Re: All RCGP members should be balloted on assisted dying
Far from the RCGP being out of touch with our membership, our recent consultation on assisted dying was one of the most comprehensive ever undertaken by the College, with 1,700 members responding from all four nations of the UK.
The result was conclusive with 77% of members who submitted response forms directly to the College indicating that they felt the RCGP should maintain its opposition to a change in the law.
Of the 28 RCGP bodies and groups who responded, 20 reported a majority view in favour of maintaining the College’s opposition to a change in the law and three reported a majority view in favour of a ‘neutral’ stance. None reported a majority view in favour of a stance of active support for a change in the law.
Extensive efforts were made to involve our members and we received responses via our local Faculties, Devolved Councils, relevant committees and RCGP bodies, as well as from our individual members.
The overall decision was debated and determined by our governing RCGP Council, whose representatives are elected by the entire College membership, having been informed by the output of the consultation. The decision to hold a consultation rather than a ballot was also agreed by RCGP Council. It is worth noting that no objections to the methodology used were made prior to the output having been announced.
It is misleading for Dr Hartropp to present the output of a consultation as if it were a study. RCGP consultations are a well-established practice that give our members the opportunity to express the divergence and complexity of their views and to explain the reasoning behind them.
Dr Maureen Baker CBE
Chair,
Royal College of General Practitioners
30 Euston Square
London NW1
Rapid Response:
Re: All RCGP members should be balloted on assisted dying
Far from the RCGP being out of touch with our membership, our recent consultation on assisted dying was one of the most comprehensive ever undertaken by the College, with 1,700 members responding from all four nations of the UK.
The result was conclusive with 77% of members who submitted response forms directly to the College indicating that they felt the RCGP should maintain its opposition to a change in the law.
Of the 28 RCGP bodies and groups who responded, 20 reported a majority view in favour of maintaining the College’s opposition to a change in the law and three reported a majority view in favour of a ‘neutral’ stance. None reported a majority view in favour of a stance of active support for a change in the law.
Extensive efforts were made to involve our members and we received responses via our local Faculties, Devolved Councils, relevant committees and RCGP bodies, as well as from our individual members.
The overall decision was debated and determined by our governing RCGP Council, whose representatives are elected by the entire College membership, having been informed by the output of the consultation. The decision to hold a consultation rather than a ballot was also agreed by RCGP Council. It is worth noting that no objections to the methodology used were made prior to the output having been announced.
It is misleading for Dr Hartropp to present the output of a consultation as if it were a study. RCGP consultations are a well-established practice that give our members the opportunity to express the divergence and complexity of their views and to explain the reasoning behind them.
Dr Maureen Baker CBE
Chair,
Royal College of General Practitioners
30 Euston Square
London NW1
Competing interests: Chair of Council, RCGP