguards and a range of issues that would need to be considered. I do not see this in the Department's opening statement. I am saying the opening statement has not identified what the safeguards would be.

Ms Siobhán McArdle

From a departmental perspective, we have not conducted research, so we do not have the information the Deputy is requesting in terms of the safeguards. The HSE statement, as Dr. Ní Bhriain has pointed out, is based on that review of preparation for attendance today, so it is coming from the clinical perspective. If this matter is to be progressed by the Government, then the Department of Health would undertake to commission research to look at those factors and to identify those safeguards put in place in other jurisdictions, their effectiveness and what the outcome of those has been.

At this point in time, however, the Department has not looked at those safeguards. Why not?

Ms Siobhán McArdle

We have not looked at them because there is no current policy for the provision of assisted dying.

I know there is no current policy, but at the same time there may be policy.

It is possible that at some point in the next 12 months there could be policy. What I am saying is that the HSE has looked at this. I will go through all of the different issues the HSE has identified as potential safeguards. They are: citizens who may be vulnerable; potential impact on healthcare workers; patient safety; safeguarding; and intergenerational impacts. Obviously there is, at a HSE level, an element of discussion on what the safeguards would be. I wonder why that is not happening at a Department level.

Ms Siobhán McArdle

As I set out in our opening statement, the Department has not been commissioned or asked by Government to work on the matter of assisted dying so our presentation today was mostly from the perspective of the services that are currently provided, under policy, which at the moment range into palliative care.

The Department has not been asked to do it and because the Department has not been asked to do it, then it was not done.

Ms Siobhán McArdle

It is not that we are not busy. There is quite a full brief of research being undertaken currently in the Department of Health, and in conjunction with the Health Research Board. However, if it was a Government or ministerial request that that was commissioned, then we would do it.

The opening statement of the HSE reads: "The CEO of the HSE has asked us to confirm that should draft legislation be forthcoming, the HSE will respond in more detail at the Committee Consultative stages", and I assume at pre-legislative scrutiny stage, etc. In a second, I will inquire from the HSE about its structure to do this work. It seems obvious to me that the HSE's CEO is looking forward and has asked those in the HSE to at least examine all of these issues. That has not happened at a departmental level and, if legislation comes, it will come through the Department.

Ms Siobhán McArdle

It will, indeed. Yes.

Not the HSE. The HSE has at least been asked to look at this in order to be in a position to respond. If there was movement on this issue, at this point in time there is zero work done by the Department. I imagine the Department would have to respond very quickly but without having, at this point in time, any work done, despite the fact this committee has been in place for some time.

Ms Siobhán McArdle

That is right, Deputy. Should it be that the policy becomes a responsibility of the Department of Health, then absolutely we would have to prioritise.

Of course. If a decision is made, as we know, whoever is the Minister at the time will be told, "We have to go away and we have to look at all of this". That could take a year or two years. At the very least, the HSE seems to be in parallel with the work of this committee, examining issues, but the Department is not.

The HSE said it has examined these issues. Has a working group examined these issues? Is there a formal working group within the HSE? The HSE statement states: "The CEO of the HSE has asked us to confirm that should draft legislation be forthcoming, the HSE will respond". Is there a formal working group working on that?

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

There is not an existing working group. What we did was use our existing governance structures to do some work and consideration, as I outlined to the committee before. We have a group, within the clinical leadership, where we meet on a regular basis to discuss issues of concern, interest and information with that group. We use that forum to have the conversation.

In fairness to the Department, I also had a conversation with Ms McArdle prior to this where we were just conscious of our timing and wanted to, from the clinical side, bring up the clinical issues and then bring up the policy issues as well from the departmental side.

In response, we have worked at this through existing governance structures and in an existing group. That is a clinical group. I know that if legislation was to be introduced, there would be a wider working group to look at it.

I accept that. I assume that some of the work the HSE has done will be useful. We do not know what the recommendations will be. This committee will deliberate and publish a report. I think it is reasonable to point out that there is a level of work that was done, at the very least, in the HSE. The CEO of the HSE has, at the very least, asked the HSE to examine the matters and be prepared for legislation. I wish to point out because it is a statement of fact that that has not happened in the Department. I think that is a mistake. It is not that the Department has to take a position because there is no position to take. In my view, at the very least, the Department should be examining the issues in the same way that is being done by the HSE.

Deputy Higgins, please.

I thank all of our guests for being here with us today. I thank the Chair, the Acting Chair, all of the committee members and all the witnesses who have attended over the last number of months. This is our last meeting of this special committee.

