The debate around assisted dying has been incredibly visible this past year or two as the country tackles the possibility of a new law making it permissible for the first time in the UK, with a range of checks and safeguards. The arguments on both sides, either advocating for the sanctity of life or the primacy of individual choice, are compelling, and this play brings them vividly to life with a cast of characters that are articulate, nuanced and fully human in their wrestling with the moral and ethical issues at hand.
Claire Harrison, played impressively by a mercurial Siobhan Lambie-Philip, is the woman caught in the centre of the argument, whose very life and body become the battleground of the debate. Lambie-Philip makes Claire's quick wit, fierce intelligence and sharp humour both utterly endearing and a formidable force to be reckoned with.
Opposing her are two doctors, Dr Scott, played with avuncular compassion by Guy Peskin, and the paternalistic Dr Emerson played by Roger Saper, who refuses to budge in what he sees as his medical duty, the preservation of life at all costs. They're supported by two nurses, the matronly Sister Anderson, played with stolid confidence by Suzanne Brower, and the trainee Nurse Kay, also known as Flea, who graces the stage with a gentle naturalism. Claire Andrews added another layer to the team as the social worker Margaret Boyle, forever trying to put an optimistic spin on Clare’s future prospects when Clare would prefer to remain doggedly focused on the pessimistic realities of her present moment.
The costumes are all white and grey, creating a powerful sense of the institutionalisation Claire feels she is imprisoned by, while a screen above her bed, which dominates the stage, ensures our attention is focused on her face at all times. Although paralysed from the neck down, the expressiveness of her face and voice remind us just how alive she is, and problematises her desire for death. On the other hand, her work as a sculptor foregrounds how important the body, shape and movement are to her, rationalising her choice. The play keeps the balance between the two positions on a high wire, never falling into agitprop but rather giving each character a convincing and understandable motivation for their outlook.
Overall, this is a thoughtful and sensitively delivered play which deals with one of the most pressing and urgent political, medical and moral issues of our day.
