UK Lawmakers Back a Bill to Allow Terminally Ill Adults to End Their Lives

LONDON (AP) — U.K. lawmakers on Friday approved a bill to allow terminally ill adults in England and Wales to choose to end their lives, taking it one step nearer to becoming law.
The vote backing what is generally termed ' assisted dying ' — sometimes referred to as 'assisted suicide' — is potentially the biggest change to social policy in the U.K. since abortion was partially legalized in 1967.
Members of Parliament voted 314-291 to back the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill following an impassioned debate. The majority of 23 was less than the 55 when they last voted on the issue in November, meaning that some lawmakers changed their minds in the intervening months.
Since November, the bill has been scrutinized, leading to some changes in the proposed legislation, which has been shepherded through Parliament by Kim Leadbeater, the Labour lawmaker who proposed the bill.
'I appreciate it's a huge moment for the country,' she told Sky News after the vote. 'It was a huge sense of relief because this is the right thing to do.'
The bill now goes to the unelected House of Lords, which can amend or delay policy, though it can't overrule the lower chamber.
What lawmakers voted on
The bill would allow terminally ill adults over age 18 in England and Wales, who are deemed to have less than six months to live, to apply for an assisted death. The bill doesn't apply to Northern Ireland or Scotland, which is holding its own vote on the issue.
One of the most important changes to the bill from last November was the dropping of the requirement that a judge sign off on any decision. Many in the legal profession had objected.
Now any request would be subject to approval by two doctors and a panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist.
Changes were also made to ensure the establishment of independent advocates to support people with learning disabilities, autism or mental health conditions and the creation of a disability advisory board.
After receiving a go-ahead from doctors and the panel, the terminally ill person would have to be capable of taking the fatal drugs themselves.
Another big change made was that 'no person,' including doctors, social care workers and pharmacists, will be obliged to take part.
Divisive issue
The bill has divided lawmakers for months. The vote was a free one, meaning lawmakers vote according to their conscience rather than on party lines. Alliances have formed across the political divide.
Proponents of the bill argued that those with a terminal diagnosis must be given a choice at the end of their lives to relieve their suffering. They also said that the current situation discriminates against the poor as wealthy individuals can already travel to Switzerland, which allows foreigners to legally end their lives, while others have to face possible prosecution for helping their loved ones die.
However, opponents warned that the most vulnerable in society, such as disabled and older people, could be at risk of being coerced, directly or indirectly, into ending their lives to save money or relieve the burden on family members.
Both sides agreed on the need to make improvements in palliative care and greater investments in hospices to ease suffering.
Passions ran high outside of Parliament where hundreds of people gathered to make their voices heard.
Supporters were dressed in clothing emblazoned with the phrase 'Campaign for Dignity in Dying,' while opponents held up banners urging lawmakers not to make the state-run National Health Service the 'National Suicide Service.'
Supporters wept, jumped and hugged each other as the bill was backed.
'This is for all the people who couldn't be here today,' said Sarah Wootton, chief executive of Dignity in Dying. 'This vote sends a clear message. Parliament stands with the public and change is coming.'
Timeline for the bill
The legislation now goes to the unelected House of Lords. Any amendments would then go back to the House of Commons.
There's also the possibility of legal challenge to the policy. Opposition campaigners such as 'Right To Life U.K.' and 'Care Not Killing' said after the vote that they weren't giving up the fight.
Backers of the bill say implementation will take four years, rather than the initially suggested two. That means it could become law in 2029, around the time that the next general election must be held.
Government stance
There is clearly no consensus in the Cabinet about the measure.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer backed the bill on Friday, while his health secretary, Wes Streeting, voted against.
The government has said it will respect the outcome.
However, it's not clear what the cost implications are, or how it would impact the NHS, hospice care and the legal system.
Nations where assisted dying is legal
Other countries that have legalized assisted suicide include Australia, Belgium, Canada and parts of the United States, with regulations on who is eligible varying by jurisdiction.
Assisted suicide is different from euthanasia, allowed in the Netherlands and Canada, which involves health care practitioners administering a lethal injection at the patient's request in specific circumstances.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Nikkei Asia

7 hours ago

• Nikkei Asia

Columbia University protester Mahmoud Khalil freed from detention

Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil speaks after his release from federal immigration detention in Jena, Louisiana on June 20. © AP JENA, Louisiana (AP) -- Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil was released Friday from federal immigration detention, freed after 104 days by a judge's ruling after becoming a symbol of President Donald Trump 's clampdown on campus protests. The former Columbia University graduate student left a federal facility in Louisiana on Friday. He is expected to head to New York to reunite with his U.S. citizen wife and infant son, born while Khalil was detained.