In the past few months, we have heard from healthcare professionals, palliative care professionals, theologians, legal experts, NGOs and from those with international experience from abroad. We have heard about a huge array of expertise and, in many ways, contrary views. It is a complex issue that we are exploring at this committee and unfortunately for members of the committee and the secretariat, the work will not be finished today. It will not be finished until 20 March or thereafter.

I will put on the record that my views have changed since the beginning of this committee. That shows the value of these committees and of witnesses coming before us and helping to shape views and potential legislation.

I differ from my colleagues about the HSE's statements on safeguards. While there are six themes of safeguards in its statement, I only see one safeguard listed, that is, that conscientious objection should be enabled. There is a possibility of a second on additional time being given. I have struggled with this throughout these committee meetings because we have heard many views and safeguarding has come up again and again. I have found it difficult to get examples of what safeguards should be introduced if this legislation comes into play.

My second question is for both the HSE and the Department. We heard from international experience that other countries have taken assisted dying outside their versions of the HSE, if you like, and set it up in an independent or separate authority. That approach was supported by healthcare workers who chose to work in that area. Could that work in Ireland?

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

I apologise but was the last sentence of the last question about something that could work in Ireland.

We heard from international experts that other countries took it out of the HSE, effectively.

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

I might just talk a little about the issue of safeguarding. We have different forms of safeguarding in different areas of care. For example, if a person is detained under the Mental Health Act, the safeguard is that it is reviewed by a tribunal, which is similar to a sitting of the Circuit Court. The tribunal consists of a layperson, a medical person and a legal person. That is a form of safeguard which reviews the reasons a person is detained under the Mental Health Act.

There are other areas, such as the safeguarding of care of children. The Deputy will be aware of and familiar with the Children First policy. For example, if we consider there are threats to, or concerns about, the health or safety of a child, that has to be reported to Tusla. That is a form of safeguarding. Updated work is ongoing in the Department on safeguarding for older people. My background is geriatric medicine and old-age psychiatry. If we have concerns about a person being subjected to undue coercion, being financially abused or whatever, there are safeguards in place.

There are safeguards already in place

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

There is a lot more detail and we could provide the committee with some of it after the meeting perhaps.

I appreciate that. I am wondering whether there are particular safeguards we would need to introduce in terms of this particular legislation on top of what already exists.

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

There are. Safeguarding is generally done in particular areas. We have particular safeguards in children's care, particular safeguards in mental health and particular safeguards for older people and there are other areas of care, such as disability services, where there is safeguarding. There is no one perfect way of safeguarding. There are multiple different ways depending on the situation.

Does Dr. Ní Bhriain think the existing safeguards are sufficient? Is that what Dr. Ní Bhriain is saying?

Dr. Feargal Twomey

I am minded to use Professor Richard Huxtable's evidence to the committee some months ago. The safeguard the Deputy mentioned of conscientious objection is one of the concerns Dr. Ní Bhriain mentioned earlier on protecting healthcare workers. Professor Huxtable recommended ensuring eligibility and other inclusion criteria are clear. That is a safeguard, being clear about who this is for and who will be eligible to apply for it. He mentioned palliative care which was discussed already and conscientious objection which the Deputy already raised, but one of the key things that it is important the committee consider is that if there are to be safeguards, how they will be monitored and how will data be collected to ensure boundaries are enforced?

To go back to what Dr. Ní Bhriain said in her opening statement, the exact details of what safeguards might look like would come at what the Deputy called the pre-legislative scrutiny, PLS, stage. If I may, I will segue into one of the other questions around healthcare, the options before the committee are not to legislate at all, as I mentioned earlier, or to have it within or outside healthcare.

Again, there are different models that members have heard about from around the world that will guide them. It is often that a safeguard has to be as restrictive as possible in something that is as important as this, but, again, that is a decision that, unfortunately, the ladies and gentlemen of the committee and others are responsible for taking.

Perhaps I could get other views on that second question as to whether this could operate independently of the HSE, if we legislated for it, or whether it is more appropriate that it would fit within the HSE.

Dr. Philip Crowley

Obviously, the legislation will determine whether the HSE provides it. We said we will provide anything that is legislated for. Clearly, services are provided outside of the HSE as well, so that is clearly an option.

I echo what colleagues said and thank the Chair for the manner in which he has chaired the public sessions. I commend the secretariat and support staff who have provided us with a huge amount of invaluable work and research and background assistance as we move into the final stage of this. I thank our witnesses for coming today.

I take a different view from previous speakers. I think the Department of Health and HSE might face severe criticism on the other side of the coin if it was seen they were breaking ground developing policy on a assisted dying. That perspective also needs to be stressed for balance.

