logo
Assisted dying: BMA says patients should meet end-of-life care doctor first

Assisted dying: BMA says patients should meet end-of-life care doctor first

Leader Live20 hours ago

A motion passed by delegates at the British Medical Association's annual representative meeting (ARM) in Liverpool on Monday proposed a number of changes to the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill.
The proposed legislation for assisted dying cleared the Commons with a majority of 23 votes on Friday and will move to the House of Lords for further debate.
As it stands, the Bill 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.
British Medical Association (BMA) members have now called for patients to also have an in-person review with an independent palliative care doctor at the very start of the process.
Speaking at the union's meeting, Dr Samuel Parker said: 'To ensure patient care needs have been met, and to help detect coercion, any patient requesting assisted dying should be encouraged to attend face-to-face reviews by an independent specialist palliative care doctor before the assisted dying pathway begins.
'This can also ensure whether the patient has received the best quality outcomes prior to preventing their assisted dying.'
Dr Sarah Foot added: 'Choice is only a choice if it is an informed choice… this is about making sure that patients know their options, that have had access to palliative care.
'What is uncomfortable is patients choosing to die when they haven't had access to palliative care and don't know what's available to them.
'Our united voice will help influence this Bill in the House of Lords later this year, be proud and proactive and stand up for some of our most vulnerable patients.
'Those who are dying are physically and emotionally dependent on us in society to help safeguard them. They need to be safe and supported.'
Dr Parker warned that palliative care in the UK is under-resourced, 'with few specialists, a post-Covid lottery and a shortage of funding'.
He said patients deserve rapid access to high-quality care, adding that 'safety and patient welfare are essential'.
Dr Foot said: 'Hospices and palliative care does not have enough funding. We cannot live in a society were we fully fund assisted dying, but we don't fully fund hospice and palliative care.'
Last week, the Health Secretary – who was one of the most senior opponents of the legislation – warned that legalising assisted dying would take 'time and money' away from other parts of the NHS.
Writing on his Facebook page, Wes Streeting said he could not ignore the concerns 'about the risks that come with this Bill' raised by the Royal College of Psychiatrists, the Royal College of Physicians, the Association for Palliative Medicine and charities representing under-privileged groups.
The motion at the BMA ARM also affirmed the right of doctors to decline involvement in the service. An opt-out for all healthcare professionals is already built into the Bill.
Speaking of the potential impact of assisted dying on the mental wellbeing of healthcare professionals, Dr Parker called on the BMA to ensure there are 'no subtle pressures' on doctors to participate, and 'no risk of professional sanction or discrimination'.
Dr Andrew Green, chairman of the BMA's medical ethics committee, said: 'While the BMA is neutral on the issue of assisted dying – that is whether the law should change or not – we have been engaging with legislation to ensure doctors are represented on a number of key issues.
'This motion reaffirms, and strengthens, a number of the BMA's existing positions, including the right for doctors to decline to participate for any reason should the law change, and the need for any assisted dying service to be funded through new money and not at the expense of other parts of health and social care.
'We have been clear that any future assisted dying provision should be offered via a separate service that doctors must opt in to, and not part of any doctor's existing regular work. This service must come with additional funding, alongside further investment in palliative care, which we know has for too long been under-resourced, leading to huge variations in availability across the country.
'In discussions around Kim Leadbeater's Bill in England and Wales, which has now passed its final stages in the Commons, we have strongly opposed moves to ban doctors from raising the subject of assisted dying with patients, but have been clear that this must be part of a discussion around all options available.
'This motion expands on this, ensuring that patients who may be considering assisted dying are able to access information about all possible treatment and routes available to them.'
Meanwhile, research has suggested that almost half (47%) of UK adults surveyed are worried they or their loved ones will have a painful or undignified death.
The survey, carried out by Focaldata for King's College London (KCL), found 44% feel worried about the quality of palliative and end-of-life care in the UK, although 46% said they feel confident services will be available when they or loved ones need them.
Meanwhile, the polling found 61% of the 2,106 adults asked in March were supportive of the assisted dying Bill which is currently being considered by Parliament for England and Wales.
KCL is launching The Impact Centre for Palliative and End-of-Life Care in autumn, a privately-run centre aiming to improve palliative care in the UK, and establish a framework for better care which it said could be applied around the world.
The centre, funded by the Kirby Laing Foundation, will be the first of its kind in the UK and will work to 'create long term, systemic change in the delivery of care for dying people'.
Centre lead Professor Katherine Sleeman, said: 'Although a wealth of evidence has now been generated on ways to improve experiences and outcomes for people approaching the end of life, too often this evidence is not used to improve care, meaning dying people suffer and those close to them are left to pick up the pieces.
'By closing the gap between evidence and practice, the Impact Centre for Palliative and End-of-Life Care will make a profound and lasting difference for people with life-limiting illnesses and their loved ones, now and in the future.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Overlooking sexual harassment against health staff ‘risks patient safety'
Overlooking sexual harassment against health staff ‘risks patient safety'

