I NOTE the letter from Aidan Cook of Care Not Killing Scotland (August 20) regarding our analysis of the responses to the Health and Sport Committee consultation on the Assisted Suicide (Scotland) Bill.
To be clear, our analysis is restricted to the responses to the committee which, as Mr Cook accepts, shows a majority of responses in favour and is not an opinion poll. When such an independent poll was conducted in January 2014, it showed 69 per cent in favour of this legislation.
Mr Cook's organisation has made several references in the media to levels of opposition during previous consultation processes, so it is appropriate to point out the levels of support received during this exercise. We look forward to continuing a detailed and healthy debate with organisations which do not support this legislation in order to ensure proper public scrutiny but believe that the strong public support for these measures should be a key factor for MSPs when considering those discussions.
Sheila Duffy,
My Life, My Death, My Choice,
2 Walker Street,
Edinburgh.
AIDAN Cook observes that a majority of the written submissions to the Health and Sport Committee are in favour of the Assisted Suicide Bill. He also notes that their number is less important than the arguments they contain.
However, he fails to acknowledge that his organisation continues to make much of the fact, in its literature and on its website, that in 2010, 87 per cent of such submissions were opposed to the previous Assisted Dying Bill.
It would appear that matters have changed substantially since then. Is he willing to use such information only when it suits his case?
Bob Scott,
Humanist Society Scotland,
Creitendam Lodge,
Balmaha Road,
Drymen.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article