DOCTORS AND THE RIGHT TO KILL
[To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR.]
SIR,—I can hardly make out from Dr. Sym's letter whether he wishes to criticize my conclusions, or to support them. On the face of it, my short reply to Mr. Talbot would seem equally appropriate as a reply to Dr. Sym. The objections raised by your correspondent to the legalization of euthanasia are pretty much the same as those advanced in my article. We evidently differ, as Mr. Talbot and I differ, in our estimates of individual responsibility and of individual rectitude. I believe in law ; and I think that everyone should hesitate before he deliberately breaks the law. But I do not recognize the supremacy of law over individual conscience. Apart from this, I agree generally with Dr. Sym, as I think he will discover for himself if he re-reads my article. He is a dis- tinguished ophthalmic surgeon. Presumably, therefore, he is not often confronted with the moral dilemmas with which a general practitioner is constantly faced.—! am, Sir, &c.,
HARRY ROBERTS.
Oakshott Hanger, Hcavkley, Liss, Hants.
Previous page
