Latest news with #TerminallyIllAdultsBill
Times
16 minutes ago
- Health
- Times
Assisted dying bill latest: Starmer yet to decide if he will vote
Public support for the bill remains high, according to the latest YouGov poll. The proportion of people who feel assisted dying should be legal in principle has risen slightly, to 75 per cent from 73 per cent in November. Its survey of 2,003 adults in Great Britain took place last month and the findings were published yesterday. Kim Leadbeater, the Labour MP behind the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, has warned that defeat for the bill would end hopes of changing the law for another decade as she rejected claims of rushing through reform. She insisted her bill is 'the most robust piece of legislation in the world' and has argued dying people must be given choice at the end of their lives in a conversation which has seen support from high-profile figures including Dame Esther Rantzen. Leadbeater said it had 'gone through hours and hours and hours of scrutiny', adding: 'This is not being rushed through, this is not a quick thing that's happened overnight.' Four Labour MPs confirmed on the eve of today's vote that they will switch sides to oppose the proposed new law. Paul Foster, Jonathan Hinder, Markus Campbell-Savours and Kanishka Narayan wrote to fellow MPs to voice concerns about the safety of the proposed legislation. They branded it as being 'drastically weakened', citing the scrapping of the High Court Judge safeguard as a key reason. However, Bill sponsor Kim Leadbeater has insisted that replacing the judge's approval with multidisciplinary panels strengthens the legislation, as it will incorporate wider expert knowledge to assess assisted dying applications. Protesters and campaigners have been gathering this morning in Westminster before the vote on the assisted dying bill. Photos from the scene show supporters from campaign group Dignity in Dying holding pink placards with white letters urging 'legalise assisted dying, vote yes today.' Opponents of the bill are wearing white masks with the word 'euthanise' on the forehead, and they are holding white signs saying 'don't make doctors killers' and 'protect our NHS from becoming a national suicide service'. In 1937, Switzerland legalised assisted suicide provided those doing the assisting were not motivated by 'any selfish intent'. Six decades later, the US state of Oregon legalised physician-assisted suicide for people with less than six months to live. In 2001, the Netherlands became the first country in the world to decriminalise assisted dying. As MPs vote on the bill today, this is how other countries in the world compare. Read in full: Where is assisted dying legal? How the rules worldwide compare More than 7,500 terminally ill people a year could seek state support to end their life within a decade of the practice being legalised, the government estimates. Officials believe about 60 per cent of requests for assisted dying would be approved, equating to approximately 4,500 or 0.68 per cent of all deaths from 2039 onwards. The findings came in an impact assessment drawn up by the Department for Health and Social Care. Officials also estimated that legalising the practice in the UK could cost the NHS tens of millions of pounds. Staff time costs ranged from £412,000 to £1.98 million in year one, to between £2.6 million and £11.5 million in year ten. MPs will today take part in the final Commons vote on whether to back a bill to help terminally ill adults end their lives in England and Wales. Politicians supported legalising assisted dying when they first debated the issue in November by 330 votes to 275. However, since then the outcome has become too close to call, after analysis by The Times showed that margin eroding. The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill has undergone months of scrutiny leading to some changes in the proposed legislation. One change is to replace the role of a High Court judge in signing off an application for an assisted death with a panel of experts. This panel would contain a senior lawyer, a psychiatrist, and a social worker. Advocates of assisted dying believe their bill will pass its final Commons vote on Friday, despite a shift among MPs against it. Kim Leadbeater, the MP who proposed the law change, denied the bill has been rushed and remained confident MPs would vote in favour of it. Read in full: Assisted dying vote 'too close to call' as MPs turn against bill Sir Keir Starmer has yet to decide whether he will take part in today's landmark vote on assisted dying as he deals with the Middle East crisis. The prime minister, who is in favour of assisted dying, is working from Downing Street today but could end up missing the vote depending on his commitments as he seeks to deescalate the conflict between Iran and Israel. A government source said no decision as been made He backed assisted dying in 2015 and has signalled that his view has not changed. The issue is deeply divisive and has split the Labour Party. Starmer said this week: 'It is a matter for individual parliamentarians, which is why I've not waded in with a view on this publicly, and I'm not going to now it's coming to a conclusion. 'There has been a lot of time discussing it, both in Parliament and beyond Parliament, and quite right too. It's a really serious issue. 'My own position is long-standing and well-known in relation to it, based on my experience when I was chief prosecutor for five years, where I oversaw every case that was investigated.'
Times
13 hours ago
- Politics
- Times
Assisted dying vote ‘too close to call' as MPs turn against bill
Advocates of assisted dying believe their bill will pass its final Commons vote on Friday, despite a shift among MPs against it. Opponents said that the last chance to block a change in the law was too close to call, with turnout likely to decide the outcome. Kim Leadbeater, the Labour MP behind the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, warned that defeat for the bill would end hopes of changing the law for another decade as she rejected claims of rushing through reform. Only five amendments from MPs opposed to the bill will be put to a vote before the Commons decides whether to approve the bill in its third reading. Critics said this left key problems unaddressed and have unsuccessfully pleaded for more time.
Daily Mail
a day ago
- Health
- Daily Mail
Keir Starmer insists assisted dying Bill has not been rushed as dozens of MPs say it should receive more scrutiny
Keir Starmer has dismissed warnings that the proposed legalisation on assisted dying is being rushed. The Prime Minister insisted that plenty of time had been devoted to the controversial plan despite dozens of his MPs pleading for it to receive more scrutiny. He also indicated that he will back the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill in the knife-edge vote tomorrow. But he said he would not try to sway opinion as the Government has remained officially neutral – though he previously promised leading campaigner Dame Esther Rantzen he would make time for assisted dying to come to the Commons. Asked during the G7 summit if he will be voting for the Bill, the PM replied: 'I've done my best not to influence the vote. My own view, I think, is well known and long-standing.' When pressed as to whether the critics within his party were wrong to raise concerns about the process, Sir Keir replied: 'It is a matter for individual parliamentarians. 'There has been a lot of time discussing it, both in Parliament and beyond Parliament, and quite right too, it's a really serious issue.' Since the bill passed its first Parliamentary hurdle in November, Kim Leadbeater, the Labour MP behind has introduced a series of changes, including removing the safeguard of a High Court judge signing off applications A majority of 55 voted in favour the Bill last year, meaning that 28 would need to switch sides to bring it down, and at least a dozen have publicly turned against it in recent weeks. Even MPs sympathetic to the principle of legalising assisted dying plan to vote against it due to the actions of Labour's Kim Leadbeater. Since the bill passed its first Parliamentary hurdle in November, she has introduced a series of changes, including removing the safeguard of a High Court judge signing off applications. She instead put forward the concept of a panel of experts who would consider requests. Yet many professionals claim her plan is unworkable and more than 1,000 doctors have urged MPs to reject it. Some 50-plus Labour MPs want the third reading vote be delayed, warning the final version of the Bill has not been published and only 12 of 133 proposed amendments have been voted on.
Yahoo
7 days ago
- Health
- Yahoo
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.
Telegraph
7 days ago
- Health
- Telegraph
Hospices that oppose assisted dying ‘could be forced to shut'
Hospices that refuse to offer assisted dying services could be forced to shut if their funding is pulled, palliative care doctors have warned. Almost 350 clinicians involved in end of life care have written to the Health Secretary urging him to promise not to revoke NHS funding for providers if they do not offer assisted dying. They have warned that if hospices were to lose funding as a result of the choice to not provide assisted dying services, they would be at risk of closure. The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill will return to the House of Commons on Friday for further debate. The proposed legislation would mean terminally ill adults in England and Wales with six months left to live could apply for assistance to end their lives, subject to the approval of two doctors and an expert panel. Medical professionals, including doctors, pharmacists and social care workers, would have the right to refuse to take part in providing assisted dying services to patients. However, the Bill as currently drafted does not allow employers, including hospices and care homes, the right to refuse to offer assisted dying on their premises. The lack of protections for providers to opt out on religious or ethical grounds has prompted concerns from doctors in the sector about the risk of losing funding. Campaigners have pointed to an example in Canada where a hospice in British Columbia was forced to close its doors after the Government pulled $1.5 million (£1.1 million) of funding when it refused to offer medical assistance in dying (MAID). It comes as the Children's Commissioner for England warned that teenagers were worried about the future possibility of the Bill extending to 16 or 17 year olds. In a letter to Wes Streeting, 347 working clinicians, including 124 consultants and doctors in palliative medicine, demanded clarity on protections available to hospices and care homes. 'Some hospices may be forced to close should they be denied NHS funding because they are unwilling to participate in the provision of assisted suicide,' the letter says. 'Our hospices provide expert, community based, specialist palliative care which is world-leading in our sector. We do not want to kill our patients, nor have them fearful that we may do just that. Let us do the job we are trained to do.' They added: 'We urgently request clarity from the Government that no hospice will be denied public funding because they are unwilling to facilitate assisted suicide on their premises or be placed under a duty to provide such a service.' 'Conscientious objection' A third of hospice funding is provided by the Government, with the other two thirds charitably funded. During the Bill's committee stage Danny Kruger, a Conservative MP against the legalisation of assisted dying, said that he was concerned about the risk of institutions being 'defunded'. He told the committee in March: 'I am concerned about the implication of that, which might be that institutions that did not wish to provide or facilitate assisted suicide but did receive public money, for instance care homes or hospices, would be at risk of losing that money – essentially being defunded – on the grounds of their conscientious objection to participating in assisted dying.' Dr Gillian Wright, a spokesman for Our Duty of Care, warned that without stronger protections for hospices, doctors could leave the sector 'in their droves'. 'The palliative care and hospice sectors are already in crisis, massively underfunded and understaffed. Yet this Bill will compound the problem by failing to give hospices who do not support killing their patients an opt out. 'This will force many doctors, nurses and even volunteers to make a Hobbesian choice to stick to their clinical, ethical or moral objections against assisted suicide, or take part in ending someone's life. This is likely to see medical and ancillary staff leave the sector in their droves. Personnel who can't be easily replaced.' She added: 'There are problems with the failure of MPs to give hospices the right to opt out. There may be pressure on hospices to provide assisted suicide or lose funding.' Meanwhile, Dame Rachel De Souza, the Children's Commissioner, warned that teenagers had expressed concerns about the possibility of the eligibility of assisted dying later expanding to cover 16 and 17 year olds. In a statement on Friday, she said: 'Even at this major stage of the Bill's passage through Parliament, children's views have at best been sidelined, at worst written off entirely simply because they would not fall within the scope of the current scope of legislation. 'They have spoken passionately about their worries that this Bill could be extended further. We need only to look to other models, such as Canada, where proposals for assisted death to be expanded to 'mature minors' – children – are a live issue, to understand the source of their concern'.
