Latest news with #DameEstherRantzen
Telegraph
16-05-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
We need a Royal Commission on assisted dying
Reasonable people may disagree on the principle of assisted dying. Strong moral arguments have been made for and against, weighing individual sovereignty against the dignity of human life. What is not in dispute is that the process through which Kim Leadbeater MP and her allies have sought to change the law has been utterly shambolic. The Bill presented to Parliament is not fit for purpose, and the debate around it has been unnecessarily rushed, attempting to ram through a highly controversial change without adequate scrutiny. The result is that the Bill that was presented at the Second Reading is quite distinct from that which has emerged from the Committee stage. MPs were promised that a High Court judge would oversee each application. When this proved impractical, their role was removed, with a replacement panel of social workers, psychiatrists and legal figures suggested. Ms Leadbeater has attempted to sell this as making her law 'even more robust'. Many will disagree. Moreover, both the Royal College of Psychiatrists and the Royal College of Physicians have publicly stated that the Bill is unfit for purpose, raising questions over its practical implementation. The row over Dame Esther Rantzen's suggestion that opposition among MPs is driven by ' undeclared personal religious beliefs ' is merely one last indignity in a process filled with them. It would be better at this point to abandon this undercooked effort at reform, and to establish a Royal Commission to examine the matter properly.
The Independent
16-05-2025
- Health
- The Independent
MPs vote in favour of assisted dying opt-out for all healthcare workers
No medics would be obliged to take part in assisted dying, under a change approved by MPs amid further impassioned debate on the controversial topic. The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill was debated for almost five hours on Friday. It was the first time the proposed legislation had returned to the Commons since a historic yes vote in November saw a majority of MPs support the principle of assisted dying. MPs voted for one new clause to be added to the Bill, which will ensure 'no person', including any medical professional, is 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. The at-times emotional debate saw supporters of changing the law argue the Bill has returned with strengthened safeguards after being amended in committee earlier this year. But opponents have complained the Bill does not have enough protections and has been rushed through, with the criticism coming days after two royal medical colleges voiced their doubts on the legislation in its current form. Dame Esther Rantzen, who is terminally ill and is one of the most high-profile backers of the Bill, appealed for MPs to vote for what she termed a 'crucial reform'. In a letter to MPs on the eve of Friday's debate, she urged them to change the law 'as so many other countries have, not for me and for those like me who are running rapidly out of time, but for future generations to have the right if necessary, not to shorten their lives, to shorten their deaths'. She suggested some MPs opposed to the Bill have 'undeclared personal religious beliefs which mean no precautions would satisfy them'. This drew criticism in the Commons from Labour's Jess Asato who branded the Childline founder's comments 'distasteful and disrespectful'. An effort by Conservative MP Rebecca Paul preventing employees from providing assisted dying, while working for an employer which has chosen not to take part in the process, was rejected. Health minister Stephen Kinnock said that amendment might leave workers with 'conflicting obligations' and could make the service more difficult to access 'if employers can prevent their entire workforce from participating in the provision of assisted dying'. The Government is neutral on the Bill and any votes MPs make are according to their own conscience rather than along party lines. In its current form the Bill, 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, with approval needed from two doctors and the expert panel. Bringing her Bill back to Parliament, Labour MP Kim Leadbeater said assisted dying must be legalised to avoid terminally ill people acting out of desperation or making 'traumatic' trips to Switzerland. Following the Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych) statement this week on its 'serious concerns' including on numbers of psychiatrists available to sit on panels assessing a terminally ill person's application, Ms Leadbeater told MPs said she 'wouldn't anticipate any problems' on staffing. Other amendments discussed – but not voted on – on Friday included ensuring care homes and hospices can decide whether or not to be involved in assisted dying and that their funding would not be affected based on their decision. Elsewhere, Labour's Dame Meg Hillier spoke of her concern that patients could 'feel pressured into ending their lives' if doctors are able to raise the prospect of assisted dying with patients first in a conversation. Dame Meg has urged MPs to support her amendments which would mean that could not happen, and that health professionals could not raise the topic with under-18s. Neither of those were voted on. Another 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. With dozens of amendments having been tabled for Friday, some MPs raised further concerns about the quality of the debate and the length of time allocated. The current stage – known as report stage – will continue on June 13, when further debate will take place in the Commons. If time allows on that day it is possible a third reading could take place, giving MPs another vote to either approve or reject the overall Bill and decide whether to send it on to the House of Lords. Speaking to pro-change campaigners following Friday's session, Ms Leadbeater said: 'We've got further to go, but I think it was a reasonably good debate.' Addressing a group in Parliament, including Dame Esther's daughter Rebecca Wilcox, Ms Leadbeater became emotional, saying she gets upset 'when we get obsessed with parliamentary procedure, when this is actually about human beings, and that's what I find upsetting, because I think it's not about a green book, or it's not about a piece of paper'.
