MP ‘will not be complicit' in approving assisted dying law in safeguards call
Assisted dying safeguards to prevent coercion and 'terrible tragedy' are 'inadequate', MPs have argued as they debated a draft new law.
Labour's Naz Shah warned that the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill is 'literally a matter of life and death' and said she would not be 'complicit' in approving a law without adequate protections.
Her colleague Florence Eshalomi told the Commons that she too opposed the proposal to legislate for assisted dying, as a result of 'inadequate safeguards against the coercion of minority communities'.
At Friday's debate about the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, Ms Shah tried to amend the proposal so that a person would not meet the requirements for an assisted death 'solely as a result of voluntarily stopping eating or drinking'.
Kim Leadbeater, the Labour MP for Spen Valley who proposed the Bill, told MPs that people would not qualify for an assisted death solely on the basis of an eating disorder.
But Ms Shah, the MP for Bradford West, said she had spoken to the parents of a girl who had 'diabetes and complexities of anorexia'.
'If the safeguards in this Bill fail, even once, it will be a young woman like Jessica who dies, it will be parents like Leslie and Neil who lose a child. That is a terrible tragedy no family should ever have to endure,' she said.
'No-one in this House will be able to say truthfully that we did not know or didn't see this coming. That is not compassion, that is abandonment.
'I will not be complicit in that and I hope this House will not be either.'
Ms Shah said: 'This is literally a matter of life and death. If this Bill passes that it doesn't have the safeguards, there's no coming back from those decisions.'
Conservative MP for Reigate Rebecca Paul said she supported Ms Shah's amendment, because it 'addresses a big risk'.
She said: 'In the case of anorexia, there are physical manifestations of the illness, such as malnutrition and diabetes, that might mean the patient meets the definition of being terminally ill, and that is the nub of the problem here.
'The Bill doesn't adequately rule out physical manifestations caused by mental illness.'
Ms Eshalomi said she had 'voted against this Bill at second reading on the grounds of inadequate safeguards against the coercion of minority communities', and added: 'I'm sad to say I'm even more worried now than I was then.'
The Vauxhall and Camberwell Green MP also said: 'It is because we recognise that if this Bill passes, it may impact everyone, not just those who may wish to die. It is not wrong or scaremongering to consider the wider family life, relationships with feelings of burdens or coercion including vulnerable women and people from the BME (black and minority ethnic) community at the end of their life.
'It is not wrong or scaremongering for us as politicians as we continue to receive correspondence from our constituents about the broken state of our NHS and social care, and for us to think carefully about a Bill which may alter the very relationship between doctors and their patients.
'It is frankly insulting to disabled people, hardworking professionals up and down the country who have raised many valid concerns about this Bill, to have it dismissed as religious beliefs.'
Addressing Ms Shah's amendment, Ms Leadbeater told the Commons she had previously 'worked with a number of people with eating disorders'.
She said: 'Eating disorders cause huge distress for individuals and their families and loved ones, but with care and with the right treatments, it is possible for people to recover and to go back to leading a full and fulfilling life.'
From the despatch box, health minister Stephen Kinnock said whether or not to approve Ms Shah's proposal was 'a policy choice for Parliament' but warned it 'risks introducing some uncertainty over a persons' eligibility for assistance under the Bill'.
