Around 1,000 doctors urge MPs to vote against ‘unsafe' assisted dying Bill
Around 1,000 doctors have written to MPs urging them to vote against the assisted dying Bill describing it as 'simply not safe'.
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill will return to the House of Commons for debate on Friday, with MPs expected to consider further amendments.
But in a letter, published this week, doctors from across the NHS have urged lawmakers to listen to those 'who would have to deliver the consequences of this deeply flawed Bill'.
They warn the Bill 'poses a real threat to both patients and the medical workforce'.
In its current form the proposed legislation, 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, subject to the approval of two doctors and an expert panel.
Last month, MPs approved a change in the Bill to ensure no medics would be obliged to take part in assisted dying.
Doctors already had an opt-out but the new clause extends that to anyone, including pharmacists and social care workers.
Encouraging or assisting suicide is currently against the law in England and Wales, with a maximum jail sentence of 14 years.
The letter to MPs said: 'As experienced medical professionals who regularly work with dying patients and who have reviewed the worldwide evidence on assisted dying, it is our opinion that this Bill poses a real threat to both patients and the medical workforce, and we urge you to vote against it.
'We are concerned that the private member's Bill process has not facilitated a balanced approach to the collection of evidence and input from key stakeholders including doctors, people with disabilities and other marginalised groups.
'This Bill will widen inequalities, it provides inadequate safeguards and, in our collective view, is simply not safe.
'This is the most important piece of healthcare legislation for 60 years and we urge you to listen to the doctors who would have to deliver the consequences of this deeply flawed Bill.'
Sir Ed Davey welcomed the letter on Monday, telling Sky News he had 'real concerns'.
'I have voted against this assisted dying legislation, as I did on previous occasions,' the Liberal Democrat leader said.
'I have real concerns about the pressure on individuals, that they will put on themselves, if they think they are a burden on their family, so I welcome this letter.'
He added: 'I hope, as time has gone on, as the arguments have been better exposed, that MPs will switch sides and join the side that I and many MPs are on.'
But Sir Chris Bryant said he would be voting in favour.
The technology minister told Sky News: 'The Government doesn't have a formal position at all and individual members are free to choose how they vote.
'I'm not going to hide my own personal preference. I abstained on the first time round, I decided I wasn't going to vote because I wanted to hear the debate.
'I have listened to a lot of the debate. Of course, I don't want anybody to feel that they are a burden on society and that should lead them towards taking their own life, but I also have heard the cries of people who are absolutely miserable, and that's why I will be voting for the Bill.'
Some of the Bill's opponents have urged MPs to focus on improving end-of-life care rather than legislating for assisted dying.
Ahead of last month's Commons debate on the Bill, two royal medical colleges raised concerns over the proposed legislation.
The Royal College of Physicians (RCP) said it believes there are 'concerning deficiencies', while the Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych) said it has 'serious concerns' and cannot support the Bill.
Opinions among members of the medical profession remain varied, with TV doctor Hilary Jones describing assisted dying for the terminally ill as 'kind and compassionate', adding that he would help a patient to end their life if the law was changed.
The GP, often seen on ITV's Good Morning Britain and the Lorraine show, told the PA news agency he believes medicine will go 'back to the Dark Ages' if proposed legislation being considered at Westminster is voted down.
