UK parliament votes for assisted dying, paving way for historic law change
Britain's parliament voted on Friday in favour of a bill to legalise assisted dying, paving the way for the country's biggest social change in a generation.
The legislation passed by a vote of 314-291, clearing its biggest parliamentary hurdle.
The "Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life)" law would give mentally competent, terminally ill adults in England and Wales with six months or less left to live the right to choose to end their lives with medical help.
The bill now proceeds to Britain's upper chamber, the House of Lords, where it will undergo months of scrutiny. While there could be further amendments, the unelected Lords will be reluctant to block legislation that has been passed by elected members of the House of Commons.
The vote puts Britain on course to follow Australia, Canada and other countries, as well as some U.S. states, in permitting assisted dying.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer's Labour government was neutral on the legislation, meaning politicians voted according to their conscience rather than along party lines. Starmer voted in favour.
Supporters of the bill say it will provide dignity and compassion to people suffering, but opponents worry that vulnerable people could be coerced into ending their lives.
Hundreds of people gathered outside parliament to hear news of the vote.
When the result was read out, those in favour of the legislation hugged, clapped and cheered. They shouted 'victory', 'we won' and waved placards. Those opposed to it stood in silence.
Emma Bray, who has motor neurone disease, said she hoped the result would help people in her condition.
Bray, who is 42 and has two children, said she plans to starve herself to death next month to help relieve the pain after being told she only has six months to live.
'This result will mean that people will not have to go through the same suffering I have faced,' she told Reuters.
Opinion polls show that a majority of Britons back assisted dying. Friday's vote followed hours of emotional debate and references to personal stories in the chamber and followed a vote in November that approved the legislation in principle.
Opponents of the bill had argued that ill people may feel they should end their lives for fear of being a burden to their families and society. Some lawmakers withdrew their support after the initial vote last year, saying safeguards had been weakened.
John Howard, a Catholic priest who led about a dozen people in prayer outside parliament while voting took place, said he worried that some people would be forced to end their lives early under pressure from family members.
"I feel great sorrow and concern, particularly for the most vulnerable and disabled," he told Reuters. "This is a dark day for our country."
Friday's vote took place 10 years after parliament last voted against allowing assisted dying. The 314-291 vote showed narrowing support from the 330-275 vote in favour in November.
In the original plan, an assisted death would have required court approval. That has been replaced by a requirement for a judgement by a panel including a social worker, a senior legal figure and a psychiatrist, which is seen by some as a watering down.
The Labour lawmaker who proposed the bill, Kim Leadbeater, said the legislation still offered some of the strongest protections in the world.
"I am fully confident in the bill," she told the BBC after the vote. "The safeguards are extremely thorough, extremely robust, and I'm confident that this will help the people it needs to help."
Opponents had doubts not just about the potential for coercion, but also about the impact of assisted dying on the finances and resources of the state-run National Health Service, how the law might change the relationship between doctors and their patients and whether it could mean that improvements to palliative care might now not be made.
Care Not Killing, a group that opposes the law change, issued a statement calling the bill "deeply flawed and dangerous", saying that its safeguards had been weakened since November.
"Members of Parliament had under 10 hours to consider over 130 amendments to the Bill, or less than 5 minutes per change. Does anyone think this is enough time to consider changes to a draft law that quite literally is a matter of life and death?" said the group's CEO, Gordon Macdonald.
The law was proposed under a process led by an individual member of parliament rather than being government policy, which has limited the amount of parliamentary time allocated to it.
Some lawmakers have said that such a major social change should have been allocated more parliamentary time for debate and involve a greater degree of ministerial involvement and accountability.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
MTV Lebanon
4 hours ago
- MTV Lebanon
UK parliament votes for assisted dying, paving way for historic law change
Britain's parliament voted on Friday in favour of a bill to legalise assisted dying, paving the way for the country's biggest social change in a generation. The legislation passed by a vote of 314-291, clearing its biggest parliamentary hurdle. The "Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life)" law would give mentally competent, terminally ill adults in England and Wales with six months or less left to live the right to choose to end their lives with medical help. The bill now proceeds to Britain's upper chamber, the House of Lords, where it will undergo months of scrutiny. While there could be further amendments, the unelected Lords will be reluctant to block legislation that has been passed by elected members of the House of Commons. The vote puts Britain on course to follow Australia, Canada and other countries, as well as some U.S. states, in permitting assisted dying. Prime Minister Keir Starmer's Labour government was neutral on the legislation, meaning politicians voted according to their conscience rather than along party lines. Starmer voted in favour. Supporters of the bill say it will provide dignity and compassion to people suffering, but opponents worry that vulnerable people could be coerced into ending their lives. Hundreds of people gathered outside parliament to hear news of the vote. When the result was read out, those in favour of the legislation hugged, clapped and cheered. They shouted 'victory', 'we won' and waved placards. Those opposed to it stood in silence. Emma Bray, who has motor neurone disease, said she hoped the result would help people in her condition. Bray, who is 42 and has two children, said she plans to starve herself to death next month to help relieve the pain after being told she only has six months to live. 