He added: 'Recognising the intent of this amendment, we do not believe it would render the Bill unworkable.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
43 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Assault on Good-for-You TV: C-SPAN and PBS Teeter as Trump Attacks
When money flowed more freely in television, public-service programming was seen as a means of giving back. From educational TV and supporting public broadcasting to cable operators providing C-SPAN, spaces existed where ratings weren't the yardstick — instead, this was TV intended to be good for you. On Thursday, Congress took a major step toward undermining all of that, as the House narrowly approved a rescission bill that would claw back $1.1 billion in funding to the Corp. for Public Broadcasting, which helps support PBS stations, in addition to cuts to other programs. The bill passed by the slimmest of margins, 214 to 212, with a few GOP legislators switching their votes to get it through. The funding was part of a larger $9.4 billion allocation that lawmakers had already approved for foreign aid and public broadcasting. Senate still has to weigh in on the matter, and has five weeks to decide. With PBS and NPR besieged by the political right, with C-SPAN's funding via cable and satellite fees strafed by cord cutting, higher-minded alternatives have been hit by hard times. The whole point of PBS and National Public Radio was that they would be unfettered by commercial demands, allowing them to offer programming — from children's programming like Mr. Rogers and 'Sesame Street,' devoid of toy commercials, to lower-key news, documentaries and public affairs — that didn't have to justify its existence on a balance sheet. Ditto for C-SPAN, which cable operators carried for a small licensing fee simply because of the perceived value in allowing subscribers to see what their elected representatives were doing and saying, unfiltered and unedited. Public broadcasting has found itself swept up in the Trump administration's war against the media, with the perception that any unflattering reporting about the president — whether from PBS' 'NewsHour' or 'Frontline' or NPR's 'All Things Considered' — reveals 'invidious' bias and a liberal agenda, to use FCC chairman Brendan Carr's favorite word. Conservatives have long argued that public broadcasting represents an unnecessary expense given the abundance of choices available to most consumers. But in its latest incarnation, 'Defund PBS' overtly translates into being less about fiscal responsibility than leveraging the government's underwriting role to silence otherwise-independent media voices by labeling them progressive propaganda. On the left, the response was unambiguous. The Writers Guild of America East (WGAE) condemned the House vote as 'a radical right-wing ideology that aims to destroy a non-partisan public service despite all evidence of its wide benefits.' The group quickly turned its attention to pleading with the Senate, which holds a GOP majority but has exhibited a bit more restraint than the House in prosecuting the MAGA agenda. The CEO of PBS, Paula Kerger, remained silent in the wake of Thursday's vote, but she has been lobbying intensively to save PBS, warning that Trump's push to defund public broadcasters would spell the end for a number of local stations, and the service they provide to their communities. In a recent interview with Katie Couric, Kerger contemplated the end of public funding for the network, which only relies on the government for a portion of its funds. 'I think we'll figure out a way, through digital, to make sure there is some PBS content,' she said. 'But there won't be anyone in the community creating local content. There won't be a place for people to come together.' Kerger was referring to the fact that the campaign against PBS and NPR disproportionally harms smaller and more rural communities that voted for Trump (even if many listeners and viewers didn't), which lack the same menu of local-media options as major markets. In a sense, Sesame Workshop — the entity behind 'Sesame Street' — has provided an unlikely poster child for the financial pressures on public TV, having undergone layoffs before losing its streaming deal with Warner Bros. Discovery's Max. Netflix has since stepped into the breach, joining with PBS Kids in providing access Elmo and his pals. As for C-SPAN, its challenges stem primarily from evolving technology, which has dramatically undercut the financial model upon which the network was founded in 1979. With viewers shifting to streaming and dropping cable and satellite subscriptions, the number of homes receiving C-SPAN has sharply dropped to a little over 50 million, meaning the nonprofit enterprise — which costs operators just $7.25 a month, a fraction of what they pay for channels like Fox News and CNN — is running at a significant deficit. One proposed solution would be for entities with streaming subscribers, like YouTube or Hulu's live-TV package, to carry C-SPAN. Indeed, YouTube's 8 to 10 million subscribers alone would provide enough income to offset most of the shortfall in its roughly $60 million annual operating expenses. Thus far, however, those companies have balked, prompting a rare bipartisan push in the Senate on C-SPAN's behalf, with Republican Chuck Grassley and Democrat Amy Klobuchar among those joining in a resolution calling upon streaming services to carry the network. 