Latest news with #TerminallyIllAdults(EndofLife)Bill
Epoch Times
28-05-2025
- Health
- Epoch Times
Assisted Suicide Bill Returns to Commons as MPs Remain Divided
Kim Leadbeater's assisted suicide bill is unsafe and does not adequately protect the vulnerable, critics of the proposals said during a debate in the House of Commons. On Friday, the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, which would legalise medical-assisted suicide for terminally-ill adults with less than six months to live, returned to Parliament for the Report Stage, where MPs began to debate and vote on One amendment, which was supported by MPs, would ensure that no member of staff, such as pharmacists and doctors, would be legally obliged to take part in the assisted suicide process. Another would have prevented employees from providing assisted suicide while working for an employer who had opted out of the process. However, this was rejected by MPs, by 243 to 279. Private Members' Bills are only ever debated on Fridays for a maximum of five hours. Given the number of amendments and level of engagement from MPs on the issue, the House was forced to pass a closing motion, ending the debate and scheduling it to continue next month. Bill Is 'Fundamentally Flawed' Opening the debate on Friday morning, Leadbeater said: '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. Related Stories 3/27/2025 3/13/2025 '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.' It is the first time that the bill has returned to the Commons since it passed Second Reading in a vote in November, with a majority of 55. MPs remain divided on whether there should be a change in the law, and their positions do not follow party line, with many MPs from across the political spectrum sharing similar opinions. Those opposed to the bill included Labour's Naz Shah, who sat on the committee reviewing expert evidence and considering amendments. She said that the bill was 'fundamentally flawed' and in its current form could mean patients could bring themselves within eligibility for assisted suicide by refusing to eat or drink, including those with anorexia. Labour's Rachael Maskell cited recent concerns raised by the Royal College of GPs and called the proposals 'unsafe, which is why the professional bodies are speaking out against this bill.' Her comments follow the Royal College of Physicians Others warned that terminally ill people might feel pressured or believe doctors are suggesting assisted suicide, even if the doctors are simply explaining all available options. Terminally ill people, affected families, and campaigners for a change in the law on assisted suicide gather outside the Palace of Westminster ahead of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill's report stage in London, on May 16, 2025. Lucy North/PA Wire Conservative MP Dr. Caroline Johnson said, 'If a doctor tells somebody, or gives any information, about assisted dying, it is quite reasonable for that person to think that either the doctor is suggesting that they should take part in this process, or even they're hinting their death is going to be a dreadful one and trying to be kind to them.' Neurodegenerative Illnesses Among those expressing support for the bill was Liberal Democrat Liz Jarvis, who paid tribute to Leadbeater's work on the proposals, saying, 'As other members have said, the decision before us is fundamentally about whether we believe in an individual's right to have choice at the end of their life.' Jarvis backs an amendment which would extend the minimum life expectancy for eligibility from six months to 12 months for those with neurodegenerative illnesses. She said: 'Palliative care can provide incredible support and I'm very glad that this debate has reopened the national conversation about issues of funding for palliative care, however, as I know from my personal experience with my mum who died last March after a seven-year struggle with Alzheimer's, palliative care can sometimes only go so far. 'Amendment four recognises that those with neurodegenerative illnesses deserve the same compassion, control, and dignity at the end of their lives as others do, and by extending the timeframe to 12 months they will be given more control over their ultimate decision.' The Report Stage will continue on June 13, when MPs will hear further amendments for the bill. Once the Report Stage is complete, the bill will face its Third Reading, when MPs will vote for or against the bill as a whole. If passed in the Commons at Third Reading, the bill will go to the House of Lords for scrutiny before gaining Royal Assent and becoming law. What would follow is an implementation period of a maximum of four years, meaning it might not be until 2029 that assisted suicide will be offered. PA Media contributed to this report.
