Latest news with #terminalIllness
The Independent
3 hours ago
- Health
- The Independent
Why the assisted dying bill could be voted down
Kim Leadbeater's Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill is undergoing its third reading and final Commons vote, marking a historic parliamentary moment. The Bill, which previously passed its second reading with a 55-majority on principle, faces a very close vote, with predictions ranging from a narrow win to a narrow defeat. If passed, the Bill would permit the state to end lives for terminally ill individuals with six months to live, allowing doctors to offer it as an option. A significant change to the Bill removes the requirement for a judge to sign off, replacing it with an expert panel, a safeguard cited by over 100 MPs in earlier debates. Concerns persist about the potential for the legislation to expand over time, with critics pointing to other countries where similar laws have broadened beyond terminal illness to include mental health and other issues.
Yahoo
10 hours ago
- Health
- Yahoo
UK MPs to hold crunch vote on assisted dying
British lawmakers could take a major step towards legalising euthanasia on Friday when they hold a knife-edge vote on whether to allow assisted dying for terminally ill people. MPs will either progress the legislation to the House of Lords upper chamber for further scrutiny or end it entirely following several hours of impassioned debate. Protesters both for and against the contentious bill are expected to gather outside parliament as the so-called third reading -- the MPs' last chance to debate its contents -- takes place inside. "It is about real people facing the prospect of a painful and undignified death either for themselves or a loved one," the legislation's proposer, MP Kim Leadbeater, told AFP in a statement. "The injustice and inhumanity of the status quo means we cannot wait any longer to offer them the hope of a better death." The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill would allow assisted suicide in England and Wales for adults with an incurable illness who have a life expectancy of fewer than six months. They would have to be able to administer themselves the life-ending substance, 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. - Advert ban - Supporters say euthanasia would give the terminally ill greater protections and choice at the end of their lives, but critics worry that vulnerable people could be coerced into dying. The Royal College of Psychiatrists said last month that it had "serious concerns" about the safeguarding of people with mental illness and said it cannot support the bill in its current form. MPs backed the proposed legislation by 330 to 275 votes at an initial vote in parliament last November. 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. Several lawmakers in the 650-seat parliament have subsequently switched positions, and parties are not telling them how to vote, making the outcome difficult to predict. An ITV News tracker of around half the parliamentarians estimates that 153 MPs plan to vote for changing the law, with 141 against. Some 21 remain undecided with another 21 due to abstain. Both the House of Commons and the House of Lords need to approve the legislation before the end of the current parliamentary year, likely sometime in the autumn, or the bill will fail. If it passes and receives royal assent, then it would be four years before an assisted dying service is 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 year 10. Prime Minister Keir Starmer is expected to vote in favour but several of his top ministerial team, including the health and justice secretaries, have publicly opposed changing the law. 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, while the Isle of Man at the end of March became the first British territory to pass an assisted dying bill. pdh/jkb/gv/sco
New York Times
6 days ago
- Health
- New York Times
Why the Euthanasia Slope Is Slippery
This week the Legislature of New York State passed a bill, now sitting on Gov. Kathy Hochul's desk, allowing assisted suicide for people facing a diagnosis that gives them six months or less to live. A few days before the vote, my colleague Katie Engelhart published a report on the expansive laws allowing 'medical assistance in dying' in Canada, which were widened in 2021 to allow assisted suicide for people without a terminal illness, detailing how they worked in the specific case of Paula Ritchie, a chronically ill Canadian euthanized at her own request. Many people who support assisted suicide in terminal cases have qualms about the Canadian system. So it's worth thinking about what makes a terminal-illness-only approach to euthanasia unstable, and why the logic of what New York is doing points in a Canadian direction even if the journey may not be immediate or direct. In a debate about euthanasia I was once asked, by the husband of a woman who sought assisted suicide unsuccessfully before her painful death, what I would have had the doctors offer her in place of the quietus she sought. His implication was that doctors always need to offer something: In most situations, that means care and treatment, but at the exceptional point when nothing further can be given, it's legitimate to expect them to deliver something else. This is the logic that undergirds laws that offer assisted suicide only to the terminally ill. It assumes that the dying have entered a unique zone where the normal promises of medicine can no longer be kept, a state of exception where it makes sense to license doctors to deliver death as a cure. The problem is that a situation where the doctor tells you that there's nothing more to be done for you is not really exceptional at all. Every day, all kinds of people are told that their suffering has no medical solution: people with crippling injuries, people with congenital conditions and people — like Ms. Ritchie — with an array of health problems whose etiology science does not even understand. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Sky News
13-06-2025
- Politics
- Sky News
MPs to vote again on Assisted Dying Bill - will it pass and what has changed?
