Assisted Dying

Of all the issues constituents have raised with me over the past few weeks, none has generated as much correspondence as the bill on assisted dying. Like many other MPs, I received hundreds of letters and emails, many of them telling powerful and moving stories about caring for loved ones in the last months of their life.  

I recognised the weight of responsibility in considering people’s experiences and looking at the evidence ahead of a vote that all parties treated as a matter of individual judgement and conscience for MPs. 

I and my parliamentary colleagues also heard received an extraordinary level of guidance and evidence from medical professionals, advocacy groups and faith leaders.  

So when I sat through the debate on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill – to give it its correct title – I was aware of the very deep-felt emotions behind this issue. And I saw the House of Commons at its best with serious, considered debate conducted with a huge amount of respect for the views put forward. The speeches were honest and heartfelt, with none of the grandstanding or point-scoring which often mars parliamentary debates. Everyone there, whether on the floor of the chamber or in the public gallery, recognised that we were deciding on an issue which could profoundly impact our society. 

When the vote was finally declared, there was silence in the chamber with none of the usual cheering from the winning side. I think we all realised the gravity of what we had decided. 

I was one of the 330 MPs who voted in favour. I was minded to do so before the debate and while I listened carefully to the arguments of those who opposed the Bill, they didn’t change my mind. I believed, and still believe, that those facing the pain and inevitability of an acute and terminal illness should have the choice to avoid a terrible and slow decline. This is about shortening death not ending life – and giving people choice in their final weeks. 

There were and are very valid ethical questions raised by the Bill’s opponents. How can we ensure that no one becomes vulnerable to coercion? Can we come up with a clear legal framework that upholds a physician’s unwavering principle of ‘do no harm’? How can we prevent the measures around assisted dying expanding beyond the intended scope? Are the safeguards put in place robust enough to ensure an individual’s choice is both voluntary and informed? 

The Bill does include wide-ranging safeguards such as strict eligibility criteria so that only terminally ill adults with a life expectancy of six months or less can ask for assistance; a reflection period after the request is made; multiple healthcare professionals must confirm that the individual is making the choice freely; it must be confirmed by a High Court judge. These safeguards are essential to protect the individual from coercion from family, caregivers or healthcare providers but we need to have confidence that the NHS and judges have the capacity to play their part in this.  

Although the vote on 29th November was a major milestone, it does not mean the Bill will automatically become law. There are months of scrutiny in committee to come where the Bill will be poured over line by line by MPs and, unusually, by outside experts too. It will have to pass through several stages in the House of Commons before going to the House of Lords where there will be further scrutiny. 

There are MPs who have admitted they voted for the Bill even though they had serious doubts about it, in the hope that their doubts can be addressed during this scrutiny and amendment process. 

The debate around assisted dying has also highlighted the urgent need to improve palliative and social care in our country. We must ensure that all individuals facing a terminal illness have access to the highest standard of care so they don’t feel forced into a decision because of inadequate care and support. Since the assisted dying debate I have asked questions in the Chamber on support for the palliative care sector and I will continue to press for this and social care to get the support and focus they need. 

We have taken a momentous step as a nation. We are not the first to do so. Several countries in Europe, parts of Australia, the US and Canada have all legalised assisted dying. If the parliamentary process over the months ahead is conducted with the same care, seriousness and humanity as the debate in the House of Commons, I think we can achieve a compassionate outcome which delivers choice to terminally ill people over how their life comes to an end.