Daily Mail
28-05-2025
- General
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Assisted dying vote 'on a knife-edge' as another MP now says they'll vote against new laws - despite previously backing Kim Leadbeater's Bill
Another MP who previously backed assisted dying laws has now said they will vote against the legislation when it returns to the House of Commons. In a recent letter to a constituent, seen by MailOnline, Liberal Democrat MP Brian Mathew wrote that he was 'minded to vote against the Bill' at its third reading. He added that several of his concerns about the legislation had so far been 'inadequately answered'. This included his worry that those who are terminally ill might apply to end their lives because they feel a 'burden' on their families. Dr Mathew, MP for Melksham and Devizes, is among more than 15 MPs to have altered their stance on assisted dying laws since an initial Commons vote. Opponents of the Bill have said there is now a high chance of the Bill being defeated in a 'knife-edge' Commons vote next month. An analysis by campaigners has revealed that only two more MPs will need to move from backing the Bill to voting against it for the legislation to fall at its third reading. At the end of November last year, the Commons backed the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill by 330 votes to 275, a majority of 55 votes. The Bill, being spearheaded by Labour's Kim Leadbeater, aims to allow terminally ill adults in England and Wales - with less than six months to live - to legally end their lives. Despite it initially winning MPs' support, opponents of the legislation claim momentum has now moved against the Bill as it continues its passage through Parliament. The Bill's third reading is expected to be held on either 13 or 20 June, when the Commons will decide whether to approve or reject the overall Bill and whether to send it on to the House of Lords. Lord Stewart Jackson, the former Tory MP and an opponent of the Bill, said: 'It does feel like things have changed in regards to the Leadbeater Bill. 'There is now a steady stream of MPs flipping against the Bill and, if this continues, it looks like it will be a knife-edge vote next month.' Conservative MP Andrew Rosindell said the analysis 'corresponds with the conversations I've been having with many colleagues who voted for the Bill at second reading but are now having doubts'. 'Momentum is against Leadbeater's Bill and there is every reason to believe we can defeat it at third reading,' the Romford MP added. According to the analysis, nine MPs who previously backed the Bill in November have since withdrawn their support - including eight who will now actively vote against it. A further six MPs who did not vote in November have now said they will vote against the Bill, while there are two MPs who voted for the Bill in November but are now undecided. In his letter to a constituent, Dr Mathew said he was sharing his position on the Bill after 'months of conversations with constituents, campaigners, friends, family members and colleagues, as well as deep, personal reflection'. He said: 'At the second reading in November, I voted in favour of progressing the bill as I felt that the committee should have the time and opportunity to scrutinise and improve the Bill. 'Coming to the third reading, I am minded to vote against the Bill, as I have several concerns I feel have been inadequately answered by the report stage, which is when the Bill is re-considered in the House of Commons following the work of the committee stage. 'Although the Bill's proposers and the committee have done an impressive piece of technical work, and I am grateful that my suggestion of the inclusion of a social worker has been adopted, I still find myself asking whether this is enough? 'I share the concerns of many constituents that individuals facing terminal illness will take the decision based on concerns that they have become a burden upon their family. 'This is a serious concern for me; I worry that in someone's final days, this question will loom heavy when it does not need to. 'The intimate setting of bedside care should be a time to be surrounded by loved ones, but this bill risks inviting interference of the judicial process into the delicate and pressing needs of the end of life where many, who will be unlikely to have considered assisted dying, may now face worries from it. 'Additionally, we must be honest, the current state of end-of-life care cannot be described as optimal. 'The provision of hospices across our country is patchy at best, which means that for some, an assisted death might be seen as the preferred option, not as a last resort to be used when palliative care cannot alleviate pain.' Dr Mathew added that a 'properly supported palliative care system much of the problem that this Bill seeks to deal with goes away'.
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Changes to assisted dying bill mean 'no one is obliged to take part in process'
MPs voted to insert a new clause into the Assisted Dying Bill on Friday to say that 'no person', including social care workers and pharmacists, is obliged to take part in assisted dying and can now opt out. The Assisted Dying Bill will allow terminally ill adults, expected to die within six months, to seek help to end their lives. While the legislation passed its first stage in the House of Commons last November, the bill has been subject to amendments and is no longer the same. The clause 10 amendment was put forward by the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill's sponsor the Labour MP for Spen Valley, Kim Leadbeater. The original bill stated that no registered medical practitioner or other health professional would be under an obligation to help in the assisted dying process and would not be discriminated against if they did not want to assist. READ MORE: All you need to know as the assisted dying Bill returned to Parliament | News and Star Under the clause 10 amendment, this has been expanded to say that there is no obligation on anyone to assist in the process, providing protections to any staff who may be involved. MPs ran out of time to vote on other changes so further debate and voting will continue on June 13. Carlisle MP, Julie Minns voted against the amendment and has voiced her opposition to the bill.
Glasgow Times
17-05-2025
- Health
- Glasgow Times
MP ‘will not be complicit' in approving assisted dying law in safeguards call
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'. Ahead of Friday's debate about the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, Ms Shah tabled an amendment 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, accepted the change. Later in the debate, Bradford West MP Ms Shah, 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.' Ms Leadbeater said 'some people have expressed concerns that the severe physical consequences of a decision to stop eating or drinking could still enable someone to claim eligibility for assisted dying when otherwise they would not be able to do so'. She backed the amendment subject to possible 'further drafting changes' to reduce the risk of a 'loophole'. 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.' After the debate, Ms Shah revealed she was 'unbelievably' not told that her amendment would be accepted, and added: 'We shouldn't be playing games with people's lives like this.'
Glasgow Times
17-05-2025
- Health
- Glasgow Times
MPs vote in favour of assisted dying opt-out for all healthcare workers
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. Kim Leadbeater opened the debate on her Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (House of Commons/UK Parliament/PA) 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. Campaigners opposed to the assisted dying legislation demonstrate outside the Palace of Westminster in London, ahead of the Bill's report stage (Rosie Shead/PA) 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. Dame Esther Rantzen's daughter, Rebecca Wilcox, took part in a demonstration outside Parliament (Jas Lehal Media Assignments/PA) 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'.