Western Telegraph

timean hour ago

  • Western Telegraph

Overlooking sexual harassment against health staff ‘risks patient safety'

Medics claim that overlooking these incidents allows other toxic behaviours 'to perpetuate'. It comes as members of the British Medical Association (BMA) called for NHS trusts to include active bystander training – which aims to equip people with the skills to challenge unacceptable conduct – in mandatory training programmes. Delegates at the union's annual representative meeting (ARM) in Liverpool also voted for the BMA to lobby for a national anonymous reporting system for victims of sexual harassment. Dr Helen Neary, co-chairwoman of the BMA consultants committee, said: 'People are bystanders at all levels, and a working culture that turns a blind eye to this behaviour is also a risk to patient safety, enabling other poor behaviours to perpetuate.' The motion urged NHS organisations to probe allegations of sexual misconduct using trained investigators external to the trust. Dr Neary added: 'No one should feel unsafe at work. Yet the appalling truth is that doctors, disproportionately women, are still subject to sexual harassment, abuse and assault in the workplace – often by their fellow doctors. This has to stop. 'Not only is it obviously completely unacceptable and has a devastating impact on victims, but also affects the quality of care and workforce capacity as poor behaviours will do nothing to retain staff in the NHS.' In March, the latest NHS staff survey found one in 12 (8.82%) of workers were the target of unwanted sexual behaviour such as offensive comments, touching and assaults. The proportion was similar to that reported in 2023 (8.79%) when the question was first asked as part of the survey. Last October, NHS England launched a new national sexual misconduct policy framework to ensure trusts had robust policies in place for staff to report incidents. Speaking to delegates at the BMA ARM in Liverpool, Professor Bhairavi Sapra said that while the framework is a 'very welcome first step', it is not mandatory. 'It is up to individual employers to adopt it, and even then, perpetrators can simply move on from one employer to another without accountability for those in positions of power to prevent this behaviour,' she added. 'Worse still, there is no national reporting mechanism. That means if someone wants to report an incident months later in a different workplace, they face an uphill battle, often alone. 'Survivors have told us why they don't come forward. They fear being told they're overreacting. 'They fear retaliation or reputational damage. They fear nothing will change, and sadly, they are not wrong. 'Investigations, when they do happen, are rarely trauma informed, often the process itself can feel like another form of harm.' Dr Neary said: 'As the trade union and professional association for all doctors in the UK – from those beginning their careers as medical students to retirement and beyond – the BMA welcomes the legal obligation placed on the NHS to protect employees from sexual harassment. 'This vote makes some excellent suggestions on how this work can go further, including anonymous reporting, that will encourage those concerned about coming forward to do so, and better equipping doctors on how they can support colleagues when they witness sexual harassment at work.' Prof Sapra also claimed the 'power imbalance' in the medical profession is 'stark', adding: 'Junior staff rely on senior medical staff for training, for references and for their very careers. 'That dependency makes them especially vulnerable and often silent.' An NHS England spokesperson said: 'It is totally unacceptable that NHS staff experience sexual misconduct or harassment at work – this behaviour has no place in the health service, and all organisations must take robust and compassionate action to prevent it. 'The NHS Sexual Safety Charter has been adopted by every Integrated Care Board and NHS Trust in England, which encourages consideration of external, independent investigators in complex or sensitive cases – and all NHS organisations should ensure that those leading these processes are properly trained to handle them with the seriousness and sensitivity they require.'