I found the witnesses' papers really interesting. Even from some of the basic statistics, I did not realise that approximately 30,000 people die every year. That is the average figure in Ireland. I did not realise until now that palliative care was available and applied to individuals of any age, including children who have life-limiting illnesses, and that it encompassed that. I was ignorant on that point.

I have a couple of questions. There are also a couple of things that are worth noting given the work we do and the contributions that have been made here. The amount of budget that is provided for palliative care surprised me. It is very significant and I really do welcome that. I welcome the switch. The Government needs to be commended on the amount of funding for palliative care and particularly palliative care in hospices. If there is a person in Ireland who has not experienced interventions of palliative care, whether it is in the home or in the hospices themselves, the huge amount of funding they have is allied to the Government funding they get. The global figure surprised me in terms of its scale. While not being complacent or smug about it, the State gives a very significant piece of funding to palliative care. Clearly, it has to improve.

I acknowledge in the statement the change in status from section 39 to section 38, again, under this Government, which made a significant difference and provided close to an additional €20 million to hospices. They are really important pieces.

The way other countries handle this has impacted me, certainly as we have done our work. I read in The Guardian newspaper at the weekend that 5.1% of all deaths in 2022 in the Netherlands were by euthanasia. We heard from previous witnesses that the figure is over 3% in Canada. I am very struck, in a neutral way, at the gap between here and other jurisdictions. I am appalled in some cases, but compassionate, too, in others. I was very struck by the story about the former Dutch Prime Minister, Dries van Agt, and his wife, who were both 93. He was Catholic and founder of the Christian Democratic Appeal party. They both died by euthanasia at the weekend. It was clearly an agreement between themselves. They sounded like intelligent people who led full lives, and political lives, and were very active. Those kinds of things arrest me in my thinking as part of this whole process. Like Deputy Higgins, I have certainly found myself oscillating between positions as we have gone through our work.

The HSE representatives mentioned the intergenerational impact. They might just say a little more about that because I do not think we have heard a lot about it. They cite that there is obviously an intergenerational impact of suicide on successive generations, and that there might be a danger that legalising assisted dying or euthanasia could have an intergenerational impact that would make it easier or more open as an option.

I am also interested in the HSE piece about palliative care - providing high-quality assessment and treatment of pain and other physical, psychosocial and spiritual problems. Will the HSE representatives address that because it is an issue for me? Is that just for people who have very strong faiths or people who have none? That is a question we did not get an awful lot of time to go into. Those are my questions for now.

Deputy Michael Healy-Rae took the Chair.

Who would like to go first?

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

I will go first if that is okay. Briefly, on the issue of intergenerational impact, we noticed there is an intergenerational impact when it comes to suicide. We do not know if there is when it comes to assisted dying.

Will Dr. Ní Bhriain speak about the intergenerational impact of suicide?

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

Yes, we can. We know suicide increases the likelihood risk of dying by suicide in the siblings and the children of people who have died by suicide. That has been demonstrated over a number of generations. We have provided a couple of papers that might be of interest.

I can see that.

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

There is absolutely no evidence one way or the other on the issue of the intergenerational impact of assisted dying. We simply know that assisted dying can have an impact and that could be for good or for bad.

I am interested in the suicide piece as well.

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

Yes. If the Deputy requires more he can come back to us. Ms McArdle brought up the physical, psychological and spiritual side but Dr. Twomey may wish to comment from the clinical perspective.

Dr. Feargal Twomey

In terms of spiritual care and spirituality there is a lot more to spirituality than religious beliefs. Anybody in society providing healthcare who practices otherwise is misguided. Spiritual care within palliative care, as I know it but I am sure my colleagues in other specialties know, encompasses those of no religion, which in practical terms is a growing majority, and those who have religious beliefs. Some services have chaplaincy services. Other services have pastoral care services. Social workers and other members of the team would be able to address different spiritual needs.

I suppose it is the kinds of spiritual challenges that someone coming towards the end of life or with a life-limiting illness might experience. That is what I would like to tease out.

Dr. Feargal Twomey

That is a good question. They vary from person to person. A lot of it is existential. In my experience, when people are dying a lot of it is about, "Have I lived enough? Have I loved enough? Have I been loved enough? Is there anything I have not let go?" It was mentioned earlier that it is very important how people die. People who have an illness that will threaten their life never forget how they heard it and their families will never forget how they died. Both for the patients and for the people involved, as in an individual who is dying and who dies, and the family carers who are those they know and trust around them, all have a spirituality which is their own. People see spiritually genuinely in art, music-----

That is one of the points I wanted to draw out and Dr. Twomey has done that, which is not to equate spirituality necessarily with an institutional faith or an institutional belief-----

Dr. Feargal Twomey

No.