Sky News
16-05-2025
- Health
- Sky News
MPs criticise terminally ill Esther Rantzen's assisted dying intervention
Terminally ill journalist Dame Esther Rantzen was branded "disrespectful" and "insulting" by MPs during a debate on the assisted dying bill. The broadcaster and Childline founder wrote to all MPs ahead of Friday's Commons' debate urging them to vote for what she called a "crucial reform". MPs were voting on amendments made to the bill - the report stage - following months of a committee going line by line through it after being introduced last year by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater. The bill says people with six months to live who have the mental capacity can request medical assistance to legally end their life. Dame Esther, who has stage four lung cancer, suggested many MPs who opposed the bill have "undeclared personal religious beliefs which mean no precautions would satisfy them". However, in a highly charged Commons session, some MPs took umbrage with that. Labour MP Florence Eshalomi, who is a Christian and voted against the bill the first time, told the Commons: "This is frankly insulting to disabled people, hard working professionals up and down the country, who have raised many valid concerns about this bill, to have it dismissed as religious beliefs." Jess Asato, a Labour MP who, as a child, cared for her grandmother with serious health problems, said Dame Esther "accused those of us who have concerns about the bills as having undeclared religious beliefs". "Many colleagues found this distasteful and disrespectful," said the MP, who previously voted against the bill. Health Secretary Wes Streeting, who voted against the bill last year, backed Ms Asato's criticism as he retweeted her X post saying Dame Esther's comment about faith was "particularly distasteful". 'Clumsy criticism' Conservative MP Dr Kieran Mullan said there had been some "unhelpful remarks by high profile campaigners", and while he is not religious he was "concerned to see a clumsy criticism" that those objecting to the bill are doing so because of their "religious beliefs". In a dig at Dame Esther's comments, Rebecca Paul, Tory MP for Reigate, said she is not against assisted dying "in principle" but is against the bill - and wanted to put on the record: "I have no personal religious beliefs." The debate saw some MPs on the verge of tears as they described their own experiences of having debilitating conditions, or having family members in pain. MPs do not have to vote along party lines for the bill. How did MPs vote? An amendment tabled by Ms Leadbeater, which "expands the protection" for medical practitioners to clarify they have "no obligation" to be part of an assisted death was passed by MPs. It also provides legal protections for medical professionals to ensure they are not subject to any kind of punishment for refusing to carry out an assisted death. Another new clause to allow employers to impose a blanket ban on staff facilitating an assisted death was rejected. Since the bill was first introduced, there have been significant changes, including the replacement of a High Court judge to sign assisted dying off by a three-member expert panel - on top of two doctors having to approve. The time at which assisted dying would come into effect was doubled to four years from when it becomes law, if voted through. Medical colleges pull support Opponents have argued the bill does not have enough safeguards and is being rushed through. Three days before the debate, the Royal College of Psychiatrists pulled its support for the bill over the change that will mean a psychiatrist must be on the panel that decides if someone can die. The next day, the Royal College of Physicians (the largest college) adopted a similar position. However, supporters argue it is time to change the law, with Ms Leadbeater saying: "If we do not vote to change the law, we are essentially saying that the status quo is acceptable."
