The national debate on euthanasia has now entered an interesting juncture, as more people have started to gain interest in the delicate subject, and form an opinion. Surely, it is one of those topics that perhaps you will not think about unless you happen to be in a situation that necessitates it, but for those who are faced by the ethical conundrum, and the unimaginable pain, the debate takes a completely new dimension.

The public consultation on assisted voluntary euthanasia, gives members of the public as well as experts, and stakeholders the opportunity to contribute their views. From what is reported, views on the subject remain mixed in Malta, though there appears to have been a shift in public attitude over the years.

The current draft proposal, as proposed by government places strict limitations on eligibility, clearly denoting that it would only apply to adults who are suffering from a terminal illness with a life expectancy of less than six months. In addition, the process would require confirmation of the diagnosis and prognosis by independent medical professionals, and a thorough psychological evaluation to ensure the patient is of sound mind.

While there have been organisations cautiously welcoming this legislation, there have also been strong voices urging caution, calling for the strengthening of palliative care infrastructure, before legalising euthanasia.

In fact, they argued that many patients still lack adequate access to emotional, spiritual, and pain management support in their final stages of life. In their view, introducing euthanasia into a system that is not yet fully equipped to provide dignified care for the dying, risks sending a wrong message about the value we place on life, especially for the vulnerable.

This concern is echoed by medical professionals, as well as our religious leaders, which also deserve to be listened to.

At this juncture, I feel it is very important not to try to throw cold water on the debate. No side should try to silence the other by imposing their moral standing, or ridicule those they disagree with.

Unfortunately, we don't have a great history with unpassionate, cool debate in this country. Every time an issue comes to the fore, be it European membership, divorce, or spring hunting, party lines are quickly drawn, and the debate descends into a partisan fuelled battle for blood. Such circumstances certainly aren't the best environment for an understanding and mature debate.

Personally, I still want to read and learn more on the subject, and I am certainly not ready to shut the door or impose my views on anyone.

Malta is not alone in facing this delicate debate, and a look beyond our shores can perhaps help us understand a complex situation a little bit better. Many countries have introduced various forms of assisted dying with different safeguards along the years, and they still continue to grapple with the social, legal, and ethical implications years later. Their experiences offer useful lessons, both positive as well as cautionary.

What is certainly most important, as the consultation period continues, is to maintain an open heart and a humble mind. This is not about rushing to conclusions or forcing decisions, but about listening to patients, doctors, families, and to those whose beliefs may differ from our own.

It is about asking what dignity means at the end of life, and how a society chooses to care for its most vulnerable members. The question of whether to legislate for euthanasia will remain divisive, but the process of debating it need not be.

We have an opportunity to approach this issue with a level-headed coolness, care, and compassion. How we handle that opportunity will say much more about our values than the outcome itself.

Alexander Mangion is deputy mayor of Attard