Hospices warn of facing ‘huge implications' after assisted dying Bill passed

Hospices and end-of-life care professionals will face 'huge implications' and 'seismic change' after the assisted dying Bill cleared the House of Commons, leading organisations have warned.
MPs voted 314 to 291 in favour of the legislation, which would allow terminally ill adults with a life expectancy of under six months to end their lives, at third reading on Friday.
Despite warnings from opponents around the safety of a Bill they argued has been rushed through, the Bill will now move to the House of Lords for further debate and scrutiny.
Both Houses must agree the final text of the Bill before it can be signed into law.
Reacting to the vote, Jan Noble, interim chief executive of St Christopher's Hospice, said: 'Today's vote to pass the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill has huge implications for hospices and end-of-life care professionals.
'It is vital that the Government now provides assurance that the impact on hospices will be properly considered and that high-quality end-of-life care is made available to everyone across the country, and for that we need a better funding model for hospices.
'Our position on any change of law remains neutral but as the home of the modern hospice movement we're committed to providing expertise and evidence to policymakers and we're now urging the House of Lords to carefully consider the complex views of the public, particularly those with experience of health inequalities.
'We recognise this may be a difficult moment for many of those working in hospice and end-of-life care, as well as the wider health and social care sector.
'We are now looking to both the Government and the House of Lords for further reassurances that they will address the concerns raised by multiple professionals' bodies.'
Toby Porter, chief executive of Hospice UK, said the vote represented 'a seismic change for end-of-life care in England and Wales' and the introduction of assisted dying would have 'a huge impact' on hospices.
He said: 'Already, too many people don't get the care they need at the end of their lives. Today's decision brings the urgency to improve palliative care into even sharper focus, particularly for the most vulnerable members of society.
'Should the Bill become law, the Government has four years to bring about a transformation in palliative and end-of-life care.
'Nobody should ever feel that they have to choose an assisted death because they fear they won't get the care and support they need. As it stands, we are concerned this could become the case.
'The Bill does not detail where assisted dying will take place, or to what extent hospices will be involved. This leaves many unanswered questions for hospices, who are already under immense pressure.'
Mr Porter added that Hospice UK also remained neutral on the principle of assisted dying but would work with other hospices and the Government 'to navigate the many operational challenges it poses'.
An amendment to the Bill requiring ministers to report within a year of its passing on how assisted dying could affect palliative care was also approved by MPs ahead of Friday's vote.
James Sanderson, chief executive of palliative care and bereavement charity Sue Ryder, said: 'We all care about how and where we will die and this review is a vital step in making sure everyone gets the care they need at the end of their life.
'Sue Ryder maintains a neutral position on assisted dying, but we are concerned that gaps in care could be leaving some people feeling it's their only option.
'Our research found that 77% of people felt that terminally ill people could be forced to consider an assisted death because the end-of-life care they need isn't available. That must change – no matter how the Bill progresses in its next stages through the House of Lords.
'We are calling for the Government to back our plan for a new ecosystem for palliative care that would mean more people can die with the care and the dignity they deserve.'
Marie Curie welcomed the amendment, but warned that 'this will not on its own make the improvements needed to guarantee everyone is able to access the palliative care they need'.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Sky News

15 minutes ago

• Sky News

Assisted dying bill: How both sides of debate reacted to historic vote

People on both sides of the assisted dying debate have told Sky News how they feel about the outcome of today's vote – and while some are popping open champagne, others are "incredibly disappointed". More than 300 MPs this afternoon backed a bill that gives people in England and Wales who have less than six months to live the right to apply for an assisted death. Each request will be evaluated by two doctors and a panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist. Today's historic vote means the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill will now go to the House of Lords for further scrutiny before becoming law. Following the landmark vote, individuals for and against it have shared their feelings on the result. Frank Tate-Sutton - For 6:04 Frank Tate-Sutton is terminally ill and told Sky News she's relieved the bill has passed, even though the law won't be changed in time for her. "These are happy tears," she said. "I am emotional. It's a very difficult subject for everybody." Ms Tate-Sutton said her quality of life is "very important - and I'm losing it". "I don't want to die without dignity, without it being my choice, without my family knowing that this is what I want," she continued. "As much as they [my family] want me alive, do they want to see me lying in my living room in a hospital bed, taking all these drugs, not being able to talk, not being able to control my bodily functions? "That is not a life, for me - living on all the medications and not being able to exist without that… the side effects and everything." Mike Smith - Against 5:20 Mike Smith is a spokesperson for the disability rights group Not Dead Yet - and he has been left "incredibly disappointed" by the outcome of the vote. "This particular bill had so many failings in the way safeguards are constructed and the significant scope for coercion, whether it's overt or subliminal," he said. Mr Smith says he fears some people will "end up ending their lives earlier than they should do or want to". "There are so many disabled people around the country that have told us they're absolutely scared." "I think it's this inherent fear people have about being disabled that drives this very emotional response on this really complex topic," he explained. "What we know is, with good palliative care, social care, access to housing and an income, many disabled people ... can lead amazing lives." 6:48 Rebecca Wilcox and her TV presenter mother Dame Esther Rantzen, who has terminal cancer, have long been campaigning for a change to the UK's law on assisted dying. Speaking from Parliament Square as fellow supporters of the bill popped champagne behind her, Ms Wilcox described today's vote as "an extraordinary moment". "It means so much to me," she said. "I spoke to mum and her one word to describe it was 'wow'. "She didn't think she was going to live to see the debate, let alone a conclusion that went our way." In response to concerns about safeguarding, she said it will "bring in layer upon layer of safeguards". "We're going to have scrutiny upon scrutiny for every case and at the moment, there is no scrutiny," she said. "Coercion could be happening as we speak. "There is now protection for vulnerable people, by having this bill passed." Dr Gordon Macdonald - Against Dr Macdonald said the bill passing with a majority of 23 - less than half what its second reading achieved - is proof that "the more people have thought about this issue, the more they've had doubts". The doctor, who is the CEO of anti-euthanasia organisation Care not Killing, said: "We will see what happens when it gets to the [House of] Lords, the Lords will hopefully give it more rigorous scrutiny than happened in the Commons". His biggest concern is "for people who are vulnerable, who will feel pressure to end their lives". "That might come from external forces, but it's more likely to just be internalised pressure," Dr Macdonald said. "They'll feel they're a burden on their family and friends, conscious of the cost of care, and think they should do the decent thing, as they would see it in that thinking." It's "of course a terrible message for society to send out to people," he said.

