Assisted dying: Proposal to extend eligibility for neurodegenerative illness
People with neurodegenerative illnesses such as motor neurone disease (MND) should be able to request assisted dying with 12 months left to live, MPs have proposed.
This would extend the eligibility for this group from the current six-month life expectancy under the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill.
Liberal Democrat MP Tom Gordon, who is on the committee set to undertake formal scrutiny of the Bill next week, said his proposal 'will ensure more people with neurodegenerative conditions will be able to access an assisted death if that is their choice'.
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill is about ensuring people facing painful deaths from terminal conditions can have the choice of how they die.
For people with neurodegenerative conditions, such as MND, the final six months may be too late to apply.
1/2 pic.twitter.com/NRlMuHUyuG
— Tom Gordon MP (@tomgordonLD) February 6, 2025
The amendment is supported by a number of other MPs including Labour's Rachel Hopkins, who said a new law 'should be a compassionate one' with a different approach to different terminal illnesses where necessary.
The committee took evidence from some 50 witnesses last week, including medical and legal experts as well as bereaved families.
Among those who sat before the committee was retired High Court judge Sir Nicholas Mostyn, who told MPs the Bill 'is not ever going to provide an assisted death for me'.
Sir Nicholas, who has the neurodegenerative condition Parkinson's, told how he fears he will have to go to Dignitas rather than endure a 'poor death' in the UK with that disease.
As it stands, the Bill could see terminally ill adults in England and Wales with under six months to live legally allowed to end their lives, subject to approval by two doctors and a High Court judge.
The proposed amendment would see the definition of terminal illness changed to include neurodegenerative illnesses, diseases or medical conditions where a person's death as a result of such an illness can reasonably be expected within 12 months.
Andrew Copson, chief executive of Humanists UK, said: 'As currently drafted, the Bill will bring no relief for the majority of those who travel to Switzerland each year and it desperately needs amendment.'
He argued that the 'evidence is clear that the time limit currently in the Bill is not workable for those with neurodegenerative conditions and it needs to change'.
Opposition groups have argued a new law could see vulnerable people feel pressured into an assisted death if they feel they have become a burden.
Dr Gordon Macdonald, from Care Not Killing, said: 'This amendment shines a spotlight on the dangers of legalising state-assisted killing, as once politicians say there are some lives not worth living it is only a matter of which conditions and illnesses are included.'
He claimed the legislation is being rushed 'with indecent haste' and said more independent expert evidence is needed to 'hear about the real dangers of changing the law and focus on fixing the UK's broken palliative and social care systems'.
The committee is expected to start line-by-line scrutiny of the Bill on February 11.
No date has been given yet for the Bill to return to the Commons for further debate by all MPs at report stage but it is likely to be towards the end of April.
It will face further scrutiny and votes in the House of Commons and the House of Lords, meaning any change in the law would not be agreed until later this year at the earliest.
After that, it would likely be at least another two years before an assisted dying service was in place.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
RFK Jr. will ‘end the war' against alternative medicine at the FDA, from stem cell therapy to chelation. Here's what to know
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. doubled down on his support for non-pharmaceutical health treatments during a recent podcast appearance, saying, 'We're going to end the war at the FDA against alternative medicine.' Speaking on the Ultimate Human podcast with host Gary Brecka, a 'renowned Human Biologist, biohacker, and longevity expert,' according to the website, Kennedy said he would fix the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's bias against the following: stem cell treatments, chelating drugs, vitamins and minerals, amino acids, peptides, and hyperbaric chambers. 'Our position is that the FDA has a job: Just do the science on these kinds of issues and then tell the public what they've learned from the science … but don't tell physicians what they can and cannot prescribe,' he said. And as far as the patients go, he said, 'If you want to take an experimental drug … you ought to be able to do that.' RFK Jr. added, 'We don't want to have the Wild West. We want to make sure that information is out there. But we also want to respect the intelligence of the American people' to decide what treatments will benefit them the most. He acknowledged that, with this approach, there will be 'charlatans' as well as 'people who have bad results' from various alternative treatments. 