MPs bar doctors from raising assisted dying with children
MPs have voted to prevent health professionals such as doctors from initiating conversations with under-18s about assisted dying, as they continued scrutiny of the Terminally Ill Adults Bill.
The bill would only allow those over the age of 18, and with less than six months to live, to receive medical assistance to die in England and Wales.
Labour MP Meg Hillier, who tabled the amendment to the bill, had previously warned MPs to be alert to "the very real risk" of an assisted dying law being expanded to cover children and young people.
Her amendment was opposed by the bill's proposer Kim Leadbeater, but approved in the House of Commons by 259 votes to 216.
In a statement, a group of Labour MPs concerned about assisted dying said the result represented a "vote of no confidence in the bill and has shattered the claim that bill was the safest in the world".
A backer of the bill, Conservative Neil Shastri-Hurst, had previously argued against the proposal, warning it would leave a terminally ill young person "isolated, navigating a complex and deeply personal journey through the filter of online forums, rather than in dialogue with trusted, qualified professionals".
Hillier's other amendment seeking to stop health professionals from raising assisted dying with any patient was defeated by 256 votes to 230 - a majority of 26.
Other changes made to the bill include a ban on advertising assisted dying services and a measure to ensure assisted deaths carried out under the bill would not be deemed unnatural and therefore not be automatically referred to a coroner.
Growing number of MPs changing their mind on assisted dying
How assisted dying laws across the UK could change
The legislation was initially approved by MPs in November by a majority of 55 votes and has been undergoing further scrutiny.
At least a dozen MPs who backed it or abstained on the bill have said they are now likely to vote against it.
Supporters remain confident it will eventually clear the parliamentary hurdles and become law.
Friday's debate saw MPs largely focused on how the bill would work, rather than discussing the general principle of assisted dying.
There was general consensus that assisted dying advertising should be prohibited, although some MPs called for restrictions to be tightened.
The amendment, tabled by Leadbeater, puts a duty on ministers to block advertising, while allowing them to make exemptions.
Her fellow Labour MP Paul Waugh called for that power to be removed telling MPs "one person's advert is another person's public information campaign.
"It's not impossible to imagine a secretary of state in future who passionately believes in the merits of assisted dying to authorise such a campaign."
Labour MP Tony Vaughan argued that Waugh's proposal would remove "essential flexibility" allowing ministers to respond to future developments.
Waugh's proposed amendment was defeated by by a majority of 21, while Leadbeater's was added to the bill.
Leadbeater's amendment ensuring assisted deaths would not automatically be investigated by a coroner also got backing form MPs.
Conservative Rebecca Smith had put forward an opposing amendment which would ensure assisted deaths would still be investigated by a coroner.
Without that measure, she said it would be "exceptionally difficult to say whether there have been errors or instances of abuse".
Disagreeing, Green MP Ellie Chowns said an assisted death under the provisions of the bill "would be the most scrutinised type of death in the country".
"It makes no sense to require another legal process at the end of that when there have already been multiple layers of scrutiny," she added.
At the start of the debate, MPs agreed to a previously-debated amendment on the process for replacing doctors unwilling to participate in assisted dying and another amendment which said there has to be a report from a doctor where there is concern about a proposed assisted death.
Conservative frontbencher Kieran Mullan complained that the debate - "a deeply consequential and highly contentious piece of legislation" - was not getting enough time in Parliament.
Health minister Stephen Kinnock replied that there had been more than 90 hours of parliamentary debate and more than 500 amendments had been considered.
Liberal Democrat Christine Jardine accused some MPs of "deliberately" trying to delay the voting process.
"It really looks petty and childish and could they please abstained from doing it the next time."
The bill will next be debated on 20 June, when it will either fall or go to the House of Lords for further scrutiny.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Historic vote brings assisted dying closer to becoming law in England and Wales
Assisted dying is a step closer to being made legal in England and Wales after the proposed legislation cleared the House of Commons in a historic vote. A majority of MPs backed a Bill that would allow terminally ill adults with a life expectancy of less than six months to end their lives. Despite warnings from opponents around the safety of a Bill they argued has been rushed through, the proposed legislation took another step in the parliamentary process. MPs voted 314 to 291, majority 23, to approve Kim Leadbeater's Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill at third reading. This means the Bill has completed its first stages in the Commons and will 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. Due to the four-year implementation period, it could be 2029 – potentially coinciding with the end of this Government's Parliament – before assisted dying is offered. Encouraging or assisting suicide is currently against the law in England and Wales, with a maximum jail sentence of 14 years. Supporters of assisted dying have described the current law as not being fit for purpose, with desperate terminally ill people feeling the need to end their lives in secret or go abroad to Dignitas alone, for fear loved ones will be prosecuted for helping them. Friday was the first time the Bill was debated and voted on in its entirety since last year's historic yes vote, when MPs supported the principle of assisted dying for England and Wales by a majority of 55 at second reading. Labour MP Ms Leadbeater has argued her Bill will 'correct the profound injustices of the status quo and to offer a compassionate and safe choice to terminally ill people who want to make it'. During an hours-long date on Friday, MPs on both sides of the issue recalled personal stories of loved ones who had died. Conservative former minister Sir James Cleverly, who led the opposition to the Bill in the Commons, spoke of a close friend who died 'painfully' from cancer. He said he comes at the divisive issue 'not from a position of faith nor from a position of ignorance', and was driven in his opposition by 'concerns about the practicalities' of the Bill. MPs had a free vote on the Bill, meaning they decided according to their conscience rather than along party lines. The proposed legislation would allow terminally ill adults in England and Wales, with fewer than six months to live, to apply for an assisted death, subject to approval by two doctors and a panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist. Public support for a change in the law remains high, according to a YouGov poll published on the eve of the vote. The survey of 2,003 adults in Great Britain, suggested 73% of those asked last month were supportive of the Bill, while the proportion of people who feel assisted dying should be legal in principle stood at 75%.
