Around 1,000 doctors urge MPs to vote against ‘unsafe' assisted dying Bill
Around 1,000 doctors have written to MPs urging them to vote against the assisted dying Bill describing it as 'simply not safe'.
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill will return to the House of Commons for debate on Friday, with MPs expected to consider further amendments.
But in a letter, published this week, doctors from across the NHS have urged lawmakers to listen to those 'who would have to deliver the consequences of this deeply flawed Bill'.
They warn the Bill 'poses a real threat to both patients and the medical workforce'.
In its current form the proposed legislation, which applies only to England and Wales, would mean terminally ill adults with only six months left to live could apply for assistance to end their lives, subject to the approval of two doctors and an expert panel.
Last month, MPs approved a change in the Bill to ensure no medics would be obliged to take part in assisted dying.
Doctors already had an opt-out but the new clause extends that to anyone, including pharmacists and social care workers.
Encouraging or assisting suicide is currently against the law in England and Wales, with a maximum jail sentence of 14 years.
The letter to MPs said: 'As experienced medical professionals who regularly work with dying patients and who have reviewed the worldwide evidence on assisted dying, it is our opinion that this Bill poses a real threat to both patients and the medical workforce, and we urge you to vote against it.
'We are concerned that the private member's Bill process has not facilitated a balanced approach to the collection of evidence and input from key stakeholders including doctors, people with disabilities and other marginalised groups.
'This Bill will widen inequalities, it provides inadequate safeguards and, in our collective view, is simply not safe.
'This is the most important piece of healthcare legislation for 60 years and we urge you to listen to the doctors who would have to deliver the consequences of this deeply flawed Bill.'
Sir Ed Davey welcomed the letter on Monday, telling Sky News he had 'real concerns'.
'I have voted against this assisted dying legislation, as I did on previous occasions,' the Liberal Democrat leader said.
'I have real concerns about the pressure on individuals, that they will put on themselves, if they think they are a burden on their family, so I welcome this letter.'
He added: 'I hope, as time has gone on, as the arguments have been better exposed, that MPs will switch sides and join the side that I and many MPs are on.'
But Sir Chris Bryant said he would be voting in favour.
The technology minister told Sky News: 'The Government doesn't have a formal position at all and individual members are free to choose how they vote.
'I'm not going to hide my own personal preference. I abstained on the first time round, I decided I wasn't going to vote because I wanted to hear the debate.
'I have listened to a lot of the debate. Of course, I don't want anybody to feel that they are a burden on society and that should lead them towards taking their own life, but I also have heard the cries of people who are absolutely miserable, and that's why I will be voting for the Bill.'
Some of the Bill's opponents have urged MPs to focus on improving end-of-life care rather than legislating for assisted dying.
Ahead of last month's Commons debate on the Bill, two royal medical colleges raised concerns over the proposed legislation.
The Royal College of Physicians (RCP) said it believes there are 'concerning deficiencies', while the Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych) said it has 'serious concerns' and cannot support the Bill.
Opinions among members of the medical profession remain varied, with TV doctor Hilary Jones describing assisted dying for the terminally ill as 'kind and compassionate', adding that he would help a patient to end their life if the law was changed.
The GP, often seen on ITV's Good Morning Britain and the Lorraine show, told the PA news agency he believes medicine will go 'back to the Dark Ages' if proposed legislation being considered at Westminster is voted down.
While Friday is expected to see debate on further amendments to the Bill, it is thought a vote on the overall legislation might not take place until the following Friday, June 20.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
40 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
PETER HITCHENS: The private school pupils refused NHS care show we're becoming a People's Republic by stealth - ruled by blank-eyed bureaucrats
We are becoming a People's Republic by stealth. The warnings are increasingly urgent, but is anyone listening? Last weekend The Mail on Sunday reported a deeply disturbing fact. An NHS bureaucrat had refused therapy to a young boy, saying, 'We are unable to see this child as we do not provide a service to school-age children who attend an independent school. We are only commissioned to provide a service to the mainstream schools.'
