³ÉÈËÂÛ̳

The Prosecution services say the public interest factors that favour a prosecution are these:

1) The victim was under 18 years of age.
2) The victim's capacity to reach an informed decision was adversely affected by a recognised mental illness or learning difficulty.
3) The victim did not have a clear, settled and informed wish to commit suicide; for example, the victim's history suggests that his or her wish to commit suicide was temporary or subject to change.
4) The victim did not indicate unequivocally to the suspect that he or she wished to commit suicide.
5) The victim did not ask personally on his or her own initiative for the assistance of the suspect.
6) The victim did not have a terminal illness; or a severe and incurable physical disability; or a severe degenerative physical condition; from which there was no possibility of recovery.
7) The suspect was not wholly motivated by compassion; for example, the suspect was motivated by the prospect that they or a person closely connected to them stood to gain in some way from the death of the victim.
8) The suspect persuaded, pressured or maliciously encouraged the victim to commit or attempt to commit suicide, or exercised improper influence in the victim's decision to do so; and did not take reasonable steps to ensure that any other person did not do so.
9) The victim was physically able to undertake the act that constituted the assistance him or herself.
10) The suspect was not the spouse, partner or a close relative or a close personal friend of the victim.
11) The suspect was unknown to the victim and assisted by providing specific information via, for example, a website or publication, to the victim to assist him or her in committing suicide.
12) The suspect gave assistance to more than one victim who were not known to each other.
13) The suspect was paid by the victim or those close to the victim for their assistance.
14) The suspect was paid to care for the victim in a care/nursing home environment.
15) The suspect was aware that the victim intended to commit suicide in a public place where it was reasonable to think that members of the public may be present.
16) The suspect was a member of an organisation or group, the principal purpose of which is to provide a physical environment (whether for payment or not) in which to allow another to commit suicide.

(In most cases, factors (1) to (8) above will carry more weight than the other factors in deciding that a prosecution is required in the public interest.)

The public interest factors against prosecution are these:

1) The victim had a clear, settled and informed wish to commit suicide.
2) The victim indicated unequivocally to the suspect that he or she wished to commit suicide.
3) The victim asked personally on his or her own initiative for the assistance of the suspect.
4) The victim had:
a. a terminal illness; or
b. a severe and incurable physical disability; or
c. a severe degenerative physical condition;
from which there was no possibility of recovery.
5) The suspect was wholly motivated by compassion.
6) The suspect was the spouse, partner or a close relative or a close personal friend of the victim, within the context of a long-term and supportive relationship.
7) The actions of the suspect, although sufficient to come within the definition of the offence, were of only minor assistance or influence, or the assistance which the suspect provided was as a consequence of their usual lawful employment.
8) The victim was physically unable to undertake the act that constituted the assistance him or herself.
9) The suspect had sought to dissuade the victim from taking the course of action which resulted in their suicide.
10) The victim has considered and pursued to a reasonable extent recognised treatment and care options.
11) The victim had previously attempted to commit suicide and was likely to try to do so again.
12) The actions of the suspect may be characterised as reluctant assistance in the face of a determined wish on the part of the victim to commit or attempt to commit suicide.
13) The suspect fully assisted the police in their enquiries into the circumstances of the suicide or the attempt and his or her part in providing assistance.

(In most cases, factors 1) to 7) above will carry more weight than the other factors in deciding that a prosecution is not required in the public interest.)

Campaigners for the legalisation of assisted suicide may consider these guidelines a step in the right direction, but others disagree.

The Executive Director, Andrea Williams, gave this response:

'Our hearts of course go out to elderly and unwell people who are suffering from horrible medical conditions and to their loved ones. But we believe that all life should be protected in law and that the guidelines published today will cause great harm to individuals and society. We should learn from other jurisdictions where assisted suicide has been legalised. Very soon, elderly and vulnerable people surveyed by researchers report a shift in perception towards feeling a burden on their families and a growing sense of being under a 'duty to die'. Additionally, we are concerned that the system will be open to abuse and to a creeping, ever-widening application, which has been observed in previous cases in our own legal history where laws have been injudiciously liberalised. We shall do all we can to raise awareness of these underestimated factors in the run up to the consultation. In other jurisdictions similar laws have soon been abandoned when the damage becomes evident, but only after that damage has been done. We would rather we turned back from this well-meant but, in our view profoundly mistaken policy before that is allowed to happen'