Parents sent urgent vaccine warning amid cancer red alert
Parents sent urgent vaccine warning amid cancer red alert

Daily Mirror

time4 hours ago

  • Daily Mirror

Parents sent urgent vaccine warning amid cancer red alert

Uptake of a vital vaccine is still well below pre-Covid pandemic levels, experts have warned Young people in one area of the UK are at an 'increased risk' of a certain cancer, as health experts warned parents. According to the latest data from the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA), people in parts of the country are more likely to develop cervical cancer. This is due to the fact that coverage of a potentially lifesaving vaccine, the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) jab is not the same across the country. Figures from the UKHSA show that there are 'inequalities' in vaccination uptake in different areas and regions across the country. ‌ Uptake of the HPV jab is still below what it was prior to the Covid pandemic, the UKHSA warned. It not only protects against cervical cancer, but other forms of the disease such as anal, penile and head and neck cancer. ‌ The vaccine is offered to children aged 12 to 13. Research has shown that receiving the HPV vaccine before age 16 provides significantly stronger immune responses and greater protection against HPV-related cancers. Dr Sharif Ismail, consultant epidemiologist at UKHSA, said: 'The HPV vaccine, now just a single dose offered in schools, is one of the most powerful tools we have for cancer prevention. Every vaccination represents a young person with better protection against the devastating impact of HPV-related cancers and we must do more to ensure that no teenage girl or boy, young woman or man is denied that protection no matter where they live. 'Although we have seen some increase in the number of young people being vaccinated, uptake is still well below pre-Covid pandemic levels. Over a quarter of young people, many thousands, are missing out on this potentially life-saving vaccine, which protects not only against cervical cancer but all young adults, men and women, against genital warts and some genital cancers, as well as mouth and throat cancers. 'We're calling on all parents to return their children's HPV vaccination consent forms promptly. This simple action could protect your child from developing cancer in the future.' Worst-affected areas The latest HPV vaccine data, which was taken between 2023 to 2024, shows that Lambeth in south London has the lowest uptake of the jab: HPV coverage for female year 10 students by NHS commissioning region was lowest in London (64.9 per cent) and highest in the South East (82.7 per cent) HPV coverage for male year 10 students by NHS commissioning region was lowest in London (58.9 per cent) and highest in the South East (77.3 per cent) HPV coverage for female year 10 students at local authority level ranged from 38.7 per cent (Lambeth) to 97.6 per cent (Northumberland) HPV coverage for male year 10 students at local authority level ranged from 28.2 per cent (Lambeth) to 92.2 per cent (West Berkshire) ‌ Data provided by Cancer Research UK on cervical cancer incidence statistics report that rates in England are 65 per cent higher in the most deprived quintile compared with the least. Dr Amanda Doyle, national director for primary care and community services at NHS England, said: 'The NHS HPV vaccination programme has already helped save thousands of lives and we need to go further to boost uptake of HPV vaccines and cervical screening to help eliminate cervical cancer in England by 2040. ‌ 'If we can ensure that almost every Year 10 girl in some areas is protected and extremely unlikely to ever develop cervical cancer, we need to match this in every part of the country. It's vital for boys and young men to be vaccinated too. Rates in boys still lag behind girls and HPV causes thousands of cancers in men as well as things like genital warts. 'I would urge all parents to give their consent for their child to be vaccinated and it's important to remember that those that remain unvaccinated and have left school can still get vital protection by contacting their GP practice to catch up before their 25th birthday. With vaccination being just one dose, it is easier than ever to ensure young people get protection.' Getting the HPV vaccine For those who missed their school HPV vaccinations in year 8 and 9, catch-up options remain available and are highly effective. Anyone who missed their HPV vaccination, now just a single jab, can still receive it for free until their 25th birthday through their GP surgery; this also applies to boys born after September 1, 2006. ‌ HPV vaccinations are also offered to boys in school in year 8 and 9, and similarly help protect them against HPV infection and its complications, including genital warts, head and neck cancers (which includes mouth and throat) and genital cancers. But boys also have an important role to play in helping eliminate cervical cancer by being vaccinated and not passing on the HPV virus when they become sexually active. For young adults up to age 25, who missed their school vaccinations, please speak to your GP about catch-up options. It's never too late to get protected. And it's important to stress that even if you've had the HPV vaccine, it's vital you still attend your cervical screening appointments when invited. Both vaccination and screening together give you your best chance of protection against cervical cancer. While the HPV vaccine provides excellent protection, attending cervical screening appointments remains crucial, regardless of vaccination status. Screening can detect abnormal cells before they develop into cancer, allowing for early treatment and prevention.

