11th May, 2025
Malta needs a step-by-step approach to the assisted death discussion
We believe the time is right for a considered and thorough public discussion on the complex issue of assisted death. This is a profoundly sensitive subject, touching upon end-of-life considerations, and we acknowledge and respect the diverse perspectives that arise in such a debate.
Momentum Chairperson Arnold Cassola stated “Consistent with Momentum’s statute, which recognises matters of this nature as issues of personal conscience, our members and candidates will have full freedom of expression and, ultimately, freedom of vote when decisions are to be made.
Regarding the government’s recent publication, we advocate for an approach that allows for truly deep and reasoned deliberation. We are concerned that a limited timeframe, such as the proposed 60-day period, is not sufficient for a topic of this magnitude, especially when it coincides with a period where many families and students are understandably preoccupied with academic examinations. This approach unfortunately, brings to mind previous instances, such as the marijuana reform, where complex societal issues appeared to be hastened, potentially prioritising political timelines over the depth of public consultation required. Meaningful progress on such a delicate matter requires a more extended and accommodating schedule, free from the appearance of undue urgency for political gain.
Furthermore, we must proceed with a profound awareness of the potential risks of abuse inherent in any legislation concerning assisted death. It is precisely because of these risks and the irreversible nature of such decisions that the utmost care and meticulous attention to detail are required in crafting any potential framework. This underscores the need for an unhurried process.
It is our firm belief that progress on this issue is necessary. However, we also contend that such progress must be achieved through a carefully considered, step-by-step process. To move directly from an initial discussion to a comprehensive final resolution without addressing the interim stages would be to overlook the nuances and complexities involved.”
Momentum is keen to participate constructively in this debate. We propose that the discussion be structured sequentially, addressing individual aspects one by one, rather than as a single, all-encompassing package. For instance, a vital first step would be to thoroughly examine and enhance palliative care services. It is commendable that organisations like the Hospice Movement provide essential services, and we believe government support in this area should be strengthened to ensure comprehensive care is universally available.
Once we have made tangible progress on palliative care, the discussion could then naturally proceed to consider subsequent related topics, such as living wills. By addressing each component systematically, we can allow ample time for informed public discourse and reflection, enabling the community to reach well-considered conclusions at each stage.
This methodical and phased approach will ensure that the focus remains steadfastly on the well-being and interests of individuals and patients. Momentum believes that a longer, more clearly delineated debate, with distinct milestones is the most responsible and constructive way forward to achieve genuine progress on this important matter of personal conscience.