-----but that it clearly can transcend.

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

It does.

I thank Deputy Gino for earlier.

This committee has come full circle with regard to this issue. Over Christmas I listened to a BBC podcast and one of the guests was Esther Rantzen. During the Christmas period she came out with regard to her support of assisted dying. She said something very profound which I probably should have thought about as someone who supports assisted dying. She said that most people are not afraid of dying but of how they die. That was a very important statement about assisted dying. This is a very complex issue but I believe we can overcome those complexities with regard to what we are trying to grapple with.

This committee has been given the task of setting a path for legislating for assisted dying or not. I believe we should legislate. Safeguards and all the concerns we all have can only be as good as the legislation we put forward. There is also the matter of those who are eligible for availing of assisted dying. Hopefully, our committee will support and recommend assisted dying. The vast majority of people in Ireland would not be able to avail of assisted dying under the recommendations that this committee will hopefully put forward. The matter of eligibility is very important. Who can avail of assisted dying, and in what circumstances? What are the timeframes, etc.? They are all very important matters, and it is up to this committee to thrash that out over the next three or four weeks.

I agree that palliative care in this country is very good. There are deficits, such as county-by-county access to palliative care. We should not conflate palliative care and assisted dying. In some ways, they can be almost complementary. I have said on numerous occasions that if somebody is in a set of circumstances where they will die, I believe it is their fundamental human right to have a say in how they die. They should be able to die on their own terms. I do not think that is radical. That is a very contemporary way of looking at a rights-based approach to somebody who wants to have a say in their healthcare. That is a very fundamental human right. Hopefully, my colleagues will believe that as well and will recommend legislative change.

I do not have any specific question. I will just say that some of the language used by the HSE in their opening statements has been a bit disappointing. I will be honest with them about that. The word “burden” has been negatively used by opponents of assisted dying in relation to this, and I do not think it is helpful. I think conflating the issue of suicide and assisted dying is very unhelpful.

As I said, we will have to grapple with this issue over the next three to four weeks, but I believe this can be done. Public opinion suggests and points to the fact that a majority of people support assisted dying under limited circumstances. I do not have any specific questions. Perhaps Dr. Ní Bhriain can speak about some of the language that she used, which I think is slightly disappointing.

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

I thank Deputy. I will say that it is certainly not our intention to cause distress or to be pejorative in any sense, so we tried to ensure that language would not be used.

The language of “burden” is something that I, as a clinician, have heard a lot of people discuss with me. Older people have felt they were a burden. It is a word people have used in my clinical experience. There was no intention to use that word in a pejorative way in any sense at all. Dr. Twomey may wish to comment on the issue of people not being afraid of dying, but rather, how they die.

Dr. Feargal Twomey

There are a number of things I wish to come in on. I listened to Esther Rantzen’s podcast also. I deal with people who may soon die as part of my daily practice, and my sense is that there are three points. People are afraid of what will happen between now and the time they die. They are afraid of what dying is like. As was alluded to by Deputy Lahart, some people who have a belief system will wonder about what happens afterwards. There are three aspects of it.

I echo another point Deputy Gino Kenny made, which is that it is imperative and part of good healthcare for people to be involved in decisions around their care. Decisions about anybody's care should be shared with them. This is the case primarily with healthcare providers if it is a matter of healthcare, with the involvement of those they know and trust.

Speaking of the word “burden”, there is evidence from Oregon and Canada that up to 45% or 55% of those who inquire about what they in Canada call “medical assistance in dying” cite the fear of being a burden as one of the reasons for choosing assisted suicide.

Therefore, it is in the literature and in discussions around it where assisted dying, as it is called in its broadest terms, is available.

There were other indications-----

Dr. Feargal Twomey

Completely.

-----more than being a burden. That has been shown in the evidence across the United States and Canada where people indicated loss of autonomy, dignity and sometimes pain. Before this committee, I thought pain would have been one of the top reasons but it was one of the lesser ones. That is interesting.

Dr. Feargal Twomey

I agree that burden was not the only reason cited. In fact, fear of pain is cited far more often than pain in and of itself.

I thank Deputy Kenny very much. I call Deputy Costello.

While there have been some thanks to the Chair and secretariat for how they have handled these public meetings, I am conscious that we all have much work ahead of us in a private capacity. Therefore, I will save my thanks for later. I thank the witnesses for coming in and sharing their submissions.

I want to pick up on something with Dr. Ní Bhriain. She spoke about the need for conscientious objection. Members and people who have appeared before the committee have spoken much about safeguards and conscientious objection. I would be interested in hearing some of the experiences regarding conscientious objection as it stands within the HSE, what we can learn from that to transfer on to this and how we ensure we are adequately providing for conscientious objection, while at the same time ensuring service delivery.