'This result will mean that people will not have to go through the same suffering I have faced,' she told Reuters. Opinion polls show that a majority of Britons back assisted dying. Friday's vote followed hours of emotional debate and references to personal stories in the chamber and followed a vote in November that approved the legislation in principle. Opponents of the bill had argued that ill people may feel they should end their lives for fear of being a burden to their families and society. Some lawmakers withdrew their support after the initial vote last year, saying safeguards had been weakened. John Howard, a Catholic priest who led about a dozen people in prayer outside parliament while voting took place, said he worried that some people would be forced to end their lives early under pressure from family members. "I feel great sorrow and concern, particularly for the most vulnerable and disabled," he told Reuters. "This is a dark day for our country." Friday's vote took place 10 years after parliament last voted against allowing assisted dying. The 314-291 vote showed narrowing support from the 330-275 vote in favour in November. In the original plan, an assisted death would have required court approval. That has been replaced by a requirement for a judgement by a panel including a social worker, a senior legal figure and a psychiatrist, which is seen by some as a watering down. The Labour lawmaker who proposed the bill, Kim Leadbeater, said the legislation still offered some of the strongest protections in the world. "I am fully confident in the bill," she told the BBC after the vote. "The safeguards are extremely thorough, extremely robust, and I'm confident that this will help the people it needs to help." Opponents had doubts not just about the potential for coercion, but also about the impact of assisted dying on the finances and resources of the state-run National Health Service, how the law might change the relationship between doctors and their patients and whether it could mean that improvements to palliative care might now not be made. Care Not Killing, a group that opposes the law change, issued a statement calling the bill "deeply flawed and dangerous", saying that its safeguards had been weakened since November. "Members of Parliament had under 10 hours to consider over 130 amendments to the Bill, or less than 5 minutes per change. Does anyone think this is enough time to consider changes to a draft law that quite literally is a matter of life and death?" said the group's CEO, Gordon Macdonald. The law was proposed under a process led by an individual member of parliament rather than being government policy, which has limited the amount of parliamentary time allocated to it. Some lawmakers have said that such a major social change should have been allocated more parliamentary time for debate and involve a greater degree of ministerial involvement and accountability.
LBCI
11 hours ago
- LBCI
UK MPs vote for assisted dying law in historic step
Britain took a historic step towards allowing euthanasia on Friday when MPs backed legislation that would permit assisted dying for terminally ill people. Lawmakers in the lower House of Commons chamber voted 314 in favour to 291 against to advance the proposal to the upper House of Lords for further scrutiny and votes following four hours of emotional debate. AFP
Ya Libnan
a day ago
- Ya Libnan
US, Iran held direct talks amid intensifying conflict with Israel, diplomats say
MOST RECENT DEVELOPMENTS U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi have spoken by phone several times since Israel began its strikes on Iran last week, in a bid to find a diplomatic end to the crisis, three diplomats told Reuters. According to the diplomats, who asked not to be identified due to the sensitivity of the matter, Araqchi said Tehran would not return to negotiations unless Israel stopped the attacks, which began on June 13. They said the talks included a brief discussion of a U.S. proposal given to Iran at the end of May that aims to create a regional consortium that would enrich uranium outside of Iran, an offer Tehran has so far rejected. U.S. and Iranians officials did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment on the matter. This week's phone discussions were the most substantive direct talks since the two began negotiations in April. On those occasions, in Oman and Italy, the two men exchanged brief words when they encountered each other after indirect talks were held. A regional diplomat close to Tehran said Araqchi had told Witkoff that Tehran 'could show flexibility in the nuclear issue' if Washington pressured Israel to end the war. A European diplomat said: 'Araqchi told Witkoff Iran was ready to come back to nuclear talks, but it could not if Israel continued its bombing.' Other than brief encounters after five rounds of indirect talks since April to discuss Iran's decades-old nuclear dispute, Araqchi and Witkoff had not previously held direct contacts. A second regional diplomat who spoke to Reuters said 'the (first) call was initiated by Washington, which also proposed a new offer' to overcome the deadlock over clashing red lines. URANIUM ENRICHMENT U.S. President Donald Trump wants Tehran to end uranium enrichment on its soil, while Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has said Tehran's right to enrichment is non-negotiable. Trump has been keeping his cards close to his chest over whether he will order U.S. forces to join Israel's bombing campaign that it says aims to destroy Iran's nuclear program and ballistic capabilities. But Trump offered a glimmer of hope that diplomacy could resume, saying Iranian officials wanted to come to Washington for a meeting. He rebuffed President Emmanuel Macron earlier this week when the French leader said Trump had told G7 leaders at a summit in Canada that the United States had made an offer to get a ceasefire and then kickstart broader discussions. European officials have been coordinating with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who was also at the G7 summit. Britain, France and Germany, known as the E3 and party to a 2015 nuclear deal between world powers and Iran, held a ministerial call with Araqchi on Sunday. The three countries and the European Union are set to meet him in Geneva on Friday, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei and an EU official said. Earlier in the week, both Rubio and Araqchi told the Europeans in separate talks about a possible diplomatic initiative, three diplomats said. A senior European diplomat said what emerged at the G7 was that Trump wanted the operations to end very quickly and that he wanted the Iranians to talk to him, while making clear that they had to accept his demands if they wanted the war to end. Given the Israeli strikes and Trump's rhetoric, diplomats said Iran was in no position to hold public talks with the U.S., but that a meeting with the Europeans as a link to try and advance diplomacy was deemed more realistic for Tehran. (Reuters) –