Readers' letters: Assisted dying is too important to be left to politicians
Readers' letters: Assisted dying is too important to be left to politicians

Scotsman

time5 hours ago

  • Scotsman

Readers' letters: Assisted dying is too important to be left to politicians

Readers call for a referendum to decide if assisted dying should be implemented Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Like other Scots exiled south ot the Border I will, it seems, soon be able to choose to die. Of course I understand the feelings of those supporters of the bill. Many, or most, of them have had to witness the horrific death of loved ones and would not want to see this experience repeated. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad My fear is that, despite the many sincere and well meaning safeguards that will undoubtably be put in place, the passage of time will see those safeguards eroded or relaxed. Who amongst the supporters of the bill can guarantee that future generations will want the 'choice' not to be entirely that of the patient? Supporters of assisted dying celebrate after MPs voted in favour of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill last week (Picture:) Little has been heard of the Hippocratic Oath in this debate. I understand that the oath has been subject to a number of interpretations but I suspect Hippocrates would flinch at the prospect of his successors offering patients a pill that will kill them. This is too important an issue to be left to parliamentarians and a referendum is the only and clearest way for Scotland to take stock. John Rhind, Beadnell, Northumberland Peer pressure After that favourable Commons' vote on assisted dying is it really now down to the unelected upper house to declare its opinion about what the people need, seemingly regardless of what the people actually want? Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Isn't assisted dying legislation a classic case of a law that should be decided instead by the people as a whole through an informed national referendum? Too often we the people have been obliged to obey laws without our say so. Blair obliged us to invade Iraq; Major took us from the Common Market into the European Union; Cameron obliged us to invade Libya, (but to his eternal credit did permit us to decide if we wished to stay in the EU). We were all on Thatcher's side when she ordered the recapture of the Falkland Islands, but I doubt that'll be so if the Lords deliberately procrastinate to ensure the bill fails because it has run out of time. I agree that what has been passed has several faults which the Lords could sort out. Eight years ago I was given a terminal diagnosis for melanoma cancer. I put my affairs in order and awaited the end, only for a doctor to put me on to an experimental drug called Pembrulizumab which set in motion a successful immunotherapy, and so here I am still at 88. I mention that as I would make assisted dying available, at first anyway, only to mentally competent persons over 80 years of age because before then the possibility of 'miracle' cures exists, as I now have proven. An informed referendum, please, on an improved bill. Tim Flinn, Edinburgh Rogue states For a man who managed to give money to Gaza that was given to Holyrood to be spent on the Scottish people, Humza Yousaf is certainly persistent. He now wishes to extend his personal interest in the politics of the Middle East into domestic politics by denying US aircraft the use of airports in Scotland. This is in line with his party's similar policy of wanting to deny Nato vessels carrying nuclear weapons to come here, despite being part of our defence shield. Mind you, the SNP is loudly against defending ourselves. Mr Yousaf's latest outburst echoes his comments that Israel is a 'rogue state'. Like all nations, Israel has its fair share of black marks on its copybook. Consider the mass killing in the King David Hotel bombing by Jewish terrorists in 1946. Israel is quite open when it uses force. Following the recent terrorist outrage in Kashmir, India struck back against the people they blame for it, namely Pakistan. The world is too full of such attacks on 'soft' targets and nations are entitled to respond against those they see as the puppet-masters behind such attacks. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Who can blame Israel when Iranian proxies massacred their citizens at a music festival and hold others hostage? We all know that Iran's uranium enrichment has only one purpose, which is to make a nuclear bomb to drop on Israel and wipe it off the map. Does Mr Yousaf really expect Israelis, or anyone else to just sit and let them do it? There is only one 'rogue state' I can see and that is Iran. Peter Hopkins, Edinburgh Day jobs Why are John Swinney and indeed Humza Yousaf pontificating about the situation in Iran (Scotsman, June 23)? Foreign affairs are wholly retained by Westminster and, as per the Scotland Act, are explicitly outwith the jurisdiction of Holyrood. Yousaf is yesterday's man, and few care what he thinks, but Swinney, like it or not, heads up a devolved