My second question is more in response to Ms McArdle's point regarding palliative care. She quite rightly said that palliative care and assisted dying are completely separate and not to be conflated. Previous witnesses before this committee have conflated them and we are presented with an either-or choice that either we have palliative care or assisted dying, and it is kind of ruled out that we have both. Again, that would seem to me to be wrong and I assume, based on that statement, it would be Ms McArdle's evidence that it is wrong. She might talk to me about whether she sees assisted dying as undermining palliative care. How would the policy development go forward? How would the funding go forward? If this committee was to recommend and the Government was to implement assisted dying, would she be concerned about palliative care or are they completely separate issues and not to be conflated or used as a red herring in any way?

I will start with Dr. Ní Bhriain and conscientious objection.

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

I thank the Deputy. Dr. Twomey is our expert on that.

Dr. Feargal Twomey

Conscientious objection is important to many healthcare professionals. The Deputy will have heard in the sittings thus far evidence from Australia and New Zealand where conscientious objection to participating in anything to do with assisted dying is really lock tight. Essentially, healthcare professionals and doctors and nurses in Australia and New Zealand elect to participate. In essence, if they do not wish to participate, people are able to contact their ministry for health to be put in touch with a doctor or practitioner who would be interested in providing the service as it is set out in their legislation. Conscientious objection came under the spotlight in Ireland following the repeal of the eighth amendment. Conscientious objection in that is subject to a conventional compromise that has been put in place, partly to protect those who have conscientious objection but also partly to protect those looking for the service. There is an obligation to make a referral to somebody who might provide the service even though another person is not willing to provide it. From listening to the deliberations of members of the committee and their witnesses in previous sittings, there seems to be a fondness for an Oregon-based model or an Australia-New Zealand model, the full impact of which we do not know yet because it is so new.

However, one of the things said in this regard and said by Professor Huxtable, whose evidence really impressed me, was that having true conscientious objection means there is not a burden on a healthcare professional to provide something he or she is not comfortable with but it is open to those who are willing to do so to provide the service. That clarity is helpful in terms of healthcare well-being and possibly in terms of patients, members of the public, who wish to avail of a particular service, if legalised.

Ms Siobhán McArdle

We do not wish to conflate assisted dying and palliative care. Palliative care is very much a part of the continuum or life course of healthcare for people at the end of life. If the Government made a decision to proceed with assisted dying, it would be at that point the Department would consider and research the questions raised on the impact on other parts of the health service, not least palliative care. However, at this point it would be too early to answer. We consider assisted dying and palliative care to be separate at this time.

Dr. Twomey spoke about how it came under the spotlight. Has he had any issues in respect of how conscientious objection is working in practice within the HSE? Is it working or not? Is there anything Dr. Twomey would like to see reformed?

Dr. Feargal Twomey

From my experience of palliative care, it is not an issue we have come across. Unfortunately, I would not be able to answer the Deputy's question regarding the wider HSE.

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

I have not come across that much of it as a problem myself. It is as a clinician that I am speaking.

That suggests the safeguards and systems around conscientious objection are relatively smooth and largely working.

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

At the moment, certainly. We would not have experienced otherwise.

Dr. Feargal Twomey

At a granular level, there will always be some conflict, but at system-wide level, I do not believe we have that information.

I thank all the witnesses. We will now proceed to the last set of questions. Each member will have four minutes in which to ask a question and receive an answer.

Something very interesting was said about safeguards in response to Deputy Higgins. It concerned how many safeguards already exist. There definitely needs to be a recommendation on behalf of the committee or a recommendation to the Government on all the other relevant legislation, including on decision-making capacity. As the safeguarding legislation is awaited, maybe there is something in this regard that needs to be examined. All of these aspects, including the ratification of the UNCRPD, are important. The statement on coming up with safeguards clarified things for me a little. I am referring to asking where safeguards already exist and where they can apply.

