Latest news with #GeorgeAdam
Scotsman
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Scotsman
Assisted Dying Bill: Hospices and care homes must not be forced to participate
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... It is a fair criticism of the Holyrood parliament chamber that it seldom rises to the occasion when it comes to debate. Too often we simply see a succession of backbenchers reading out highly partisan speeches, sometimes written by a researcher, which bear little relation to what has been said before. Because of timings, the opportunities for interventions to be made and taken, and a genuine discussion opened up, are rare. There can be exceptions to that rule, and last week's debate on stage one of the Assisted Dying Bill was one of them. It is extremely unusual at Holyrood for issues to be discussed which are genuinely subject to a free vote, where all MSPs have to make up their own minds without being told what to do by the party whips. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad And so it was on this occasion, with quality speeches both for and against the Bill. Both George Adam and Elena Whitham made moving contributions, drawing on their personal experiences caring for loved ones, to explain why they supported it. Campaigners from both sides of the argument demonstrate outside the Scottish Parliament (Picture: Jeff J Mitchell) | Getty Images A narrow majority On the opposition side, my Conservative colleague Edward Mountain drew on his own battle with cancer to explain why he couldn't back the Bill, whilst the Labour MSP Pam Duncan-Glancy, in the best speech of the afternoon, expressed her concern that, as a disabled person, her life would be valued less should assisted dying be legislated for. The Bill passed stage one by a narrow majority of 70 votes to 56, but a number of those voting in favour were clear that this was only to allow the debate to continue, and this did not necessarily mean they would support the legislation in its final stage. The discussion now shifts to the detail of the Bill, and whether it is capable of being improved to remove the many concerns that have been expressed about its potential consequences. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Legal specialists have already warned that the Bill is deeply flawed as it stands, and carries with it a large number of risks. The Law Society of Scotland has said that there are significant issues that need to be carefully considered. Dr Mary Neal, reader in law at the University of Strathclyde, went further, saying: 'There is so much MSPs are going to have to address to try and mitigate some of the serious risks that the Bill poses. Some of those risks, as I see it, are just unfixable. Almost every aspect of the Bill is deeply flawed and ill-conceived.' Medical profession's concerns There are particular concerns around a number of areas, including the role of the medical profession. Many doctors and nurses are very clear they want nothing to do with offering assisted dying to patients, indeed palliative care doctors have come out strongly against the legislation in principle. There must be firm protections for those who do not wish to participate. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Those protections also need to cover settings such as hospices and care homes. There can be no suggestion that hospices should be under an obligation to discuss assisted dying as an option with patients if they feel that is fundamentally objectionable and contrary to their ethos. Such a protection needs to be stated explicitly in the Bill. There remain concerns around the question of whether the Bill falls within Holyrood's legislative competence. The law on medical opt-outs and on the regulation of medicines is reserved, and Holyrood cannot pass laws in these areas without Westminster consent. This issue needs to be resolved if the Bill is to progress further. These legal concerns are real and serious but, as we saw in the debate, the principal arguments against the legislation remain at a more philosophical level. Both Pam Duncan-Glancy and Jeremy Balfour spoke from their perspectives as disabled MSPs, about the pressure that they feel would be put on disabled people to end their lives prematurely. Against a backdrop of a rapidly aging population and spiralling care costs which governments are unable or unwilling to meet, these concerns are real. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Slippery slope is real There is also a very real worry that passing this legislation simply opens the door to it being expanded in future. I have met many constituents on both sides of the argument, including those pressing for a change in the law to allow assisted dying, and what has struck me in many of the cases of individuals with whom I have met is that they would not actually be eligible for assisted dying under this Bill. That means even should this Bill be passed, there will be a push for the criteria to be expanded beyond the definition of those with a 'terminal illness'. And once parliament has agreed in principle to grant a right of assisted dying to one group of individuals, there is essentially no argument in principle against extending that to others. As we have seen in Canada, the slippery slope is real. I voted against the Bill essentially because I believe that granting a right to one group of articulate well-informed individuals with agency in their lives can only in this case come at the expense of putting at risk another group who are weak, vulnerable, and potentially subject to coercion. That remains my view, but I will certainly look to work with others to build in additional protections to what is a deeply flawed piece of legislation. Already there are signs that the mood is shifting against the Bill. This week the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, which had been widely expected to move to a neutral stance on assisted dying, instead voted to reaffirm its historic opposition, thus keeping it in the mainstream of Christian opinion. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad It seems that the more people consider the arguments, the more likely they are to be opposed. Whether that will be enough to change the votes of seven MSPs who voted in favour – all that's needed to prevent the Bill becoming law – remains to be seen.