The Independent
16-05-2025
- Health
- The Independent
Care homes and hospices must have right to opt out of assisted dying, MPs hear
Concerns around the prospect of care homes providing assisted dying and the risks of patients turning to Google if not given all the options by a doctor have been raised in Parliament as the controversial topic was once again debated by MPs. Demonstrators gathered outside Parliament as the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill came back to the Commons for the first time since a historic yes vote in November saw a majority of MPs support the principle of assisted dying. Dame Esther Rantzen, who is terminally ill and is one of the most high-profile backers of the Bill, appealed for MPs to vote for what she termed a 'crucial reform'. She urged them to change the law 'as so many other countries have, not for me and for those like me who are running rapidly out of time, but for future generations to have the right if necessary, not to shorten their lives, to shorten their deaths'. Dame Esther also suggested many MPs opposed to the Bill have 'undeclared personal religious beliefs which mean no precautions would satisfy them'. But Labour's Jess Asato criticised the Childline founder's comments as 'distasteful and disrespectful'. Opponents have argued the Bill does not have enough safeguards and has been rushed through, with two royal medical colleges voicing their doubts on the legislation in its current form. Among those opposed to the Bill, Paralympian Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson – who would have a vote on the Bill should it make its way to the Lords – has argued the Bill has 'not been made safer', criticising the scrapping of the much-lauded High Court safeguard in favour of expert panels. Other changes made to the Bill – which concerns only England and Wales – in recent months during a weeks-long committee process include the timeframe in which an assisted dying service might come into effect being doubled to four years from royal assent. In its current form the Bill would mean terminally ill adults with only six months left to live could apply for assistance to end their lives, with approval needed from two doctors and the expert panel. It is possible this part of the parliamentary process, known as the report stage, will run into a second day next month, meaning a vote on approval or rejection of the overall Bill would not take place on Friday. Bringing her Bill back to Parliament, Labour MP Kim Leadbeater said assisted dying must be legalised to avoid terminally ill people acting out of desperation or making 'traumatic' trips to Switzerland. As Friday's session – which could last for up to five hours – opened, she told MPs gathered in the Commons: 'Put simply, if we do not vote to change the law, we are essentially saying that the status quo is acceptable.' Referring to stories she had heard of people dying in 'deeply difficult and traumatic circumstances', she added: 'Too many have seen their terminally ill loved ones take their own lives out of desperation, or make the traumatic, lonely and costly trip to Switzerland, and then face a police investigation while dealing with their grief and loss.' Following a Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych) statement this week on its 'serious concerns' including on numbers of psychiatrists available to sit on panels assessing a terminally ill person's application, Ms Leadbeater told MPs said she 'wouldn't anticipate any problems' on staffing. Amendments being discussed on Friday included ensuring care homes and hospices can decide whether or not to be involved in assisted dying and that their funding would not be affected based on their decision. Conservative MP Rebecca Paul, who tabled both amendments, said they 'provide important protections' which she argued 'are currently lacking in the Bill'. She told MPs: 'Whether you're in favour of assisted dying or not, we must preserve the rights of organisations, companies and charities to choose whether to offer it. They must never be bought into it by public funding being conditional on the provision of assisted dying.' Conservative former minister Sir Edward Leigh used his speech to express the views of a care home manager who spoke of the 'unworkable nature of individual exclusion from the processes of assisted dying in social care environments' Quoting the care home boss, he said: 'Specific exclusion of the care home sector should be a feature of the Bill. In any case, organisations and sites should and must be given the ability to exclude themselves from the act of assisted death.' Elsewhere, Labour's Dame Meg Hillier spoke of her concern that patients could 'feel pressured into ending their lives' if doctors are able to raise the prospect of assisted dying with patients first in a conversation. Dame Meg has urged MPs to support her amendments which would mean that could not happen, and that health professionals could not raise the topic with under-18s. She said the issue is 'a very difficult thing for a lot of people to understand, but particularly for young people' and warned of adolescents being 'more likely to take risks'. Alliance MP Sorcha Eastwood said there was additional danger presented by social media on the topic, telling the Commons she had heard 'almost all of our young people across the UK are having their mental health impacted by social media'. She said: 'If we throw this into the mix, this has the potential to do untold damage.' But Liberal Democrat MP Christine Jardine suggested patients not being given 'all the options' by medical professionals could see them, particularly young people who might be active on social media, tempted to search online for their own information. She said: 'The automatic reaction is to go and Google everything, in fact we all do it … the danger is if they are not told all the options, if they are not given the guidance that's available, then they will go to Google and what we will see is yet more of the dangerous suicide attempts that we see at the moment.' The Government is neutral on the Bill and any votes MPs make are according to their own conscience rather than along party lines.
