The MP behind the assisted dying Bill will be joined by bereaved and terminally ill people as she makes her case for a change in the law ahead of a crucial vote on Friday.
Kim Leadbeater is expected to re-state her argument that dying people must be given choice at the end of their lives, but opponents of her Bill have warned it fails to guarantee protections for society’s most vulnerable.
Friday will be the first time the Bill has been debated and voted on in its entirety since last year’s historic yes vote, when MPs supported the principle of assisted dying for England and Wales by a majority of 55.
MPs are entitled to have a free vote on the Bill, meaning they decide according to their conscience rather than along party lines.
The relatively narrow majority means every vote will count on Friday, to secure the Bill’s passage to the House of Lords for further debate and voting.
An an example, the Bill would fall if 28 MPs switched directly from voting yes to no, but only if all other MPs voted exactly the same way as they did in November, including those who abstained.
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has indicated he will continue to back the Bill, as he did last year, saying earlier this week that his “position is long-standing and well-known” on assisted dying.
Health Secretary Wes Streeting, while describing Ms Leadbeater’s work on the proposed legislation as “extremely helpful”, confirmed in April that he still intended to vote against it.
While supporters of the Bill say it is coming back to the Commons with better safeguards after more than 90 hours of parliamentary time spent on it to date, opponents claim the process has been rushed and that changes to the Bill mean it is now weaker than it was when first introduced.
Significant changes since it succeeded in the initial vote in Parliament include the replacement of the High Court safeguard with expert panels, and a doubling of the implementation period to a maximum of four years for an assisted dying service to be in place should the Bill pass into law.
Academic and disability campaigner Miro Griffiths has sent an open letter to MPs, asking them not to endorse the “perilous piece of legislation” even if they support assisted dying in principle.
He wrote: “I would ask you to devote your energy to improving ethical and progressive forms of support: blanket suicide prevention, palliative care, and measures that create a more just and inclusive society for disabled people. This is the better way forward.”
Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson, who would have a vote should the Bill make its way to the House of Lords, said: “We are constantly being told that this Bill is not for disabled people and there will not be coercion.
“Coercion is an absolute reality in today’s society, and in every jurisdiction where assisted dying has been brought in, it has expanded either through legislation, the court system or practice.
“It is very easy to see that this route will be suggested to disabled people who will be made to feel a burden.”
The Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych) stated last month that it has “serious concerns” about the safeguarding of people with mental illness and said it cannot support the Bill in its current form.
Ahead of Friday’s vote, Dr Annabel Price from the college said that as it stands the involvement of psychiatrists in expert panels is “deeply troubling” as they would not have “enough space or time to carry out proper, holistic assessments” and warned of the “risk (of) making irreversible decisions based on treatable suffering”.
Countering this, a number of psychiatrists recently expressed their support for the assisted dying Bill, voicing concern and distancing themselves from the opposition stance taken by their professional medical body.
Seven RCPsych members, including a former college president and vice-president, wrote to MPs to voice their backing for the Bill, describing it as “workable, safe and compassionate” with a “clear and transparent legal framework” they argue is “far preferable to the unjust status quo, where we know dying people seek to exercise choice at the end of life, but without any upfront safeguards, routine oversight or support from relevant clinicians”.
Meanwhile, Dame Esther Rantzen’s daughter Rebecca Wilcox said she is “really hopeful” the Bill can pass the major vote, as she warned against “scaremongering” by opponents.
Read More