'But ultimately,' he said, 'you can't prevent that either way, and leaving the whole thing in the hands of pharma is not working for us.' Brecka called Kennedy's pronouncements 'music to my ears.' Below, what you need to know about the alternative therapies RFK Jr. is advocating for. What is it: It's a way to repair diseased or injured tissue in the body using stem cells—cells that can self-renew or become other types of tissues—typically grown in a lab, manipulated, and then be implanted into the patient. What it does: Though it's considered to be largely experimental, the FDA does permit stem cell therapies for blood and immune disorders. Leukemia, lymphoma, neuroblastoma, and multiple myeloma, for example, are also often treated this way, with bone marrow treatments, which are backed by decades of science. Other types of the treatment are still in clinical trials, while more and more wellness centers are offering the treatment for unapproved reasons, using cells drawn from the patient's body and injected back in without manipulation for everything from autism and ALS to Parkinson's and better skin, according to the New York Times. Kennedy told Brecka that he received the treatment for his voice disorder, spasmodic dysphonia, and that it helped him 'enormously,' but that he had to go to Antigua to access it. Risks: For starters, wellness clinic treatments cannot guarantee they are using actual stem cell, reported the Times. And improper injections can lead to a host of terrible consequences—clots, infections, blindness, and even the formation of tumors, which the FDA warned of in 2021. What it is: Chelation involves the use of certain chemicals to remove toxic heavy metals, such as mercury and lead, from the body; all FDA-approved chelation therapy products require a prescription and can only be used safely under the supervision of a healthcare practitioner. What it does: Some alternative medicine practitioners offer chelation therapy, through pill or injection, as a way to treat Alzheimer's, autism, diabetes, high blood pressure, or Parkinson's disease, all of which are unapproved and risky. Children's Health Defense, founded by Kennedy, has written about chelation as a way to treat autism, which compares 'autism with mercury poisoning' due to childhood vaccines that contained the preservative thimerosal (largely mercury) before it was removed in 2001. Some flu shots still contain the preservative, but, says the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 'There is no evidence of harm caused by the low doses of thimerosal in vaccines.' Risks: The FDA warns specifically about using chelation therapy for autism, and notes, 'Chelating important minerals needed by the body can lead to serious and life-threatening outcomes.' While minor risks may include fever, headache, muscle pain, and nausea or vomiting, severe reactions range from heart failure and kidney damage to respiratory failure and seizures, according to the Cleveland Clinic. What they are: Dietary supplements in almost every letter of the alphabet, from A to zinc, are over-the-counter pills or liquids that contain nutritional boosts of vitamins and minerals. What they aim to help: Vitamin and mineral supplements aim to fill in with necessary nutrients that a person is not getting through food—though nutritionists believe that healthy food is the best source of such vitamins and minerals. Studies have found supplements may help with practically any issue under the sun—energy, heart issues, cognitive function, gut health, sleep, and more. Risks: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration regulates supplements, but doesn't approve them for safety or effectiveness before they are sold to the public. Some may cause liver damage and toxicity, while others may just be a waste of money. What it is: Amino acids are often referred to as the 'building blocks of proteins,' needed for building proteins, hormones, and neurotransmitters. are compounds that play many critical roles in your body. You need them for vital processes such as building proteins, hormones, and neurotransmitters. Amino acids are concentrated in protein-rich foods such as meat, fish, and soybeans, and foods that contain all nine essential amino acids are called complete proteins. Peptides are short proteins, and come in the form of hormones such as follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), and creatine and collagen. What they aim to help: Amino acid supplements may help with various issues—such as L-arginine for blood flow and inflammation; tryptophan for mood and sleep; and valine, leucine, and isoleucine to help with energy and athletic performance. Taking collagen supplements may help strengthen nails and bones, while people take creatine for boosting workouts and building muscle growth. Risks: Side effects of taking either can range from toxicity and gastrointestinal issues to effects on brain function muscle protein balance. Creatine may cause muscle cramps and digestive problems (and may not have many benefits), while tryptophan may cause dizziness, headache, or nausea. And again, as with all supplements, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration regulates them, but doesn't approve them for safety or effectiveness before they are sold to the public. What it is: Hyperbaric oxygen therapy in a medical-grade, FDA-approved chamber lets you breathe pure oxygen—as opposed to everyday air, which is just 21% oxygen mixed with nitrogen. Hyperbaric oxygen is also highly pressurized, thereby allowing the lungs to take more in. Home chambers (used by folks including Lebron James, LeAnn Rimes, and Mayim Bialik), as well as those offered in many wellness clinics, do not deliver 100% oxygen. Instead, they use regular air that is 30% more pressurized than normal for what's known as 'mild hyperbarics.' What it aims to help: The FDA has been regulating HBOT chambers since 1976, and has officially cleared 13 medical conditions—such as decompression sickness, burns, radiation injury, and certain wounds—for such treatment. But it's used off-label for many other reasons, including concussions, traumatic brain injury, long COVID, age reversal, stroke recovery, fibromyalgia, and improved brain function, many of which are being looked at in ongoing clinical trials. Risks: For medical-grade chambers, risks include ear and sinus pain, middle ear injuries, temporary vision changes, and lung collapse, which is rare, according to the FDA. For mild hyperbarics, risks include potential exposure to toxic oils from some compressors, carbon dioxide buildup that brings a risk of hypoxia inside the chamber—or, according to some experts and a body of inconclusive evidence, that the treatment may simply be ineffective. This story was originally featured on
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Is Sir Keir Starmer a Right-wing extremist?