Why you can trust Sky News A monumental decision for MPs that has been looming on the horizon is now approaching at speed. The Assisted Dying Bill, which would give some terminally ill adults the right to end their lives, is back in the Commons for votes on amendments, with the final vote likely to come next week. There are not many issues like this - literally a matter of life and death - that require MPs to search their consciences and make a personal decision with profound and irreversible consequences. When the Commons first voted on the legislation back in November it passed with a 55 majority. That may seem reasonably comfortable but delving into the numbers reveals that it is flimsier than it first appears. Firstly, it would take just 28 MPs to switch from for to against to bring the bill down. And some of that initial support is quite soft with a significant number voting in favour simply to move the bill to the next stage, have the debate, raise the profile of the issue and make progress on the detail. Now that the final vote is drawing near, they may decide it's gone far enough. There are also the abstainers who could go either way if they do choose to vote at third reading. All this makes the outcome unpredictable, but Sky News has been speaking to MPs to get a sense of where the parliamentary arithmetic is headed. Ahead of the latest round of votes, 20 have confirmed to Sky that their position has changed and although there is movement in both directions it shows that the momentum is mostly one way. Taking this snapshot of MPs, the first time round nine voted for, nine abstained and three voted against. Based on how they say they will vote at the third reading, the numbers are very different - with just four in favour, one abstaining and 15 against. Among those are two ministers, Sir Chris Bryant and Ellie Reeves who are swimming against the tide by declaring that they will now vote in favour. Sir Chris told Sky News: "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… "I also have heard the cries of people who are absolutely miserable, and that's why I will be voting for the bill." Of the many more MPs who have withdrawn their support, Conservative George Freeman is one of a handful who have spoken out. He told Sky: "I want to see a law change, I think Kim [Leadbeater]'s done us a favour… "I think government needs to come back with a properly thought through, properly consulted on, possibly by royal commission. This is a big change, so I want to see law change, but I'm no longer going to vote for this bill." And skewing our figures slightly is Labour MP Emma Hardy, who voted both for and against at second reading but has now settled on against. Just that small number of switchers would still see the legislation over the line, but with a reduced majority of 38, and many believe the vote will be much closer. The main issues that are concerning undecided MPs are, firstly, protecting patients from being forced or coerced into ending their own lives. At the beginning of the parliamentary process it was suggested that a high court judge would sign off every assisted death. That has now been changed to a panel of experts, and some MPs are worried that this represents a watering down of safeguards. Kim Leadbeater, who is behind the law change, says this will actually make it safer. Others point to the way the legislation has been brought to parliament, as a private member's bill, which some argue reduces its robustness. They would like to see it return with the full weight of government behind it. And finally, changes to the timeline have raised a lot of eyebrows with the maximum implementation period extended to four has raised concerns that the bill could be passed in this parliament but not delivered, and would become a divisive issue at the next general election. Despite all this there is still a huge amount of support and all eyes will be on the House of Commons as more debate and votes on amendments get underway, giving us the best sense yet of whether this once in a generation legislation still has a chance.
New York Times
10-06-2025
- Health
- New York Times
New York Moves to Allow Terminally Ill People to Die on Their Own Terms
The New York State Senate approved a bill on Monday that would allow people facing terminal diagnoses to end their lives on their own terms, which the bill's proponents say would grant a measure of autonomy to New Yorkers in their final days. The bill, which passed the State Assembly earlier this year, will now head to the desk of Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, for her signature. It is unclear whether she plans to sign it; a spokesman for her office said she would review it. Eleven states and the District of Columbia have passed laws permitting so-called medical aid in dying. The practice is also available in several European countries and in Canada, which recently broadened its criteria to extend the option to people with incurable chronic illnesses and disabilities. The bill in New York is written more narrowly and would apply only to people who have an incurable and irreversible illness, with six months or less to live. Proponents say that distinction is key. 'It isn't about ending a person's life, but shortening their death,' said State Senator Brad Hoylman-Sigal, a Manhattan Democrat and one of the sponsors of the bill. It passed on Monday night by a vote of 35 to 27, mostly along partisan lines. He framed the measure as a statement of New York's values, citing efforts by Republicans to increase governmental control over people's bodies, including by restricting gender-affirming care and abortion. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