BBC News

19 minutes ago

• BBC News

Some refuse workers will lose money

The leader of Birmingham City Council has admitted for the first time some refuse workers will lose money under plans to reform the workers who are members of Unite the Union have been in a stand-off with the Labour-run council over proposed changes to roles and pay, since January. In an exclusive interview with the BBC, council leader John Cotton said he "absolutely understood" there would be "implications for individuals", but the authority had to "implement job evaluation fairly across the council". Unite claims 170 workers face an annual pay cut of £8,000, but the authority has said only 17 members of staff lose up to £6,000 - something Cotton had not acknowledged publicly. Cotton stressed that the council continued to negotiate with Unite in order to find a "reasonable settlement" to "reflect the workforce's concerns".He denied claims from Unite that the deal to end the dispute had been "watered down" and said the authority had provided a "fair and reasonable offer", which was being discussed by arbitration body Acas. All-out strike action in the city began on 11 March and rubbish has continued to pile up on streets, but securing a legal injunction in May enabled more bin lorries to to be brought in to clear the mountains of bin bags."Regarding the city as a whole, since we secure the injunction and have been able to deploy our available fleet we have collected 33,498 tonnes and average 1,288 per day which includes weekends," a spokesperson for the city council said."We have cleared the backlog so are now able to continue to implement our contingency plan, providing residents with one collection each week." 'Avoid repeating mistakes' The leader of the Labour-run authority described the situation as "incredibly frustrating" and said it continued to urge Unite to accept the offer it had placed on the table. "This strike needs to end so we can carry on with transforming the waste service and ensuring everyone gets the services they're entitled to," Cotton the council leader added that he had "set some straight red lines" to avoid "repeating some of the mistakes that happened in the past"."We have had to take a look at the grading of the driver roles, that is part of the process we have signed up to together with the trade unions, it is a recognised methodology for evaluating jobs."He said a negotiated settlement was "in everyone's interest" and it would allow the council to "get back to the business of improving the waste service in the city". Follow BBC Birmingham on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.

Sky News

24 minutes ago

• Sky News

Trump's credibility gap and why Iran may want to take its chances in Israel conflict

After hours of talks, the ayatollah's chief diplomat emerged giving little away. All eyes were on Abbas Aragchi. Would he give ground in the face of Israel's fierce bombardment of his country? Yes, but only if Israel stops that bombardment which is not going to happen. Especially after a day when two of Israel's big cities suffered direct hits from Iranian missiles. The best that can be said for almost four hours of talks, is they happened and might again. There were no breakthroughs to report, no ground shifting on either side. The talks were flawed in concept from the beginning. The countries meeting Aragchi here are not involved in the conflict. Israel and America were absent. The US did send a message, via Britain's foreign secretary David Lammy. We want to talk but we're serious about getting involved with military force if you do not. But the UK was delivering an American ultimatum and threat of force it does not itself believe to be a good idea. Britain and its European partners want de-escalation and oppose any idea of Donald Trump and his military getting involved. Iran is embattled, beleaguered and bombarded. But if its government is worried, its calm and collected foreign minister was showing none of it. The Iranians know Trump may send in the bombers and bunker busters within two weeks, but do they believe him? The president for whom they coined the acronym 'Trump Always Chickens Out' has a credibility gap. And if he takes action that leads to a chain of events where Americans end up dying, he will be crucified for it by his own MAGA movement.