Is Sir Keir Starmer KC – Left-wing human rights lawyer, former director of public prosecutions, and Labour Prime Minister of the United Kingdom – a dangerous Right-wing extremist? Common sense, evidence and reality say emphatically not. Government materials issued as part of Prevent training programmes give a less clear answer. The Prime Minister's warning that uncontrolled migration risks turning Britain into an 'island of strangers' would appear to risk falling foul of the definitions used in a Prevent course taken by thousands of public sector professionals with a duty to make referrals to the scheme. This defines 'cultural nationalism' as a type of extreme Right-wing terrorist ideology, including the belief that 'Western culture is under threat from mass migration and a lack of integration by certain ethnic and cultural groups'. Sir Keir is no more an extremist than any other writer who has expressed concern over the unprecedented scale and pace of migration and cultural change in recent years. Why, then, has the Government risked labelling him as such? The short answer is that, riddled with political anxieties over the composition of terrorism in Britain – 80 per cent of the Counter Terrorism Police network's live investigations involved Islamism in 2023, compared with 10 per cent for the extreme Right – Prevent has given the appearance of loosening the definition of the latter in order to provide an artificial 'balance' to its work. As the Shawcross Review found in 2023, the programme has adopted a 'double standard' when dealing with Islamists and the extreme Right. The results have been farcical, with an 'expansive' definition of Right-wing extremism capturing 'mildly controversial or provocative forms of mainstream, Right-wing leaning commentary that have no meaningful connection to terrorism or radicalisation' even while Prevent funded organisations whose leaders have publicly made statements 'sympathetic to the Taliban' and referred to militant Islamists as 'so-called 'terrorists' of the legitimate resistance groups'. Such absurdities might be overlooked if Prevent had also proved ruthlessly effective at preventing atrocities. It has not. Prevent has failed to identify dangerous and violent suspects on multiple occasions, including Southport killer Axel Rudakubana, who was referred and dismissed on three occasions before carrying out his attack. A deradicalisation programme that seems to show less interest in deradicalising potential terrorists than in policing Right-wing thought is unfit for purpose. It beggars belief that two years after the Shawcross Review we are once again having the same conversations. Prevent must be reformed – or if incapable of change, dismantled entirely. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
SNP ‘running down the clock' before losing power, claims Anas Sarwar
The SNP's 'balloon has burst' and John Swinney is 'running down the clock', Anas Sarwar, Scotland's First Minister, has said after Labour won a shock by-election victory. The Scottish Labour leader said his party's knife-edge win in the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse contest showed voters wanted to oust the SNP from power in next year's Holyrood election. Labour's Davy Russell won the Scottish Parliament seat by 602 votes from the SNP's Katy Loudon, with Reform's Ross Lambie only 887 votes behind her. The Tories finished a distant fourth, barely saving their deposit, after their support collapsed. Mr Swinney was left humiliated by the loss of the SNP seat after repeatedly claiming the by-election was a straight fight between his party and Reform. Alex Neil, the former SNP minister, said the First Minister should resign. Speaking the morning after the victory, Ms Sarwar accused Mr Swinney of running a 'disgraceful campaign' that 'deliberately' encouraged people to vote for Reform. Mr Sarwar said the result demonstrated that next year's Holyrood election would really be a 'straight choice' between the SNP and Labour, with Reform merely a 'spoiler' who could not win power. But Prof Sir John Curtice, the country's most eminent psephologist, said Reform had achieved a 'highly creditable' third place by attracting a slew of former Labour voters. Writing in the Telegraph, he warned Nigel Farage's party risked 'severely denting' Mr Sarwar's hopes of being First Minister. Sir John also said Labour's performance, its vote share in the constituency declined, was 'well short of what is needed to demonstrate it is currently on course to win next year's Holyrood election.' He said Labour still managed to scrape victory thanks to a 17-point drop in support for the Nationalists, with independence supporters 'less forgiving than they once were of what many perceive as the SNP's poor record in government.' The contest was called following the death of Christina McKelvie, the