Yomiuri Shimbun

10 hours ago

• Yomiuri Shimbun

UK Lawmakers Back a Bill to Allow Terminally Ill Adults to End Their Lives

LONDON (AP) — U.K. lawmakers on Friday approved a bill to allow terminally ill adults in England and Wales to choose to end their lives, taking it one step nearer to becoming law. The vote backing what is generally termed ' assisted dying ' — sometimes referred to as 'assisted suicide' — is potentially the biggest change to social policy in the U.K. since abortion was partially legalized in 1967. Members of Parliament voted 314-291 to back the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill following an impassioned debate. The majority of 23 was less than the 55 when they last voted on the issue in November, meaning that some lawmakers changed their minds in the intervening months. Since November, the bill has been scrutinized, leading to some changes in the proposed legislation, which has been shepherded through Parliament by Kim Leadbeater, the Labour lawmaker who proposed the bill. 'I appreciate it's a huge moment for the country,' she told Sky News after the vote. 'It was a huge sense of relief because this is the right thing to do.' The bill now goes to the unelected House of Lords, which can amend or delay policy, though it can't overrule the lower chamber. What lawmakers voted on The bill would allow terminally ill adults over age 18 in England and Wales, who are deemed to have less than six months to live, to apply for an assisted death. The bill doesn't apply to Northern Ireland or Scotland, which is holding its own vote on the issue. One of the most important changes to the bill from last November was the dropping of the requirement that a judge sign off on any decision. Many in the legal profession had objected. Now any request would be subject to approval by two doctors and a panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist. Changes were also made to ensure the establishment of independent advocates to support people with learning disabilities, autism or mental health conditions and the creation of a disability advisory board. After receiving a go-ahead from doctors and the panel, the terminally ill person would have to be capable of taking the fatal drugs themselves. Another big change made was that 'no person,' including doctors, social care workers and pharmacists, will be obliged to take part. Divisive issue The bill has divided lawmakers for months. The vote was a free one, meaning lawmakers vote according to their conscience rather than on party lines. Alliances have formed across the political divide. Proponents of the bill argued that those with a terminal diagnosis must be given a choice at the end of their lives to relieve their suffering. They also said that the current situation discriminates against the poor as wealthy individuals can already travel to Switzerland, which allows foreigners to legally end their lives, while others have to face possible prosecution for helping their loved ones die. However, opponents warned that the most vulnerable in society, such as disabled and older people, could be at risk of being coerced, directly or indirectly, into ending their lives to save money or relieve the burden on family members. Both sides agreed on the need to make improvements in palliative care and greater investments in hospices to ease suffering. Passions ran high outside of Parliament where hundreds of people gathered to make their voices heard. Supporters were dressed in clothing emblazoned with the phrase 'Campaign for Dignity in Dying,' while opponents held up banners urging lawmakers not to make the state-run National Health Service the 'National Suicide Service.' Supporters wept, jumped and hugged each other as the bill was backed. 'This is for all the people who couldn't be here today,' said Sarah Wootton, chief executive of Dignity in Dying. 'This vote sends a clear message. Parliament stands with the public and change is coming.' Timeline for the bill The legislation now goes to the unelected House of Lords. Any amendments would then go back to the House of Commons. There's also the possibility of legal challenge to the policy. Opposition campaigners such as 'Right To Life U.K.' and 'Care Not Killing' said after the vote that they weren't giving up the fight. Backers of the bill say implementation will take four years, rather than the initially suggested two. That means it could become law in 2029, around the time that the next general election must be held. Government stance There is clearly no consensus in the Cabinet about the measure. Prime Minister Keir Starmer backed the bill on Friday, while his health secretary, Wes Streeting, voted against. The government has said it will respect the outcome. However, it's not clear what the cost implications are, or how it would impact the NHS, hospice care and the legal system. Nations where assisted dying is legal Other countries that have legalized assisted suicide include Australia, Belgium, Canada and parts of the United States, with regulations on who is eligible varying by jurisdiction. Assisted suicide is different from euthanasia, allowed in the Netherlands and Canada, which involves health care practitioners administering a lethal injection at the patient's request in specific circumstances.