Daily Record
15-05-2025
- Health
- Daily Record
Paisley MSP says wife deserves the right to 'chose how her life ends' in moving speech to parliament
George Adam – whose wife Stacey lives with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis – delivered an emotional speech during the Assisted Dying Bill debate. The Assisted Dying Bill has passed the first hurdle in the Scottish Parliament with the backing of an emotional George Adam. The MSP for Paisley – whose wife Stacey lives with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis – said she deserves the right to 'chose how her life ends'. The bill had been tabled by Liberal Democrat MSP Liam McArthur, who said people diagnosed with a terminal illness should have the right to a dignified and peaceful death. Those in favour of the bill said it sought to ease suffering for dying people, while those who voted against it said they had grave concerns that the most vulnerable in society may be pressured into ending their lives early. For George however the issue is 'deeply personal' given his wife's fragile health. While Stacey's MS, asthma and osteoporosis are not considered terminal, he said the couple have been forced to think about how they could lead to a serious terminal event in later life. 'We know the road ahead could get harder,' he told a packed Scottish Parliament. 'Let me be clear, on their own many of Stacey's conditions won't qualify under this bill. 'MS isn't classified as terminal, nor is asthma, nor is osteoporosis, but together in someone with secondary progressive MS and a weakened immune system, these conditions could lead to a serious terminal event in later life. 'That's why this bill matters because it recognises that illness isn't straight forward, that someone can live with chronic conditions for years and then reach a point where death is close and the suffering is great. 'That's why Stacey and I support Liam McArthur's bill, not because it's about us now, but because one day it might be. 'We hope that time never comes but if it does, if the suffering becomes unbearable, Stacey should have that right to choose how her life ends with dignity, with compassion and surrounded by those who love her.' Explaining the bill sought to not only empower those with incurable illnesses, George said the bill would enable families to fulfil the dying wishes of their loved ones at a time when they too are under immeasurable strain. Speaking as Stacey sat in the public gallery, he added: 'The truth is I don't know if I would be strong enough to let go. The thought of life without her is unbearable. I know that's selfish but I'm a human being. 'As the song goes, 'she's every thought, she's everything, she's every song I ever sing'. I don't want to make that decision, I want Stacey to be able to decide and that's what this bill is about. 'For Stacey, for me, for thousands of other families, it's about having that choice of a peaceful, dignified end if and when that comes. 'I support this bill not just as a politician but as a husband because my wife has shaped by life, my career, my values and I owe her to stand here today and say yes, we trust people to make the most personal decision of all, yes we trust them to know when enough is enough.' Recognising the concerns around coercion, pressure and early death, George said he was reassured by a number of safeguards within the bill including: Two doctors must agree the person is terminally ill, the person must be mentally capable, there is a waiting period and there are multiple steps to confirm it's informed and voluntary.
Daily Mail
14-05-2025
- Health
- Daily Mail
STEPHEN DAISLEY: Tearful testimony, but sober analysis shed the most light
Liam McArthur is a Liberal Democrat and therefore a fundamentally inoffensive chap. Owlish and earnest, firm but polite, he has the demeanour of a librarian. Every time he speaks, I worry that I might have overdue books. But because he's a Lib Dem he is also invincibly certain. Not obnoxiously certain — he's not a Green, after all — but serenely secure in his belief that the world is an enlightened place, where everyone has good intentions, institutions can be trusted, and law is the reliable guarantor of process. It was in this spirit that he opened the Stage 1 debate on his Assisted Dying Bill. He wished for a reasonable and respectful exchange and urged doubters to give him a chance to better the legislation at the next stage. McArthur demonstrated his fluency in the language of contemporary liberalism with its promises of consent, choice, and autonomy. Nowadays, even death must be human rights compliant. Among those in favour of McArthur's Bill, the two hardest-hitting contributions came from Nationalist MSPs Elena Whitham and George Adam. Whitham, a scrunched up tissue gripped in her hand, described how her mother Irene starved herself to death in 2014 after being diagnosed with terminal cancer aged 58. She took two weeks to die. 'My mum deserved to plan a compassionate death, surrounded by her family, not one she had to conduct in secret,' Whitham told MSPs, in a defiance-hardened voice. Her words set off an audible chain of sniffles. Her colleague, Adam, spoke of his wife Stacey, who has multiple sclerosis. Adam is a gallus, cheery fellow, and watching him pause to gird his emotions — without much success — was an odd experience. He admitted that he couldn't bring himself to agree to assisted dying for Stacey for 'selfish' reasons, and that is why it was right that it be Stacey's choice. It was not something they needed now, but they might need it in the future. His contribution drew applause from across the chamber and both sides of the issue. It was one of the rawest, most personal speeches I have ever seen given at Holyrood. McArthur quipped that Adam was 'a snottery wreck'. Among those opposed, the interventions were no less poignant. Labour MSP Pam Duncan-Glancy