While Friday is expected to see debate on further amendments to the Bill, it is thought a vote on the overall legislation might not take place until the following Friday, June 20.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
a day ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Bill C-5 passes in the House, as Carney vows to consult Indigenous groups
OTTAWA — Facing concerns and warnings of Indigenous resistance against a key part of his governing agenda, Prime Minister Mark Carney acknowledged Friday that 'more fulsome conversations are needed' to choose the development projects his government wants to fast-track through controversial new legislation, Bill C-5. Speaking moments after the bill passed third reading in the House of Commons, Carney pledged to hold meetings in the coming weeks with First Nations, Inuit and Métis leaders and experts in a series of summits to 'launch the implementation of this legislation in the right way' in 'full partnership' with Indigenous communities. This will be the 'first step' in the process to choose which projects will be chosen through the new legislation for the fast-track to approval within the government's goal of two years. The Liberal government's major projects bill has passed the House of Commons thanks to help from the Conservative Party. Prime Minister Mark Carney calls the legislation the core of his government's domestic economic response to U.S. tariffs (June 20, 2025 / The Canadian Press) Carney also repeated pledges earlier this week, as the Liberal government rammed the bill through the House over the objections of some Indigenous , environmental groups and opposition parties, that the new process will respect Indigenous rights to consultation and 'free, prior and informed consent' under the United Nations Declaration to the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The government House Leader said this week they expect the bill to pass in the Senate next week. 'These projects will be built with Indigenous nations and communities. This is not an aspiration. It is the plan embedded in the bill itself,' Carney said Friday. 'We all agree that more fulsome conversations are needed to select the nation-building projects and to determine the conditions that they must fulfil. In other words, the real work begins now.' In the April 28 election, Carney's Liberals won a minority government while promising to fast-track development projects like mines, pipelines and ports to boost economic growth, make Canada a 'superpower' in clean power and fossil fuels, and reduce reliance on the United States that has imposed a series of tariffs on Canadian goods. Carney acknowledged the bill sailed through the Commons quickly, but argued Friday that speed was needed to confront the 'crisis' of the American trade war. 'This is the response. This is us being in charge of our destiny. That's why we pushed it,' Carney said. Indigenous Services Minister Mandy Gull-Masty — a former grand chief of Eeyou Istchee in Quebec — said the promised summits are a 'serious signal' that Indigenous communities are going to be 'at the table' in deciding how projects will be chosen under the new process. 'There have been more projects selected. It is something that we will define together,' she said. The bill passed through the House of Commons Friday in two votes, after House Speaker Francis Scarpaleggia ruled to split the legislation into two parts. All parties supported a less contentious section to lift federal barriers to trade and labour movement inside Canada. The other, more controversial part dealing with major projects also passed with Liberals and Conservatives voting en masse in favour, and Bloc Québécois, NDP and Green MPs voting against. Toronto Liberal and former cabinet minister MP Nate Erskine-Smith also voted against the national projects part of the legislation . The version of the bill now moving to the Senate came with a suite of amendments, including some that the government supported, aimed at increasing transparency and restricting some of the powers the legislation would create. This includes a provision to obtain the written consent of affected provinces and territories before the government chooses to fast-track a given project, and to ensure the new process that the law would create respects ethics rules and can't override legislation like the Indian Act. The changes also created a new requirement for the government to publish a suite of information about the projects — from the contents of any studies and assessments about their impacts, to all recommendations about them from the civil service — at least 30 days before it officially puts them into the fast-track process. Business groups like the Canadian Chamber of Commerce have also supported the legislation, arguing that a thicket of government regulations has delayed major projects, and that there is now an urgent need to build new infrastructure for energy, critical minerals and other sectors. But Bill C-5 remains controversial, including with predictions this week from some Indigenous leaders that it could inspire resistance and protest like the 2012 'Idle No More' movement because of a lack of consultation on the new powers. MPs have also condemned the national projects part of the legislation as a troubling expansion of power that risks trampling environmental protections and Indigenous rights. After the amendments Friday, the bill retained its proposal to allow the cabinet to choose projects to fast-track based on 'any factor' it considers relevant, and to skirt laws like the Canadian Environmental Protection Act and Species at Risk Act when reviewing projects to speed up. 'This legislation is an abomination and one that will be a stain on the reputation of this government and of our prime minister. As a first effort to lead this country, it's a bad effort,' said Green Leader Elizabeth May. Bloc MP Sébastien Lemire accused the government of reproducing the 'condescending and colonialist spirit' of the last century towards Canada's Indigenous Peoples. And Don Davies, the NDP's interim leader, alleged the bill creates 'Henry VIII' powers that allow the government 'to override laws by decree. 'It guts environmental protections, undermines workers and threatens Indigenous rights,' Davies said. 'This bill will end up in court.'