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Voices: Poll of the day: Do you support the assisted dying bill?
The assisted dying bill returns to Parliament today for its final reading amid growing controversy – and a vote that could determine whether the legislation moves forward or falls entirely. A group of Labour MPs dramatically withdrew their support on Thursday night, citing serious concerns about the removal of key safeguards, including the requirement for High Court oversight. They warned that the bill had been 'drastically weakened' and no longer offers enough protection for vulnerable patients. If passed, the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill would allow people in England and Wales with fewer than six months to live to apply for a medically assisted death. Approval would be required from two doctors and a panel including a senior legal figure, a social worker, and a psychiatrist. Campaigners are making a final push on both sides of the debate, and with a narrow majority at stake, every vote counts. MPs have a free vote and are not bound by party lines. Supporters argue that the bill offers dignity and choice to those in need. Meanwhile, opponents argue it opens the door to abuse and erodes trust in end-of-life care. With so much at stake and such deeply personal questions at the heart of this debate, we want to hear from you: do you support the assisted dying bill? Vote in our poll and let us know your thoughts in the comments.
Hamilton Spectator
an hour ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Mark Carney's government reviewing suggested changes to infrastructure bill
OTTAWA — The Liberal government is reviewing a series of changes to add oversight and restrain some — but not all — of the extraordinary powers created under its controversial legislation to fast-track major development projects. The proposed law, Bill C-5, has sparked warnings of Indigenous resistance in the coming weeks, along with condemnation from environmental groups, and some reservations within the Liberal caucus. But the government insists the legislation is necessary in the face of U.S. President Donald Trump's tariffs, after the Liberals won a minority government in the April 28 election while promising to supercharge economic growth and reduce Canada's reliance on the unpredictable United States. A rare alliance between Prime Minister Mark Carney's Liberals and Pierre Poilievre's Declaring the need for speed to get new projects like mines, ports and pipelines approved for construction in less than two years, Prime Minister Mark Carney's administration is ramming the bill through the House of Commons over the objections of opposition parties this week, with votes anticipated Friday on a host of amendments proposed during a marathon parliamentary committee meeting that finished just after midnight Thursday morning. Speaking to reporters on Parliament Hill, Liberal House Leader Steven MacKinnon said the government was reviewing the proposed amendments, and that he expects the bill to pass in the Senate next week after it goes up for a vote on third reading in the House on Friday. So far, the bill has passed at a rapid clip through the Commons with the support of Liberal and Conservative MPs, with the Bloc Québécois, New Democrats and the lone Green MP opposing it. Asked about the bill Thursday, Carney was adamant the processes it creates will respect Indigenous rights and include the 'full embrace of free, prior and informed consent' — a key provision of the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. He insisted it will ensure participation and consultation with Indigenous communities in choosing and reviewing projects to fast-track, including for environmental and other conditions the developers will need to follow. 'Consultation, co-operation, engagement, participation is at the heart of C-5,' Carney said. 'And that is how you build a nation, and that's very much how we've designed it.' Provincial laws seeking to fast-track development under the spectre of American tariffs have also faced criticism in recent weeks, including Ontario's Bill 5 that prompted allegations the government is infringing on Indigenous rights. Amid controversy about fast-tracked mining projects, Ford is sitting down with dozens of As written , the federal law includes measures to reduce federal barriers to trade and labour mobility within Canada. The criticism has centred on the other part of the bill, which aims to create a special process that gives the federal cabinet the power to choose and fast-track development projects it deems to be in the 'national interest.' The current version of the law says the government may consider any factor it sees fit, and gives the federal cabinet the power to skirt laws and regulations — including environmental protections — used to assess chosen projects for approval. The bill says the framework to choose projects to fast-track will expire after five years. The opposition parties' amendments include measures to increase parliamentary oversight of how the law is used. One proposed change calls for the creation of a special committee to examine how the law is being applied, similar to the body of MPs that was automatically created when the federal government triggered the Emergencies Act to quash the so-called 'Freedom Convoy' in February 2022. Other amendments would require the government to disclose documents it uses to choose whether a project gets fast-tracked, publish an advisory 30 days before bringing a new project into the process, and release a report on Indigenous consultations 60 days after a development is authorized through the new law. The proposed changes also aim at the special powers the bill would create, with amendments to limit which laws the federal cabinet would be allowed to skirt in the name of approving a development project. One of the amendments says the government would not be able to do this when Parliament is dissolved or suspended. Another — supported by both the Conservatives and Bloc Québécois — says the government wouldn't be able to circumvent laws that include the Criminal Code, ethics and conflict of interest legislation, the Indian Act, and the Official Languages Act. The committee shot down other proposed amendments, including changes to write the Liberals' professed two-year deadline for project approval's into the bill, and to reduce the sunset clause of the special fast-tracking process from five to two years. At Wednesday's long committee meeting, Lance Haymond, chief of the Kebaowek First Nation in Québec, warned the lack of consultation in drafting the legislation could lead to protests like the 'Idle No More' movement against the former Conservative government's bid to rewrite project assessments in 2012. 'The conditions for an Idle No More 2.0 uprising are being written into the law as we speak,' Haymond said. MacKinnon defended the bill Thursday, and shrugged off a question about how some Liberals have raised questions about concerns from Indigenous leaders and groups like the Assembly of First Nations. 'We believe that by moving ahead on projects, we will continue to give Canadians the confidence that we can get big projects done, can create jobs for skilled trades workers in this country, can attract investment, and can create economic development opportunities for Indigenous Peoples,' he said. With files from Althia Raj