My question is mainly for Dr. Twomey and Dr. Ní Bhriain. Even though they cannot come here and say they support or do not support legislation and must be neutral, there is a missed opportunity. I realise the Department is not being asked to carry out anything because the policy has not been given to it yet, but this is the largest conversation that has been had on assisted dying and the recommendations of this committee could potentially determine what the heads of the Bill will look like. Therefore, there is a missed opportunity in terms of experts determining what should be in the legislation. The witnesses have said they will engage during pre-legislative scrutiny but maybe that will be too late to impart their expertise as clinicians or experts on palliative care. I am not asking them to support a position. When I worked in the addiction sector, I was able to examine policy or what was being presented to me, perhaps with a different idea from others on what should happen, and say such a model would be preferred from a harm-reduction perspective if it were introduced. The witnesses, having examined the various models abroad, should be able to say that if a certain one, such as that in New Zealand or Oregon, is being considered for introduction, it should be examined more closely with additional safeguards. In saying this, I am not saying the officials should take a position. From an expert perspective, the committee has to make recommendations on models, but it would be best for it to have clinicians with wide experience, such as those present, saying what the best one would be, if introduced, but saying so would not be to say the committee should legislate in this area. The witnesses have to inform what this committee suggests. Otherwise, why have this conversation in the first place?

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

I have a comment on safeguarding that I hope will help. Safeguarding generally needs to be specific to the situation involved, with specific safeguarding for specific groups.

The Senator correctly mentioned the Assisted Decision Making (Capacity) Act and the National Consent Policy 2022. There are areas this would need to be aligned to. If we were to say anything, it is that safeguarding is very important and needs to be specific to the case involved and fit for purpose so we can monitor it. Safeguarding is a critical issue for consideration by the committee, if that is any help.

Dr. Philip Crowley

Whatever is put in place should be evaluated as it proceeds and we can improve it, based on the evidence in Ireland.

The witnesses must have looked at other models and hope that certain things are or are not suggested, if there is going to be a suggestion.

They have to be given political direction.

They are here as experts.

They are here as civil servants.

Why have them then?

It is because they take direction from Government. I was going to say from their political masters, but I do not mean that. There is no direction on this.

We are having a discussion about assisted dying.

It is also worth having this discussion. It is the point I made, following the contribution. Does Senator Ruane not think there would be a scandal if people who are set against-----

The scandal will happen if we introduce something and the HSE says, "Oh my God, I cannot believe they went with that".

Can I finish the question? Does the Senator not think there would be public uproar among people who might-----

If people have policy-----

I have not finished the question.

Well it is my slot.

I will be happy to share a minute of mine with the Senator.

If people have policy experience-----

The Senator did not allow me to finish the question.

If we were discussing drug policies, people from the Department and from the social inclusion area would talk about which drug policies are best and those that are not good.

The Senator was leading the witness though.

I ask Dr. Twomey to respond briefly.

Dr. Feargal Twomey

If you were to legislate in this area, based on Deputy Gino Kenny's comment that the vast majority of the public would not be able to access this, the most important thing in healthcare is first to do no harm. In essence, if you are to legislate, a little like in the case of Tom Curran who is in the Gallery, the Supreme Court said he was the most compelling witness and it was the most compelling case and if it could make a law for him that would harm no one else, it would be minded to do so. Those were extremely powerful words. The question is whether there is a model that has absolute safeguards. No one can convince me there is. If one were to consider it, I would suggest listening to Professor Theo Boer and not to look at euthanasia where a physician or healthcare worker does the act, because it makes it a far easier choice for people to make what is an enormous step.

Those last comments by Dr. Twomey are significant. What he said about conscientious objection is also significant and we should revisit the issue of allowing people who have a professional or moral objection or whatever, especially where the State is paying for, providing or permitting. It is important people are able to disengage completely, rather than having to transfer for care, but that is a discussion for another day.

Listening to what my friend and colleague, Deputy Gino Kenny, had to say, I was struck by something. I admired the late Leonard Cohen very much. In 2016, he said he was ready to die and he hoped it would not be too uncomfortable. I deeply believe that if we can address people's fears and concerns about dying - not only pain or the fear of pain which Dr. Twomey emphasised is the even stronger issue - we can address this issue in a way that does not require an assisted suicide or euthanasia regime and therefore enables us to avoid all the risks we have talked about, such as people feeling they are a burden, people with mental health issues getting caught up in the trap and all the other situations.

In that context, I will turn to Dr. Ní Bhriain briefly with a sensitive question. We all know that suicide should never be encouraged. It has been described as a permanent solution to a temporary problem. We know it happens for various reasons. One of the things our work on this committee has brought out for me is that there are two ways in which the suicide question intersects with the euthanasia or assisted suicide issue. One is the question, reflecting on what Dr. Anne Doherty and others had to say, of whether, no matter how it is tried, people with mental health challenges of one kind or another will get caught up in the net, even if it was only legislated for in cases of terminal illness.

The second issue is whether the very existence of assisted suicide as a possibility causes people intergenerationally other otherwise to set their lives at a lesser value. I ask my question of Dr. Ní Bhriain delicately and with caution. Is assisted suicide not a branch of the suicide question, in the sense that whenever suicide takes place, there is a reason for it?