The Independent
16-05-2025
- Health
- The Independent
MPs must act to legalise assisted dying, Leadbeater urges as debate begins
Assisted dying must be legalised to avoid terminally ill people acting out of desperation or making 'traumatic' trips to Switzerland, the MP behind a Bill to change the law has told Parliament. The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill is back before the Commons on Friday for the first time since a historic yes vote in November saw a majority of MPs support the principle of assisted dying. Since then the proposed legislation has undergone significant changes, after a weeks-long committee process which saw a High Court judge safeguard replaced with a three-member expert panel and the timeframe in which an assisted dying service might come into effect doubled to four years from royal assent. Opponents have argued the Bill does not have enough safeguards and has been rushed through, with two royal medical colleges voicing their doubts on the legislation in its current form. But others, including Dame Esther Rantzen, have appealed for MPs to keep backing the Bill. The 84-year-old, who has stage four cancer, has said: 'Please vote for this crucial reform, as so many other countries have, not for me and for those like me who are running rapidly out of time, but for future generations to have the right if necessary, not to shorten their lives, to shorten their deaths.' As Friday's session – which could last for up to five hours – opened, Kim Leadbeater told those gathered in the Commons: 'Put simply, if we do not vote to change the law, we are essentially saying that the status quo is acceptable. 'Over recent months, I have heard hundreds of stories from people who have lost loved ones in deeply difficult and traumatic circumstances, which show that that is clearly not the case. 'Too many have seen their terminally ill loved ones take their own lives out of desperation, or make the traumatic, lonely and costly trip to Switzerland, and then face a police investigation while dealing with their grief and loss.' The Bill being considered by Parliament would apply only in England and Wales. In its current form it would mean terminally ill adults with only six months left to live could apply for assistance to end their lives, with approval needed from two doctors and the expert panel. It is possible this part of the parliamentary process, known as the report stage, will run into a second day next month, meaning a vote on approval or rejection of the overall Bill would not take place on Friday. The Royal College of Physicians (RCP) this week said it believes there are 'concerning deficiencies' with the proposed legislation as it stands while the Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych) said it has 'serious concerns' and cannot support the current Bill. RCPsych warned of a shortage of consultant psychiatrists to meet the demands of a Bill which would currently require a psychiatrist to sit on the panel to assess a terminally ill person's application. The RCPsych statement was this week branded by one opponent of the Bill as a 'blow to its foundations' but pressed on the issue in Parliament, Ms Leadbeater said she does not have concerns on staffing. She said: 'If we refer to the impact assessment, the numbers of people who access assisted dying in the first few years will be very small. 'I think there are around 4,500 psychiatrists in the country, but there's also a period of time again to do the training that's required for those psychiatrists who will be taking part in the process over a number of years, so I wouldn't anticipate any problems there.' Amid questions around the process by which the Bill has progressed through Parliament, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer – who is on a trip to Albania and so is not at the debate – has indicated he remains supportive of the proposed legislation. The PM voted for the Bill last year and, in comments to reporters this week, said it was facing 'a lot of scrutiny', adding that he was 'satisfied' it had 'sufficient time' in Parliament. The Government is neutral on the Bill and any votes MPs make are according to their own conscience rather than along party lines. Paralympian Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson, who would have a vote on the Bill should it make its way to the Lords, argued ahead of the debate that the Bill has 'not been made safer', criticising the scrapping of the much-lauded High Court safeguard in favour of expert panels. But in a boost, new Reform MP Sarah Pochin has confirmed she will support it. Mike Amesbury, whom she replaced in the Runcorn and Helsby constituency earlier this month, had voted no last year. Amendments being debated on Friday include ensuring there is no obligation on anyone, such as medical staff, to take part in the assisted dying process. Demonstrators from both sides of the argument gathered outside Parliament ahead of the debate on Friday. While pro-change campaign group Dignity in Dying said Friday is a 'milestone in the journey towards a more compassionate and safeguarded law', the Christian Action Research and Education group, which is against the Bill, urged MPs to instead focus on end of life care.