raised the risk that disabled people like her, already made to feel like a burden on society, would come under pressure to end their lives. Haltingly, and choking back tears, she told how during Covid she and her husband were so scared that medics wouldn't bother trying to revive them that they wrote notes to each other saying, 'Please resuscitate me.' In closing, she pleaded with her colleagues for her life and those of people like her: 'Rather than legislate to assist people to die, let us legislate to assist people to live.' The Tories' Edward Mountain drew on his background as a soldier and his experience of cancer to inform his views on death. Like Duncan-Glancy, he believed parliament should be in the business of improving life, not making it easier to terminate. While others warned of coercion, he invited us to consider 'passive coercion', such as poor provision of palliative care services. That anyone found themselves in this scenario, and felt driven to assisted suicide, was itself a form of coercion. Hour after hour, MSPs poured out their hearts and dabbed their eyes, and it was difficult to watch, especially if you had lost someone truly close to you in a slow, agonising fashion. Yet the contribution that shed the most light was not a tear-stained testimony but a steady, sober analysis. Murdo Fraser cautioned that McArthur's Bill was 'the opening of the door to more widely available assisted dying than we are currently legislating for'. 'The slippery slope,' he assured Holyrood, 'is real'. Assisted suicide was lobbied for by articulate people with high social capital but it would also apply to the poor, the vulnerable and 'those more susceptible to coercion'. Create a right for one and you create a risk for the other. Come decision time, MSPs backed the Bill 70 votes to 56 with one abstention. The Bill goes forward and assisted suicide will now become a fiercely fought battle over the meaning of life and death in Scotland.
Scotsman
11-05-2025
- General
- Scotsman
Poll reveals levels of support for SNP's free university tuition policy
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... The majority of Scots are strongly in favour of maintaining free university tuition - but are calling for a commission to be set up to examine how higher education is funded. A new poll by Survation has found 57 per cent of Scots say they 'strongly' or 'somewhat' support free tuition in Scotland. By comparison, only 17 per cent of people interviewed said they opposed the flagship SNP policy. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad A graduation ceremony at University Campus Suffolk in Ipswich. Picture: Chris Radburn | Chris Radburn The poll also found support is higher amongst women and that support for free tuition grows the more academic qualifications a person has. Support for the policy, which according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies costs the Scottish Government around £900 million a year, is highest amongst Scottish Green voters, followed by SNP voters. On top of this, support for the policy is above 50 per cent for almost all generations except the ones most likely to currently be at university - those between the ages of 16 and 24. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Only 46 per cent of this age group said they support free tuition fees. The poll was carried out for public affairs agency True North, with 1,012 people in Scotland aged 16 and over interviewed online from May 2-5. Broken up by region, 90 per cent of respondents living in Lothian, which has one of the highest concentrations of higher education institutions in Scotland, said they support the policy. In the north-east, which includes cash-strapped Dundee University, 85 per cent of people support free tuition. The region with the lowest level of support is Mid Scotland and Fife, which includes St Andrews University and Perth College UHI. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad SNP MSP George Adam said: 'The SNP is proud to have abolished tuition fees in Scotland and is the only party which can be trusted to make sure that access to further and higher education is based on the ability to learn, not the ability to pay. Jane Barlow/Press Association 'History has shown that the Labour Party cannot be trusted on tuition fees. Whether in Scotland, England or Wales, fees have gone up under Labour governments. 'Under the SNP, we have record numbers of Scottish students securing places at our universities, and recent figures showed a rise in students from our most disadvantaged communities. 'This progress has only been made possible because the SNP abolished Labour's tuition fees and we will never let them be reimposed on Scotland's students.' Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad One in two Scots (49 per cent) surveyed said they want to see a new commission being set up to examine the existing funding model for universities. A number of universities have declared financial crises over the past month, not least Dundee University, which is cutting over 600 jobs in a bid to plug a £35m deficit. Professor Shane O'Neill, the university's interim principal and vice-chancellor, said the crisis was partly down to the Scottish Government's underfunding of higher education. Miles Briggs, the Scottish Conservatives' education spokesman, said: 'Years of cuts from the SNP have had a devastating impact on the finances of Scotland's leading universities. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Miles Briggs MSP 'Ministers cannot continue to bury their heads in the sand and must look at ways of addressing these issues, which could include setting up a commission on future funding models. 'It is clear from this poll that Sots are keen for the SNP to act before the crisis in our universities escalates even further.' Only 45 per cent of Conservative voters said they support free tuition fees.