Yomiuri Shimbun

10 hours ago

• Yomiuri Shimbun

Europeans' Meeting with Top Iranian Diplomat Yields Hope of More Talks but No Breakthrough

GENEVA (AP) — A meeting between Iran's foreign minister and top European diplomats on Friday yielded hopes of further talks but no immediate concrete breakthrough, a week after the crisis centered on the Iranian nuclear program erupted into war between Israel and Tehran. Foreign ministers from Britain, France and Germany, as well as the European Union's foreign policy chief, emerged from talks at a Geneva hotel about 3 1/2 hours after Iran's Abbas Araghchi arrived for the meeting. It was the first face-to-face meeting between Western and Iranian officials since the start of the conflict. In a joint written statement issued after the talks ended, the three European nations and the EU said that they 'discussed avenues towards a negotiated solution to Iran's nuclear program.' They reiterated their concerns about the 'expansion' of the nuclear program, adding that it has 'no credible civilian purpose.' 'The good result today is that we leave the room with the impression that the Iranian side is fundamentally ready to continue talking about all important issues,' German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul said, adding both sides had held 'very serious talks.' British Foreign Secretary David Lammy said: 'We are keen to continue ongoing discussions and negotiations with Iran, and we urge Iran to continue their talks with the United States.' He added that 'we were clear: Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.' In a separate statement, Lammy stressed that the aim of Europe and the U.S. was that Iran should stop all uranium enrichment. He said that 'there can be discussions about the energy needs of Iran' but added that 'zero enrichment is the starting point.' Lammy told British media outlets that there is 'a window of within two weeks where we can see a diplomatic solution,' and urged Iran 'to take that off ramp.' 'We must absolutely prioritize a return to full negotiations that include the nuclear program to go toward zero enrichment,' said French President Emmanuel Macron earlier on Friday in an apparent alignment with the U.S. position. Enrichment has been the key point of contention in talks between the U.S. and Iran over its nuclear program. U.S. Mideast envoy Steve Witkoff at one point suggested Iran could enrich uranium at 3.67%, then later began saying Iran must stop all enrichment on its soil. That position on the American side has hardened over time. Tehran rejects giving up all uranium enrichment. 'Military operations can slow Iran's nuclear program but in no way can they eliminate it,' said French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot. 'We know well — after having seen what happened in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in Libya — how illusory and dangerous it is to want to impose regime change from outside.' Barrot also said that European nations 'invited the Iranian minister to envisage negotiations with all parties including the United States, and without waiting for the end of the strikes.' The French Foreign Minister explained that in discussions with Iran, Foreign Minister Araghchi agreed 'to put all the issues on the table including some that weren't there before' and 'showed his disposition to continuing the conversation — that we started today — and for the Europeans to help facilitate, including with the United States.' EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said 'we agreed that we will discuss nuclear but also broader issues that we have, and keep the discussions open.' Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi also addressed reporters outside the meeting venue after the talks ended. He expressed support for continuing discussions with the three European countries and the EU. He also denounced Israel's attacks against nuclear facilities in Iran and expressed 'grave concern' over what he called 'non-condemnation' by European nations. U.S. considering how to proceed Lammy traveled to Geneva after meeting in Washington with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and President Donald Trump's Mideast envoy, Steve Witkoff. Trump has been weighing whether to attack Iran by striking its well-defended Fordo uranium enrichment facility, which is buried under a mountain and widely considered to be out of reach of all but America's 'bunker-buster' bombs. He said Wednesday that he'll decide within two weeks whether the U.S. military will get directly involved in the war given the 'substantial chance' for renewed negotiations over Tehran's nuclear program. Israel says it launched its airstrike campaign to stop Iran from getting closer to being able to build a nuclear weapon. Iran and the United States had been negotiating over the possibility of a new diplomatic deal over Tehran's program, though Trump has said Israel's campaign came after a 60-day window he set for the talks. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot said that 'we wanted to open a discussion with the Iranian foreign minister because we believe that there is no definitive solution by military means to the Iranian nuclear problem — military operations may delay it but they can't eliminate it.' 'We are not seeking negotiations' Iran's supreme leader rejectedU.S. calls for surrender Wednesday and warned that any military involvement by the Americans would cause 'irreparable damage to them.' Before Friday's talks, Araghchi said in an interview aired by Iranian state television that 'in the current situation, as the Zionist regime's attacks continue, we are not seeking negotiations with anyone.' He said that 'we have nothing to discuss with the United States, which is a partner in these crimes.' 'As for others, if they seek dialogue, not negotiations, which don't make sense right now, we have no problem with that,' he added. He said that Friday's discussion would focus 'solely on the nuclear issue and regional matters' and Iran won't hold talks on its missiles with anyone. Threats to reinstate sanctions Just before meeting the European diplomats, Araghchi made a brief appearance before the U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva. He said that Israel's 'attacks on nuclear facilities are grave war crimes,' and insisted that 'we are entitled … and determined to defend our territorial integrity, national sovereignty and security with all force.' Iran has long insisted its nuclear program is peaceful, though it was the only non-nuclear-armed state to enrich uranium up to 60%, a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90%. The three European countries played an important role in the negotiations over the original 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and world powers. But they have repeatedly threatened to reinstate sanctions that were lifted under the deal if Iran does not improve its cooperation with the U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency.