Latest news with #HouseOfCommons
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Health
- Telegraph
The Lords must now revise this dreadful assisted dying Bill
Britain is a less civilised country today. Seldom has the House of Commons enacted legislation with such potentially calamitous consequences as the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, which has passed its third reading by a majority of 314 to 291. The narrow margin of victory for the assisted dying Bill indicates that opinion had turned against the legalisation of euthanasia during the process of scrutiny, but not in sufficient numbers to defeat it. The only hope of mitigating its worst aspects now lies with the House of Lords. The Lords is a revising chamber and it should now do the job that the Commons failed to do: proper scrutiny. In this case, the revision required to make this legislation workable and safe will have to be radical. This Private Member's Bill was not in the Labour manifesto and so the Upper House is much less limited by convention in the scope of possible amendments. Peers are not generally eager to correct the follies of MPs, but this time their Lordships' duty is to make root and branch changes to the Bill, even if this risks confrontation with the Commons. In particular, the bishops of the Church of England have a responsibility to speak out much more clearly on a matter of such moral gravity. We know that in countries where euthanasia has been legalised, a large and growing proportion of all deaths are now assisted by doctors. In Canada, for example, some studies suggest up to 10 per cent of all lives will end in this way. Surely the Lords Spiritual should be leading the national conversation about what is likely to become reality here, too, in the very near future. Many people will rightly feel a sense of dread at the prospect of death on the NHS. When the new law takes effect in 2029, our health service will be obliged to offer assisted suicide as though it were just another form of care. Palliative care (already the Cinderella of the NHS) will now compete for resources with the new 'service'. As we report, assisted death is likely to overwhelm the NHS and finally break its budgets. Doctors will have to offer lethal drugs to any and all patients who are deemed to be terminally ill, as long as they have mental capacity. Those who meet the criteria could include patients with all kinds of disabilities, people with Down's Syndrome and those with eating disorders. The panels that will decide whether to authorise assisted dying do not need to have personal knowledge of the patient, nor to inform families or friends. They need only decide on the balance of probabilities that the patient is not being coerced. How did Britain find itself saddled with such a 'bad Bill', as the Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch called it, on a matter of such cardinal importance? The Prime Minister must carry much of the blame. Unwilling to shoulder responsibility, he chose to pass the buck to Kim Leadbeater, a backbench MP with more zeal than sagacity. A Government Bill would have allowed much more time to examine the practical costs and benefits of shoehorning the provision of medicalised death into a service designed to preserve life. One of Sir Keir Starmer's predecessors, Gordon Brown, rightly observed that in the name of autonomy the Bill sets up a false choice. Patients who request assisted dying will in future have a legal right to receive it, 'without guaranteeing anything approaching an equivalent right to high-quality palliative care for those close to death', he said. The refusal of the Commons to acknowledge this glaring injustice now places the onus on the Lords to enable physicians to offer terminal patients a genuine choice. Whatever one's views about the principle of assisted dying, this Bill is a case of legislating in haste and repenting at leisure. Posterity will have to live with its lasting impact on the relationship between the public and the medical profession. But it is not too late for peers to remedy some of the Bill's flaws.
LBCI
2 hours ago
- Health
- 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
News.com.au
3 hours ago
- Health
- News.com.au
UK MPs vote in favour of assisted dying bill in historic step
Britain's parliament took a historic step towards allowing euthanasia on Friday when MPs backed contentious legislation that would introduce assisted dying for terminally ill people. Lawmakers in the lower House of Commons chamber voted 314 in favour to 291 to send the proposal to the upper House of Lords for further scrutiny following four hours of emotional debate. The outcome sparked celebrations among supporters gathered outside parliament who say legalised euthanasia will give people with an incurable illness dignity and choice at the end of their lives. But opponents attending a neighbouring counter-protest said they feared vulnerable people could be coerced into dying and urged lawmakers to focus on improving palliative care instead. The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill would allow assisted suicide in England and Wales for adults who have been given less than six months to live. They would have to be able to administer the life-ending substance themselves, and any patient's wish to die would have to be signed off by two doctors and a panel of experts. A change in the law would see Britain emulate several other countries in Europe and elsewhere that allow some form of assisted dying, including Belgium and the Netherlands. - 'Heartbreaking stories' - Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who proposed the legislation, told Friday's so-called third reading debate that a law change would "offer a compassionate and safe choice" for terminally ill people. She said maintaining the status quo would mean more "heartbreaking stories" of "pain and trauma, suicide attempts, PTSD, lonely trips to Switzerland, (and) police investigations". But Vicky Foxcroft, also of Labour, said the proposal did not include adequate safeguards for disabled people. "We have to protect those people who are susceptible to coercion, who already feel like society doesn't value them, who often feel like a burden to the state, society and their family," she pleaded. Outside parliament, protesters waved placards with slogans including "Let us choose" and "Don't make doctors killers". David Walker, 82, said he supported changing the law because he saw his wife of 60 years suffer for three years at the end of her life. "That's why I'm here, because I can't help her anymore, but I can help other people who are going through the same thing, because if you have no quality of life, you have nothing," he told AFP. But Elizabeth Burden, a 52-year-old doctor, said she feared the legislation would open "slippery slope" where those eligible for assisted dying expands. "Once we allow this. Everything will slip down because dementia patients, all patients... are vulnerable," she told AFP. - Public support - MPs in the 650-seat parliament backed an earlier version of the proposed legislation by 330 to 275 votes at an initial vote in parliament last November, a larger majority than Friday's 23. Since then the bill has undergone several changes, including applying a ban on adverts for assisted dying and allowing all health workers to opt out of helping someone end their life. MPs added a safeguard which would prevent a person being eligible "solely as a result of voluntarily stopping eating or drinking", ruling out people with anorexia. Britain's medical community and Prime Minister Keir Starmer's top ministerial team are split on the proposed law change. Starmer voted in favour, while his health and justice secretaries opposed it. But in a YouGov poll of 2,003 adults, surveyed last month and published Thursday, 73 percent or respondents backed an assisted dying law. "Change is coming," hailed Sarah Wootton, chief executive of the Dignity in Dying campaign group. But Catherine Robinson of Right To Life UK insisted the bill "still faces an uphill battle" to get through the Lords and her opposition campaign group "will be fighting it at every stage" to prevent it becoming law. The House of Lords now needs to approve the legislation before the end of the current parliamentary year, likely in the autumn, or the bill will fail. If it passes and receives royal assent, it would still be four years before an assisted dying service was implemented. A government impact assessment published this month estimated that approximately 160 to 640 assisted deaths could take place in the first year, rising to a possible 4,500 in a decade. Assisted suicide currently carries a maximum prison sentence of 14 years in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Separate legislation is going through the devolved Scottish parliament. At the end of March, the Isle of Man became the first British territory to pass an assisted dying bill.
South China Morning Post
3 hours ago
- Health
- South China Morning Post
UK lawmakers back assisted dying law in historic move
Britain took a historic step towards allowing euthanasia on Friday when MPs backed contentious legislation that would introduce assisted dying for terminally ill people. Lawmakers in the lower House of Commons chamber voted 314 in favour to 291 to send the proposal to the upper House of Lords for further scrutiny following four hours of emotional debate. The outcome sparked celebrations among supporters gathered outside parliament who say legalised euthanasia will give people with an incurable illness dignity and choice at the end of their lives. But opponents attending a neighbouring counter-protest said they feared vulnerable people could be coerced into dying and urged lawmakers to focus on improving palliative care instead. The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill would allow assisted suicide in England and Wales for adults who have been given less than six months to live. They would have to be able to administer the life-ending substance themselves, and any patient's wish to die would have to be signed off by two doctors and a panel of experts.
Telegraph
4 hours ago
- Politics
- Telegraph
Your verdict on the assisted dying vote
Following a final round of debate in the House of Commons, the assisted dying Bill is set to become law. The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill won the backing of 314 MPs, ensuring a majority. It will now go to the House of Lords for further scrutiny, but it is widely expected to become law. Critics argue that the numerous amendments introduced during the legislative process leave the Bill open to potential misuse or error. Supporters, however, hailed the vote as a landmark victory. However, the majority of respondents to our poll do not agree with how MPs voted. Telegraph readers reacted in droves, with many raising serious concerns about how a new law will work in practice. 'Utterly evil Bill' Elizabeth Kirkby argues that the Bill is 'deeply flawed in every way, with gaping loopholes everywhere'. She adds: 'It is just a total disgrace and truly shames our so-called 'Government'. This utterly evil Bill is nothing short of murder. I just hope against hope that the House of Lords throws this abhorrence out.' Miss Winter thinks this is 'the sickest vote in our history'. She believes that the people were 'not given a democratic vote on their right to avoid being coerced out of life'. Reader R Scully describes the Bill as a 'total mess' and expresses frustration over its lack of provisions. They remark: 'Irrespective of the arguments, this Bill contains no means as to how it should be implemented. That's just left for other people to work out. What else should we expect from this total mess of a Parliament?' Adrianne Al-Zobaiydi was once in favour of assisted dying, but that support has now waned. She argues: 'We no longer have family GPs who know all about us. Asking a judge to make a decision is ludicrous. The recent decisions seen by judges regarding immigration and asylum seekers only strengthens my argument – they are not medically equipped to do this job.' Stephen Johnston says: 'To have a psychiatrist, social worker and legal figure involved in final decisions is concerning.' Reader Russell Ellis points to a more sinister reality, suggesting: 'Soon some families may be knocking off the old to get the money.' 'Gives the terminally ill peace of mind' However, some Telegraph readers are relieved by the Bill's passing. 'As the wife of a very ill woman, I am extremely pleased to see this go through,' Michelle Thurston remarks. She continues: 'It will give my wife the option of taking the dignified way out rather than being forced into a situation where she has to go through much suffering before the end.' Reader Bill Palmer says: 'At last, something to celebrate. A victory for humanity, for secularity, for common sense, for the majority and for individual freedom of choice.' Julia Shamilton has nursed countless people near the ends of their lives. After witnessing many beg for death she is 'in agreement with this Bill'. She says: 'I had one wonderful patient who used to ask me at every visit why she was still here. It was heartbreaking to see her waste away, turning to skin and bone. All I could tell her was that her body wasn't ready, which felt like a feeble excuse.' Reader Sal Charm argues: 'The final stages of some terminal illnesses are pretty awful. Choosing to curtail that seems reasonable to me. I would not leave my dog or cat suffering at the end of life. I think I should have the same option for myself.' 'Humane decision' While Ash Delacroix has some reservations about the Bill in its current state, she is hopeful it will be refined over time and is grateful for a step in the right direction. Ash says: 'This is the start of giving people a choice. It is a huge relief knowing that if the pain becomes unbearable, all dignity is lost, and no drug works, there is a way to find permanent sleep. 'This is a humane decision today, albeit one that had a rough time getting through. We now need to shepherd it and ensure the legislation works properly.' Stephen Pointing comments: 'The right result. It is something the majority of the population is in favour of and has been for a considerable period of time. Well done to those MPs who stuck by their guns despite a huge amount of pressure being applied by those against the Bill.'
