logo
MPs to discuss ban on assisted dying adverts as Bill returns to Parliament

MPs to discuss ban on assisted dying adverts as Bill returns to Parliament

Independent18 hours ago

A ban on advertising assisted dying is to be debated as the controversial Bill returns to Parliament.
The regulation of substances to be used by a terminally ill person to bring about their death is also due to be discussed by MPs in the Commons on Friday.
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill is undergoing a second day of report stage, with various amendments likely to be debated and possibly voted on.
Its third reading – where a vote is taken on the overall Bill – could take place next Friday.
The Bill passed second reading stage by a majority of 55 during a historic vote in November, which saw MPs support the principle of assisted dying.
Various reports have indicated some MPs who voted in favour last year could withdraw their support amid concerns around safeguards and how much scrutiny the proposed legislation has received, while others might switch to supporting a Bill that backers argue has been strengthened over time.
Opinion in the medical community has been divided, with the Royal College of Physicians (RCP) and Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych) expressing concern, but some MPs who are doctors are among the Bill's strongest supporters.
Seven RCPsych members, including a former president and vice president, have written to MPs to distance themselves from their college's concern, instead describing the current Bill as 'workable, safe and compassionate' with a 'clear and transparent legal framework'.
Meanwhile, the Children's Commissioner for England has repeated her call for children's voices to be heard in the conversation.
Dame Rachel de Souza said: 'Children's views have at best been side-lined, at worst written off entirely simply because they would not fall within the scope of the current scope of legislation.
'They have spoken passionately about their worries that this Bill could be extended further. We need only to look to other models, such as Canada, where proposals for assisted death to be expanded to 'mature minors' – children – are a live issue, to understand the source of their concern.
'This Bill has raised the level of debate on important and challenging subjects in England – but children have raised very real concerns with me about their opportunity to shape this legislation, which could impact them as they reach adulthood, or impact them in indirect ways through the deaths of loved ones.'
Demonstrators are once again expected to gather outside Parliament to make their views known on the Bill.
Disability campaigner George Fielding, representing campaign group Not Dead Yet UK, argued the Bill 'risks state-sanctioned suicide'.
He added: 'It risks making people feel like a burden while ignoring the social, economic and systemic pressures that deny people the treatment and dignity they need to live.
'This is not choice. This is coercion, masquerading as compassion.'
But Claire Macdonald, director of My Death, My Decision, which is in favour of assisted dying, said the public mood is clear that change is needed.
She said: 'We hope MPs strike the careful balance between creating a law that is strong and safe, with a system that works for dying people, giving them choice and compassion at the end of life.
'What is clear is that no-one should be forced to suffer, and the British public wants politicians to change the law on assisted dying.'
In a letter to MPs this week, Labour's Kim Leadbeater, the parliamentarian behind the Bill, said supporters and opponents appear in agreement that 'if we are to pass this legislation it should be the best and safest Bill possible'.
She added: 'I'm confident it can and will be.'
Among the amendments to the Bill expected to be discussed on Friday are a ban on advertising an assisted dying service were the law to change, with Ms Leadbeater previously saying it 'would feel inappropriate for this to be something which was advertised'.
But Bill opponent Labour MP Paul Waugh warned of 'unspecified exceptions, which could make the ban itself worthless', adding that he had put forward a tighter amendment to 'strengthen the Bill on this issue and to better protect the vulnerable'.
Ms Leadbeater said other possible amendments include ensuring 'any approved substance used for assisted dying is subject to robust regulation and scrutiny', which she said is 'essential for clinical safety, public confidence and ethical integrity'.
Earlier this week, a group of charities wrote to MPs to express 'serious concerns' about what they described as an 'anorexia loophole', arguing people with eating disorders could end up qualifying for assisted dying because of the physical consequences of their illness.
However, an amendment preventing a person meeting the requirements for an assisted death 'solely as a result of voluntarily stopping eating or drinking' – tabled by Labour's Naz Shah – was accepted by Ms Leadbeater without a vote last month.
Ms Leadbeater said this, combined with existing safeguards in the Bill, would rule out people with anorexia falling into its scope.
As it stands, 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.
MPs are entitled to have a free vote on the Bill and any amendments, meaning they vote according to their conscience rather than along party lines.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

‘Unreliable' UK not told in advance about Israel's attack on Iran
‘Unreliable' UK not told in advance about Israel's attack on Iran