Scottish Government minister, who won the seat for the SNP with a 4,582 majority in the 2021 Holyrood election. Although Labour won the equivalent seat at Westminster by almost 10,000 votes in last year's general election, the party's collapse in support during the early months of Sir Keir Starmer's government meant it was viewed as an outsider in the contest. However, Labour insiders attributed their victory to Mr Russell's popularity locally and a strong get-out-the-vote operation that saw more than 200 activists travel to the constituency on polling day. Speaking at a press call in Hamilton town centre with Mr Russell, Mr Sarwar said he was 'confident' that he could replace Mr Swinney as First Minister in 2025. The Scottish Labour leader said: 'I think what we're seeing now is the running down of the clock. This is an SNP government that's lost its way, the balloon is burst, they are out of ideas, they are out of steam. 'They have no positive offer for the people of Scotland, they've got no positive record to put in front of the people of Scotland and they're running down the clock.' He said there was a 'lesson' for pollsters and commentators who believed Mr Swinney's claim that the by-election was a straight fight between the SNP and Reform, arguing they should stop listening to the First Minister's 'nonsense.' Pressed on Sir John's view that Reform's strong performance would make it difficult for Labour to win power next year at Holyrood, he said the psephologist was only looking at a 'snapshot' of a particular by-election. Mr Sarwar argued this approach ignored 'the general mood music and the general momentum of a campaign going into next year'. He added: 'On the ground, people believe the SNP are done. They are sick to the back teeth of think they're a busted flush. They want them out.' Sir Keir sent his congratulations to Mr Russell on his 'fantastic victory.' In a post on social media, the Prime Minister said: 'People in Scotland have once again voted for change. 'Next year, there is a chance to turbo-charge delivery by putting Labour in power on both sides of the border. I look forward to working with you.' Speaking in Edinburgh, Mr Swinney said: 'Clearly, we're disappointed that we didn't win last night, but we made progress in the election compared to the general election last summer, and we've got to build on that and make sure that we strengthen our support in advance of 2026. 'So the SNP made progress last night, but it's not nearly enough and we've got to build on that.' Asked if it was a mistake to call the by-election a 'two-horse race' between the SNP and Reform, he said: 'I called it the way I saw it.' The First Minister argued the Labour vote had collapsed compared to last year's general election and 'we saw the Reform vote surging, which it has.' But Mr Neil, who served in Alex Salmond's and Nicola Sturgeon's Cabinets, tweeted: 'Poor by-election result for the SNP despite having the best candidate 'It shows that the opinion polls appear wide of the mark. Most importantly, it shows the current SNP leadership needs to be replaced urgently.' The SNP under Mr Swinney was also routed in last year's general election. Labour won the by-election with 8,559 votes (31.6 per cent), despite its vote share declining by two percentage points compared to the 2021 Holyrood election result in the seat. The SNP finished second with 7,957 votes (29.4 per cent), a huge drop in support compared to 2021, when Ms McKelvie won 46.2 per cent of the popular vote. Reform finished third with 7,088 votes (26.1 per cent), which Sir John noted was 'well above' the 19 per cent support recorded in Scotland-wide opinion polls, despite the seat not being 'particularly fertile ground for Nigel Farage's party.' Richard Tice, Reform's deputy leader, attended the count and insisted he was 'delighted' with the result. He said it was 'truly remarkable', adding: 'We've come from nowhere to being in a three-way marginal.' But the result was disastrous for the Scottish Tories, who won only 1,621 votes. Their vote share declined from 17.5 per cent in the 2021 election to only six per cent. Speaking ahead of next week's Scottish Tory conference in Edinburgh, UK leader Kemi Badenoch said: 'Larkhall is not the place where the Conservative Party fightback starts'. She said it was 'interesting' that Reform was 'causing problems for all parties' and noted that 'we live in a very competitive political environment.' Miles Briggs, the shadow education secretary for the Scottish Tories, said the party knew it would be a 'difficult' by-election and blamed 'protest voting' for Reform and Labour. He told BBC Radio's Good Morning Scotland programme: 'We know what that challenge is and we have no doubt of the fight that we have to take forward into the election next year.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