South Wales Argus
41 minutes ago
- South Wales Argus
Concern over proposed decriminalisation of killing unborn children
How? By removing 'all legal protection' from the unborn child via 'the Crime and Policing Bill' going through Parliament, by tabling extreme amendments to this Bill that would decriminalise the killing of unborn children (up to birth) by removing the little legal protection they still have. We must write and ask our MPs to vote "no" against these extreme amendments to this Bill - New Clause 1 by Tonia Antoiazzi MP and New Clause 20 by Stella Creasy MP if we value human life, especially the unborn child, who has no voice but ours. Write to your MP at House of Commons, London SW1A OAA. Norman Plaisted, Newport
North Wales Chronicle
an hour ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Assisted dying: UK doctor says helping patients die in Australia is ‘privilege'
Dr Emma Boulton, from Oxfordshire, spoke of the difference between her mother's 'horrible' decline over a period of weeks with respiratory failure in England and the 'very dignified' deaths she has been involved with in New South Wales. The 59-year-old, who trained and previously worked in the UK as a GP but is now based in Sydney, said her main role is assessing patients who have applied for an assisted death, but that she has been directly involved in ending the lives of 10 people. Known as intravenous practitioner administration, this involves injecting someone with an anaesthetic. In an interview with the PA news agency, she said: 'It's quick, it's painless, it's very dignified.' She added: 'When people go, there's often this palpable sense of relief, and it can be very uplifting, because you see this person who's deeply, deeply suffering in lots of ways, and they've made this really gutsy decision that they want to exit this world on their own terms, and they do so. 'And it's in a very dignified and quick and painless manner. 'It's a very moving thing to be involved with. I consider it a tremendous privilege to be involved in it and be able to assist people to determine their fate, particularly when they're going through intolerable suffering.' Dr Boulton recently took part in an event in Parliament to support campaigners from Humanists UK and My Death My Decision working towards a change in the law in England and Wales. Intravenous practitioner administration does not form part of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, which is due to return to the House of Commons for debate and more votes on amendments on Friday. The Bill proposes that a terminally ill person would take an approved substance, provided by a doctor but administered only by the person themselves. The proposed legislation would allow terminally ill adults in England and Wales, with fewer than six months to live, to apply for an assisted death, subject to approval by two doctors and a panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist. Speaking about the challenges of her role in New South Wales, Dr Boulton acknowledged that it is 'not work that's for everybody'. She said: 'You have to be pretty resilient and comfortable in your own skin and be able to work with these things. 'For me, personally, particularly for the first few (deaths) that I was involved with, I felt very strange. It's like, 'what have I done?' You know, I've spent my whole life prolonging life, and now in my hand, you know, somebody has died as a result of my actions. 'So it's quite an odd thing to have to deal with, but the way that I get around it is by knowing, understanding that I am alleviating suffering, and I'm acting on the patient's express wishes, and that really helps me through.' The Westminster Bill states that no person, including any medical workers, are obliged to take part in assisted dying, meaning doctors would be free to opt out if the law was changed and a service set up. Dr Boulton said her mother, Margaret, had endured a 'horrible feeling of slow suffocation' in the lead up to her death aged 88 in February last year, and that it had been a 'very frustrating' experience for the family, especially as her mother had voiced support for assisted dying. She said: 'When she knew that she was on the way out, that she was dying, she got very angry and said, 'I would really like to be able to just stop this now and just go'. 'What I witnessed with my mother is not that different from the suffering that I see in my assisted dying work. But the good thing is that if they meet the eligibility criteria in our assessment then the patients that I see (in Australia) can access the assisted dying process, whereas people in the UK can't.' Medics remains divided on the subject of assisted dying, with some MPs who are also doctors among the Bill's supporters, but the Royal College of Physicians (RCP) and Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych) both airing concerns. The RCP said it believes there are 'concerning deficiencies' with the proposed legislation while the RCPsych said it has 'serious concerns' and cannot support the current Bill. Earlier this week, around 1,000 doctors signed a letter to MPs urging them to vote against a Bill they described as 'simply not safe'. The doctors, from across the NHS, urged lawmakers to listen to those 'who would have to deliver the consequences of this deeply flawed Bill', warning it 'poses a real threat to both patients and the medical workforce'. Dr Boulton said she believes much opposition to a change in the law is born from fear. 'I think objection is based in fear and I think a proper legislative framework would actually protect people and their practitioners,' she said. Many opponents of the Westminster Bill have raised concerns about people being coerced and the vulnerable being taken advantage of, but Dr Boulton said it is not a case of 'killing off granny'. She said: 'The patients I work with are incredibly calm. They're clear, they're very determined that this is a choice that they want to have. 'So, you know, people are worried about killing off granny because they want to get her money and that she's helpless and she can't make decisions for herself, and it's not like that at all. 'The process of assessment and making sure that people are fully aware and that this is an informed choice that they're making about their own life, having that really structured assessment framework actually protects people.'