administration. The taxpayer employs MPs at Westminster to address international affairs while we pay Swinney and Yousaf to focus on such crucially important areas as the NHS, education, housing and roads. But perhaps this is simply too dreary for them? SNP politicians seemingly imagine that speaking out on international conflicts bigs them up in our eyes, yet the opposite is very much the case. It draws attention to their dismal performance in managing a vitally important raft of public services that the people of Scotland rely on each and every day. Martin Redfern, Melrose, Scottish Borders International law Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Gerald Edwards' support for Israel is ludicrous, as is his support for Trump's bombing of Iran (Letters, June 23). When Israel attacked Iran without warning it breached international law. A state is only permitted to attack another state if it presents an imminent danger. Netanyahu claimed that Israel was about to manufacture a nuclear weapon. Tulsi Gabbard, the US Director of National Intelligence, refuted that. Trump's bombing of Iran also broke international law, and also broke the constitution of the United States because it was an act of war. The US President can only declare war if Congress approves it. Congress can only approve war against a country if that country poses an immediate and grave military threat. Iran posed no threat to the United States. By breaking the constitution, Trump lays himself open to impeachment. Israel assassinated a number of Iranian nuclear scientists including the lead negotiator in the talks to discuss Iran's nuclear programme which were scheduled to take place on the Sunday after Israel attacked in what was described as a 'Pearl Harbour moment' for Iran, without declaration of war, and therefore a war crime. Like many, I believed Donald Trump's pre-election claims that he would end America's endless wars. Sadly I was wrong. As American military analyst Colonel Douglas Macgregor said commenting after the bombing of Iran: 'We are the rogue state in support of the other rogue state.' William Loneskie. Lauder, Scottish Borders No sense of shame Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad So Douglas Alexander, MP for Lothian East – who was complicit as a cabinet minister in the UK Government in taking the UK into an illegal war in Iraq and is now complicit in supporting a fanatical Israeli government regime accused of genocide in Gaza and engaged in bombing Syria, Yemen and Iran – proclaims that Scotland is in a 'voluntary union' but yet he cannot state (as evidenced on BBC Scotland's Sunday Show) a democratic route for Scotland to leave this union. It appears not only that Mr Alexander and the Labour Party have abandoned any remaining principles but they unapologetically have no sense of shame, having apparently learned little from past mistakes and resultant catastrophes. We can do better and the parliament we elect should have the power to conduct a constitutional referendum so that we in Scotland can determine our own future, including our own non-imperialist foreign policy. Stan Grodynski, Longniddry, East Lothian Gael force I am delighted that the national importance of Gaelic has been recognised, unanimously, by the Scottish Parliament. Gaelic is more than a language, it is part of the cultural identity of our nation. It is heritage and history, vital to the story of Scotland's sovereignty and indeed predates English by well over 1000 years. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad For those detractors that say it is a dead and useless language and a financial drain, I say shame on you. Through centuries of oppression and abuse Gaelic has survived and now with music and the arts and a longing for independence, there is a resurgence. Only in knowing the history of your country, can there ever be confidence in its future destiny. Wrapped around its ancient Celtic identity, Scotland remains a reawakening nation that has, in the past, given much to the world. Grant Frazer, Newtonmore, Highland Matter of principal I'm a proud son of Edinburgh and as a graduate (MA, 1966) of the Tounis College, I keep a strong interest in developments there. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad However, news can take time to reach London, where I am now based; and so I have only just seen an account of the Principal and Vice-Chancellor's appearance earlier this month in front of of the Education Committee of the Scottish Parliament. For Sir Peter Mathieson to say 'I do not carry the figure about in my head' when asked about his salary doesn't just beggar belief, it smacks of arrogance and disrespect. It's also worrying that, faced with a financial crisis in the university, its head seems not to be able to remember basic numbers. The principal has lost credibility and, I would suggest, any respect. He should at least try to preserve some fragment of his reputation, do the decent (and right) thing by the University of Edinburgh and resign. Sir James HodgeLondon Write to The Scotsman

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store