I try to keep my diary column focused on the interesting constituency activities I do as an MP. Meeting inspiring Northamptonians is my favourite part of my role. But I want to take the chance this week to use my column to discuss the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, also known as the assisted dying or assisted suicide bill.
When the bill is put to a vote this week, I will vote against it. Here’s why.
For those of you that don’t know, the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill would allow people with a terminal illness, who are expected to live for less than six months, to ask for help from an NHS doctor to end their life. They’d need to meet certain conditions, such as being mentally sound and making the decision voluntarily, but ultimately if agreed, the state would facilitate their death.
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill does not provide everyone suffering from terminal illness the chance to end their life if they choose to do so. Many of you will have felt the pain of someone passing away at the hands of dementia. This bill doesn’t cover those people. Many of you will have known someone, or heard of someone, who have spent their final years in agony, perhaps addicted to painkillers, drugs or alcohol. This bill doesn’t cover those people either.
The bill would only apply to people who have been given less than six months to live as the result of a specific terminal illness. But I am sure many of you will have seen stories of people given weeks to live, who go on to live for years more or even make a full recovery. An example that many will be familiar with is that of Sir Stephen Hawkings, who was given two years to live at the age of 21 but went on to live until he was 76.
I can’t even begin to imagine what it feels like to be diagnosed with a Terminal Illness. But from speaking to people while deciding how to vote on this bill, I am sure that it is one of the hardest things that anybody could ever go through. This bill risks presenting people with an option to kill themselves when they’re at the lowest point of their lives. In need, and in pain, when other options are available to them. When paired with the fact that hospice care in this country is overstretched and in crisis, it creates the real risk that people will die needlessly, because they won’t be being presented with a real or fair choice.
The Royal College of Physicians doesn’t support the bill. They say it doesn’t provide adequate protection of patients and professionals.
The Royal College of Psychiatrists don’t support the bill. They say there are too many unanswered questions about the safeguarding of people with mental illness.
Last week more than 1000 Doctors urged MPs to vote against the bill. They say that it represents a “real threat to both patients and the medical workforce”.
We have already voted once on the bill, back in January. This stage is called the ‘second reading’, where MPs vote on the draft wording of the bill. Many have said they voted for it at second reading to allow it to progress through to a stage in the legislative process called ‘committee stage’, where it is reviewed and scrutinised by a panel of cross-party MPs, and they try to fix problems with the bill. As well as amendments and adjustments made by this group, other MPs can also put forward amendments, and these final adjustments have been debated in two Friday sessions of the House of Commons.
Rather than allowing adjustments to be made , such as stopping doctors discussing ending their life with children, banning the advertising of assisted suicide on TV, and blocking family members from knowing if their loved one is going to end their life, the pro-assisted dying campaigners have fought to block any improvements. Repeated attempts to improve the legislation have been voted down in an attempt to push this legislation through quickly.
I am worried that the bill still lacks protections needed to safeguard vulnerable people. It does not stop hospices, care staff and NHS staff from being prosecuted for assisting suicide. The rushed drafting of the wording leaves legal loopholes that could allow private companies to make a profit from ending people’s lives.
There are a million uncertainties surrounding the bill and the potential impact that it could have. But one thing we do know for certain. If passed, the assisted dying bill will change our health and social care service as we know it.
I know this is a difficult subject. I’ve spoken to passionate people on both sides. People with loved ones in pain, and people worried about what this law could mean for the most vulnerable. But when laws change, so do attitudes. If we open that door and allow Government to conclude that some lives are no longer worth living, it will be a very hard door to close.
It’s my view that we should be investing in care, pain relief, and dignity. Not giving up on people when they need help the most. That’s why I’ll be voting against this bill.