'For tens of millions of Americans who have cut the cord and get their content from streaming services, they should not be cut off from the civic content made available by C-SPAN,' the senators stated. It's a welcome development for C-SPAN CEO Sam Feist, who joined the network a little over a year ago from CNN. Feist noted that 'cord cutting' doesn't accurately characterize what's transpired — since old cable subscribers have generally moved to new delivery systems — meaning the case for carrying the network remains as simple as the public-service ideal that inspired its launch. 'We're the only network that provides what we provide, which is this unfiltered view of American government,' Feist told TheWrap, adding in regard to the streamers, 'It is good for the country for their customers to have access to our product.' The campaign regarding C-SPAN carriage has seemingly gained some momentum over the last year, with former Federal Communications Commission chairman Tom Wheeler and the Washington Post's Karen Tumulty among those joining the aforementioned senators in taking up the cause. Wheeler called YouTube's decision not to carry C-SPAN 'baffling and anti-democratic,' writing in The Hill that the company is depriving viewers of 'an unfiltered window into the goings-on in Congress, the White House and other parts of the government.' As Sen. Ron Wyden told Tumulty, carrying the network would only cost YouTube about $6 million a year — 'crumbs,' he suggested, for a streamer that rakes in billions in ad revenue. YouTube has stated that its subscribers 'have not shown sufficient interest in adding C-SPAN to the YouTube TV lineup to justify the increased cost' to their monthly bills, although as Wyden noted, that would amount to a relative pittance of 87 cents a year per household. The two situations aren't completely analogous, especially with the fate of PBS and NPR having become embroiled in politics, as opposed to corporate stubbornness. More fundamentally, though, both situations speak to the question of civic responsibility, and whether the government and private interests acknowledge such obligations. Because even if C-SPAN and PBS reach smaller audiences in a fragmented world, certain things are worth keeping around not because everybody watches them, but rather for what they offer, symbolically as well as tangibly, thanks to the staid sobriety they provide by being available to the people that do. The post The Assault on Good-for-You TV: C-SPAN and PBS Teeter as Trump Attacks appeared first on TheWrap.
Medscape
43 minutes ago
- Medscape
Last Signs of Life: What to Expect in Final Hours
Caregivers of terminally ill patients often turn to health professionals to learn what to expect in the final weeks, days, and hours of life. Regardless of the underlying cause, many signs and symptoms are similar during this period. Addressing families' concerns proactively can ease discomfort and anxiety and help prevent crises that lead to unnecessary ICU admissions. Below are the key topics to discuss with caregivers as death approaches a patient. Sleep Patients spend increasing amounts of time sleeping and may struggle to keep their eyes open because of fatigue and metabolic changes related to the dying process. Families should make the most of the time when the patient is alert, even at night, and avoid waking them. Restlessness Restlessness or agitation may arise during periods of wakefulness, making it difficult for patients to return to sleep. These symptoms, which are sometimes associated with mental confusion, may reflect real distress resulting from metabolic changes and the perception of loss of autonomy. Speaking calmly, acknowledging patients' concerns, and suggesting comfort measures can help. If these steps are ineffective, neuroleptics or sedatives may be prescribed to aid in rest. Disorientation and Hallucinations As death approaches, patients often become progressively disoriented in terms of time and place, even with regard to close relatives and caregivers. Hallucinations may occur, particularly in long-standing older adults. Patients might report seeing deceased loved ones or describe comforting visions or memories, which can distress families. In these moments, caregivers must not correct or rationalize their experiences. Instead, they should encourage patients to share their feelings and explore their emotional states. Social Withdrawal It is common for patients to withdraw socially as their condition worsens. They may lose interest in activities such as reading newspapers, listening to music, watching television, visiting friends, and seeing family. Although difficult to witness, caregivers can offer a gentle and unobtrusive presence by talking softly or simply holding the patient's hand. Nutrition and Hydration Interest in eating and drinking declines gradually and can vary from one day to the next. Patients tend to need less food and liquids in response to metabolic changes during the end-of-life process. At this stage, eating no longer has a nutritional purpose and does not influence energy or prognosis, making meals a gesture of affection. It is recommended to offer only those foods that the patient prefers. Do not force-feed, as it may cause discomfort. Small ice chips or frozen fruit juice pops can soothe the mouth. When swallowing becomes impossible, oral