Times

time16 minutes ago

  • Times

‘Unreliable' UK not told in advance about Israel's attack on Iran

The UK was not officially informed about Israel's attack on Iran before it happened and provided no support to the mission, it is understood, highlighting the deteriorating relationship between the two countries. Diplomats said it appeared Israel no longer considered the UK to be a 'reliable partner' after Sir Keir Starmer placed sanctions on two far-right Israeli ministers this week. Military planners inside the Ministry of Defence were braced for the strikes on Thursday night. However, the UK appeared to have been cut out of the loop on the operation, despite being involved in previous strikes. • US urges UK to reverse sanctions on far-right Israeli ministers An emergency Cobra meeting has been held to discuss the threat to British citizens in Iran and Israel. There is an ongoing review of whether the embassy should remain open in Tehran. The prime minister's spokesman confirmed 'the UK did not participate in Israel's strikes overnight', and MoD sources were quick to dispute any suggestion that the RAF had taken part in any military action to knock out Iranian drones. A senior government source said: 'They've clearly made the calculation [that] we are not a reliable partner.' David Lammy, the foreign secretary, had been due to travel to Washington DC on Friday, but the meeting was cancelled at the last minute. The United States said it was not involved in the attack, describing the Israeli action as unilateral, although that is likely to change if US personnel are targeted in the region. • Israel-Iran latest: further explosions heard at Fordow nuclear site In April last year, the UK deployed RAF Typhoons to help shoot down drones fired by Iran. The UK was also involved to a more limited extent last October during a ballistic missile attack by Tehran. On Monday, the government was concerned enough to hold a 'war game', led by Lammy, in which departments played out the possibility of a massive Israeli attack on Iran. Military personnel are understood to have taken part. A military source said the primary concern in London was for the safety of British citizens currently in Tehran, and British citizens in Israel. There are also fears that British shipping could be targeted by the Iran-backed Houthi rebel group in Yemen. The senior government source said the UK was having to 'walk a diplomatic tight rope' and the priority was the staff in Tehran. The UK government has hardened its stance on Israel and Starmer said earlier today: 'The reports of these strikes are concerning and we urge all parties to step back and reduce tensions urgently. Escalation serves no one in the region. Stability in the Middle East must be the priority and we are engaging partners to de-escalate. Now is the time for restraint, calm and a return to diplomacy.' Earlier in the week the far-right ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich were banned from entering the UK and will have any assets in the UK frozen as part of the measures announced by Lammy. The sanctions were imposed over 'repeated incitements of violence against Palestinian communities' in the occupied West Bank. Starmer was expected to discuss the attacks with Netanyahu in a call on Friday. A Downing Street spokesman said the UK was prepared to take 'every diplomatic step' to prevent Iran developing nuclear weapons.

Palpable anger as both sides of assisted dying debate gather in Parliament Square
Palpable anger as both sides of assisted dying debate gather in Parliament Square

Sky News

time18 minutes ago

  • Sky News

Palpable anger as both sides of assisted dying debate gather in Parliament Square

Finger jabbing, the frenetic shaking of heads and the competitively loud chanting to drown out the opposition are all symptoms of rising tensions. The two sides of the assisted dying debate clashed on Parliament Square Garden as parliament worked through amendments on Kim Leadbeater's controversial bill. The sides have not shared the same space before, not intellectually, nor emotionally, nor physically. But on Friday, they stood uncomfortably close together, mostly squaring up to each other because neither side could afford to give an inch to the other. The pink-wearing supporters of the bill usually have the green lawns opposite Big Ben to themselves. The black-wearing opponents of the proposed legislation usually stand with their tombstone placards much further down towards Jewel Tower. But they decided to decamp to Parliament Square on the penultimate day ahead of the final vote next week. As the months have passed, the discourse has become increasingly bitter. There is a lot at stake for both sides, and the anger is palpable. Doctors have been publicly falling out with each other, each side accusing the other of spreading misinformation. Even some of the Royal Colleges have become embroiled in rows with sections of their membership calling out their leadership. And the emotion outside parliament was reflected inside the Commons when Liberal Democrat MP Caroline Voaden (South Devon), whose husband died of oesophageal cancer, warned MPs about the language being used. Assisted dying, she said, was not the same as "murder and killing". But those words, and stronger, were plastered across placards held by opponents of the bill outside parliament. Expect the language to become more incendiary, more accusatory in the weeks to come. In seven days, we will learn which side has won.

Justice secretary to oppose abortion amendments in crime bill
Justice secretary to oppose abortion amendments in crime bill

Times

time19 minutes ago

  • Times

Justice secretary to oppose abortion amendments in crime bill

The justice secretary will come out against stopping women being prosecuted for having an abortion before a landmark vote next week. Shabana Mahmood will write to constituents saying she has 'significant concerns' that a change in the law could give women an incentive to have unsafe abortions at home. Wes Streeting, the health secretary, is said to be weighing up whether to abstain or vote against amendments being tabled to the Crime and Policing Bill. Kemi Badenoch and Nigel Farage, the Conservative and Reform UK leaders, are expected to oppose the move. Two amendments have been tabled by Labour MPs and the Speaker will decide which to select for a vote, likely on Wednesday. Under Tonia Antoniazzi's amendment, already backed by 168 MPs, women would no longer be breaking the law if they terminated a pregnancy after 24 weeks or without approval from two doctors. New laws passed during the pandemic allow abortion pills to be taken at home up to ten weeks into a pregnancy, while later abortions must be carried out in a medical setting. Anyone who assists a woman in getting an abortion outside the law, including doctors, would still be liable for prosecution. The new rules would apply as soon as the change passes through parliament. An amendment by Stella Creasey, backed by 110 MPs, would make accessing an abortion a human right and make it harder for future governments to tighten restrictions through secondary legislation. The Times understands that Mahmood opposes both amendments, although she will be unable to vote against them as she is on ministerial business abroad next week. An ally said Mahmood had 'significant concerns' around the growth in the number of women using online services to order abortion pills without a physical consultation. 'She believes that, from a women's health and safety perspective, there's such little oversight,' the ally said. 'If you do take those pills later on, it can have a really terrible impact on you.' Senior government figures expect Antoniazzi's amendment to pass with a large majority. In a survey of more than 100 MPs, about 70 per cent agreed that women should not be liable for prison sentences if they have abortions outside the rules. Abortion providers have criticised Creasy's amendment and several MPs are considering dropping their public support for it in a bid to rally round a single cause. Six women in England have been charged in the past three years with illegally ending or attempting to end their pregnancies. The offence carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. Carla Foster, 46, a mother of three from Staffordshire, was sentenced to 28 months after pleading guilty to administering drugs or using instruments to procure an abortion under a law from 1861. This was reduced on appeal to a 14-month suspended sentence. Last month, Nicola Packer, 45, was acquitted by a jury after being accused of taking abortion medicine at home in November 2020 during the Covid-19 lockdown, when she was about 26 weeks pregnant.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store