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Latest polling says if an election was held tomorrow Reform UK would win a majority
Since the local elections Reform UK has had no shortage of good polls. But a new one suggests Nigel Farage's party has a chance not only of winning the next election, but of claiming a decent Commons majority, too. In February, Reform topped a Sky News/YouGov poll for the first time, with Nigel Farage's party edging in front on 25%, Labour pushed into second on 24%, with the Tories on 21%. But a fresh one from Ipsos puts Reform on 34%, nine points ahead of Labour on 25%, with the Conservatives a distant third on 15%. While the other parties are flatlining, Reform appears to be pushing boundaries. Were these figures to be replicated across the country at a general election, with every constituency behaving the same way, then Reform could win as many as 340 seats, giving it a majority of 30, Sky News analysis suggests. Labour could be reduced to 176 seats, down 236 on last year's election, while the Tories would hit a record low of 12 seats. But polling should always be taken with a pinch of salt and with the firm acknowledgement that there is not an election coming any time soon. Conservative backbenchers might also tell you publicly that opinion polls are notoriously difficult to translate into seat numbers because voting percentages in individual constituencies can vary hugely from the overall average. But the truth is that the symbolism of Reform UK topping another poll is likely to be noticed by MPs from all parties, especially backbench Conservatives who have actively been hoping their leader, Kemi Badenoch, can help them climb the polls and bring the party back into public favour. Politics is a brutal game and when it comes to toppling underwhelming party leaders, the Tories are more ruthless than most. One wonders how many of these polls Mrs Badenoch's party will allow her to endure. Read more: This poll is also a warning to Labour. As the party approaches a year since its major victory, it will not have much to celebrate if these numbers are anything to go by. According to this survey, only 19% are satisfied with the job Sir Keir Starmer is doing as prime minister, with 73% dissatisfied. And the figure of 25% of voters intending to vote Labour is a level not seen since October 2019. While abstract to much of the public, polling can often shape not only the chatter inside Westminster but how and when plots by MPs begin. For Reform UK, this is a much-needed morale boost after a surprise resignation by their former Chairman Zia Yusuf, and then an almost immediate U-turn back into the party. And Kemi Badenoch - who said during her leadership campaign that the Conservatives needed to go back to first principles and that this would take time - will be wondering, seven-and-a-half months after winning the leadership, how much time she really has left.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Island MPs share concern over Assisted Dying Bill after House of Commons vote
THE Isle of Wight MPs have expressed concern over the passing of the Assisted Dying Bill. The bill, which was backed by a majority of MPs, allows terminally ill adults with a life expectancy of less than six months to end their lives. Despite warnings from opponents about the safety of the legislation, the bill took another step in the parliamentary process after being approved by 314 votes to 291 in the House of Commons yesterday (Friday). Labour's Isle of Wight West MP, Richard Quigley, consistently voted against the bill at every stage. Read more: Following the news of its passing, Richard said: "This bill was always going to be emotional, but it was never about winning or losing, but having the chance to debate. "We have done that and the bill has now passed. "My opposition is based on the belief the safeguards, particularly around the so-called 'anorexia loophole,' are not robust or comprehensive enough." He urged the House of Lords to apply "rigorous scrutiny" to the bill as it progresses. Richard stressed the importance of examining every aspect of its implementation, paying close attention to the risks and unresolved unintended consequences. The Isle of Wight East MP, Joe Robertson, also voted against the bill. He shared his concerns, saying: "I voted against the Assisted Dying Bill — not because I am against the principle of wanting to relieve suffering, but because there are too many loopholes, too few safeguards and potential for unintended consequences." Joe, with great experience in the legal profession, criticised amendments made to the bill since the last vote — particularly the replacement of a role for a High Court judge with a 'panel' of professionals, with no power to summon witnesses. He said: "It means judges can decide whether a child has been coerced into wanting to spend time with only one parent (in divorce proceedings), but not whether a grandparent has been coerced into wanting to end their life (under assisted dying laws). "As a former family lawyer, I find this both perverse and dangerous." The concerns raised by both MPs reflect the apprehensions of a significant number of opponents who believe the bill was rushed through without adequate consideration of the potential risks. The bill will now move to the House of Lords for further scrutiny.