The reason may relate to mental illness, depression, the death of a loved one, some crisis in the person's life, or because the person is approaching physical illness or death, etc. Is it possible to separate these? I thought the representatives were doing so. I am not asking them inquisitorially, but I am seeking to understand. Is it not necessary for us to consider the assisted suicide question as a branch of the suicide question? It will always be a live issue. It may be the case that its availability for some categories of people will cause others to set their lives at a lesser value.

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

The Senator is absolutely right: it is a very difficult and sensitive question to answer. I would like to go back to the fact that we do not want to conflate the issues of assisted dying and suicide. That is very important. The evidence base is for suicide - not for assisted suicide or assisted dying. That brings us back to the space of what safeguarding is about, as well as what is in and out of the scope of safeguarding in this particular context. It also brings us back to the fact that if the legislation were to be introduced, safeguarding must considered as part of the pre-legislative scrutiny, in addition to what comes in and out of the scope of safeguarding. In this particular context, it does need to be very specific and fit for purpose. I also refer to Dr. Crowley’s comments. If we were to introduce this legislation, the research and monitoring component of it would be critical.

Can I ask Dr. Ní Bhriain to explain - I say this with great delicacy and sensitivity - why she does not want to conflate these issues? Is it only because not every suicide comes under the heading of assisted suicide? Does she see a qualitative difference?

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

There is a very considerable difference between a person who takes their own life without the involvement of or engagement with other people, which frequently happens, and where assistance occurs. The research that we know about involves those who have taken their own lives in different contexts. We do not have longer term evidence on the issue of assisted dying or, indeed, assisted suicide.

I call Deputy Lahart.

One of the downsides of committee meetings is there is no space for a point of information. I therefore say to my colleague, Senator Ruane, that she can take 30 seconds of my time. I am quite happy to share it.

The point I was trying to make was that there could equally be uproar if some members of the public thought the Department of Health or the HSE were tearing ahead and breaking ground on this when the committee has not come to a conclusion.

I am not saying to do this to create legislation or policy.

I am saying they might be able to inform the committee of the practices in other countries and what would cause the least amount of harm. That is very different from telling them to go and create something. It is more of an acknowledgement of their expertise in the area so that we can be more informed as a committee going forward.

Okay. Truce.

I have a couple of questions. Senator Mullen has said something I am not sure about. I will have to reflect on it. He said that suicide is a permanent solution to a temporary problem, and that suicide and assisted suicide are part of the same conversation. Yet, the evidence we have heard is that, in some cases, assisted suicide is a permanent solution to a permanent problem, and not a temporary problem. I argue that people need to be careful about saying suicide is a permanent solution to a temporary problem. Some of the evidence we have heard here is that these are life-limiting illnesses and are therefore permanent. This is permanent, it is not going to end and it is not going to go away. That is one very significant difference in how the two have been defined.

Can I offer a point of information?

No, I want to move on.

I am only seeking-----

(Interruptions).

I will wait. No, I do not need to.

I have a question I want to ask.

We will come back to it again.

That is one of the points I want to make. We have heard evidence from Dr. Twomey, who is the national clinical lead for palliative care. There are clearly opposite views in Australia, New Zealand and Canada, where they face the same challenges but come up with different answers. It is important to put that on the record, too.

I want to ask a question that has not been asked before in this committee. We have received evidence from palliative care specialists and GPs that there is pain, suffering and conditions that are beyond the reach of palliative care.

What does palliative care offer in such circumstances?

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

Palliative care is obviously a standalone specialty but it also works in conjunction with many other specialties. I have given the example of me as an old-age psychiatrist. I frequently work with my colleagues in palliative care and that is a two-way street. Dr. Twomey may wish to talk more about that.

Dr. Feargal Twomey

It could be argued that assisted dying is not something that should come in due to the absence of alternative care. There is also the situation where palliative care and other life prolonging treatments are available but people do not want to avail of them.

The evidence we have heard is that there is a tiny number of conditions that are beyond the reach of medicine.

Dr. Feargal Twomey

I probably agree. It is a question the Deputy or Deputy Gino Kenny asked me when I was previously before the committee. There are certain cases that are rare in my experience, and I have had no experience of such cases in the past ten or 20 years, where symptoms cannot be satisfactorily controlled for an individual.

What do we offer such an individual?

Dr. Feargal Twomey

Individuals who are close to the end of their lives are what I refer to as suffering from a "terminal illness". That is when somebody is within days or hours of their death. In the public domain, terminal illness is what I would call an incurable illness that is not going to go away. If someone is very close to the end of his or her life, as is true of a number of patients whose care I am currently involved with, and is distressed and in a lot of pain, we are able to manage that by controlling symptoms, pain, anxiety and-----

Is Dr. Twomey able to do that?