intake should be stopped to avoid aspiration. Incontinence and Urinary Disturbances Loss of urinary and/or bowel control is common at the end of life and may affect a patient's dignity and comfort. Keep the patient clean by changing soiled clothes and sheets regularly and using diapers or protective clothing to ensure proper hygiene and prevent skin irritation or infections. If a patient cannot urinate, a catheter may be required. Advise caregivers that urine output decreases and darkens as death approaches. Reduced Senses Vision and hearing often decline days and hours before death, sometimes with increased sensitivity to light and sound. Keep the room dim and minimize sudden noise to reduce discomfort and disorientation. Do not assume that the patient cannot hear; hearing is typically the last sense to go. Physical Signs An increase in temperature is common during the final days and hours. Causes include inflammation from tumors, infections, or metabolic changes. A temperature above 38 °C does not always indicate discomfort or the need for medication. Caregivers can apply a cool, damp cloth to the forehead to help lower the temperature and at the same time feel helpful. In the hours before death, the skin may redden, become moist, and feel warm if the body temperature rises. Conversely, extremities, such as the hands, arms, feet, and legs, may cool, accompanied by cyanosis and mottling of the skin. Cooling of the body is a natural process that occurs when circulation slows and vital organs begin to stop functioning. Sometimes, the skin on the face takes on a yellowish hue with paleness that is more pronounced around the mouth. Breathing patterns also change as bodily functions slow. Breaths may become shallow and irregular, and the accessory muscles may engage. The interval between breaths can lengthen, and patients may take several quick, shallow breaths, followed by a long pause. These cycles deepen over time and can be distressing for families. As consciousness fades, patients lose the ability to swallow or clear their oral secretions. Air passes through these accumulated secretions, resulting in noisy ventilation in approximately half the terminally ill patients. Families and caregivers may find this sound unsettling, fearing the patient is choking. Changing the patient's position or administering medication for dry secretions can reduce, and sometimes relieve, noise.
Yahoo
43 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Senate GOP Strips Provision From Tax Bill That Would Let Trump Rule As A King
WASHINGTON – Senate Republicans have quietly removed a provision from the House GOP's massive tax-and-spending bill that would have allowed President Donald Trump to circumvent the courts and essentially serve as a king. Late Thursday, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, released the panel's proposed text for the GOP's so-called Big Beautiful Bill. The House passed its version of the bill last month, so now the Senate is making its changes. Each committee is tasked with putting together language for its relevant section in the legislation. The text that Grassley released for the bill's judicial section doesn't include this jarring, one-sentence provision that House Republicans buried in their 1,116-page bill: Translated, this provision would restrict the ability of any court, including the Supreme Court, to enforce compliance with its orders by holding people in contempt. Contempt citations are an essential tool for the courts; they allow judges to threaten fines, sanctions or even jail if people disobey their orders. The provision in the House GOP's bill also would apply retroactively to all temporary restraining orders and preliminary injunctions, leaving courts with no real way of enforcing orders they've already handed those orders? The 184 court rulings that have temporarily halted unlawful actions taken by the Trump administration. And Trump has already been ignoring orders from judges to stop deporting migrants without giving them due process. Every House Republican voted for this provision when they voted to pass the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Even if they didn't know it. Senate Democrats had been pressuring their GOP colleagues to take this language out of the bill when they unveiled their version of it. Not only does this provision appear to violate the constitutional separation of powers, it also violates Senate rules. Republicans are relying on a fast-track legislative process known as budget reconciliation to move the bill, which means everything in it must be related to budget matters. Restricting judges' abilities to hand down contempt orders has nothing to do with budgets. Senate Republicans almost certainly knew this when they stripped it from the bill. Leaving it in could lead to problems for passing the broader bill, which is Trump's signature domestic policy legislation ― a package that slashes nearly $1 trillion from Medicaid and food assistance programs to pay for a massive tax cut for rich people. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) told HuffPost last week that he knew some GOP senators were 'very uncomfortable' with this contempt provision, and said Democrats planned to use every procedural tool possible to remove it. 'This is a naked attempt to shield members of the Trump administration from court orders,' Schumer said.