Dr. Feargal Twomey

I would have to say that in the vast-----

What about the tiny minority of cases?

Dr. Feargal Twomey

The law is for society. Balance is required between providing a solution for a very small minority of people-----

That is what we are talking about.

Dr. Feargal Twomey

That does not affect the majority.

May I insist? Dr. Twomey has not answered. What do we do in the case of those very rare-----

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

There may be situations where a case is beyond the remit of palliative care but if there is anxiety or stress, or particular types of agitation, somebody such as me would come in. We do consult beyond the specialty of palliative care. There are other clinical experts who can provide help and support.

What does Dr. Ní Bhriain do in such a case?

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

It depends on what the condition is.

Will Dr. Ní Bhriain give us a few examples?

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

I have often been asked by our palliative care colleagues to see somebody who may be at the end of life or suffering from a terminal illness, who is distressed about his or her prognosis and who may be suffering from a particular type of agitation. I would have expertise in prescribing certain medications in that situation.

We have been told that some conditions are beyond all of that. Is that true or false?

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

There is no such thing as a binary answer in medicine.

We were told there is.

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

Just to say, clinical care evolves all the time.

Dr. Feargal Twomey

If someone is dying and distressed, we are able to use medications to help relieve them of their distress. Perhaps it is an analgesic to help control pain, an anxiolytic or a sedative medicine to manage breathlessness, fear or anxiety, or another type of medicine to manage distress or delirium at the end of life. We can manage that.

Deputy Lahart posed a profound question about what we have been deliberating over for the past nine months. A cohort of people could and should be able to avail of assisted dying because there are complicated circumstances where somebody has a terminal diagnosis or is in a very difficult situation coming to the end of life. It can be very difficult, as I know first-hand. I am sure others have also seen such circumstances.

I want to bring us back to the person. This is the most important aspect of a profound question about one's mortality.

.

When we speak of our own lives, we also speak of others who have gone public to talk about their own personal lives. Ms Marie Fleming, Ms Bernadette Forde, Mr. Brendan Clarke and Ms Gaynor French wanted to say publicly, in the most fundamental set of circumstances, that the legislation should change around assisted dying. To me, that is probably the most important aspect of this question we are asking ourselves. Can we overcome the obstacles around the legislation? Yes, we can. Can we overcome issues around safeguards? Yes, we can, through very robust legislation. Can we overcome giving people a choice with regard to assisted dying in certain circumstances? I believe we can. When we can, I do not think the health service is going to fall apart or that society is going to fall apart. In fact, I think people will just get on with their lives. I would like, however, as a person and a citizen of this country, to have a choice if a set of circumstances happened. I would like other citizens of this country to be able to avail of a choice in limited circumstances. Most people will probably never avail of it even if there is a choice, but it should be a choice with regard to how they die. Most people who die will obviously die peacefully, but there is a cohort of people who do not die peacefully and they should have a choice regarding end-of-life care. That means changing the law, which we hopefully will do. Those sets of circumstances have to be teased out regarding how this committee will deliberate over the next three or four weeks.

Who wants to make a comment on that?

Dr. Siobhán Ní Bhriain

As I said in my opening statement on behalf of the HSE, we have made it very clear that should draft legislation be forthcoming, we will be engaging at that stage if requested to do so.

I thank Dr. Ní Bhriain, Dr. Crowley, Dr. Twomey, Ms McArdle and Mr. Rowe for coming to the meeting today and engaging with the committee. It has been very important for us, as committee members, to hear the range of opinions on this very important issue. The witnesses have certainly given us a lot of their time, which we appreciate very much. We appreciate them sharing their expertise with us.

This is the final meeting of the Joint Committee on Assisted Dying. On behalf of myself, the members and the secretariat, I thank all the witnesses who have engaged with the committee over the last nine months. Every one of them has contributed to the debate on this complex topic. It was extremely valuable to be able to engage with such a wide range of experts and hear the personal stories of the people affected by this issue. I know that people who have tuned in and listened and family members who have been affected by this issue in various different ways are perhaps hurting very badly in their own personal lives. I want to acknowledge that very much today.

We are not talking about roads or water infrastructure. We are talking about life. We are talking about the issues that come into a person's home. There is nothing more sensitive and nothing more important. That is why the work of this committee is important.

On my behalf, I want to thank the members and, of course, the secretariat for their 100% commitment to this issue. This committee will now spend the next few weeks finalising its report.

The joint committee adjourned at 1.04 p.m. sine die.
Barr
Roinn