Assisted Suicide Bill Released Just Days Before Vote

November 13, 2024 TruthUSA

Campaign groups advocating for the sanctity of life have raised concerns about the expedited publication of the bill, fearing that the safeguards may not be sufficient.

A Private Members’ Bill addressing assisted suicide has been introduced with less than three weeks before the initial vote in the House of Commons.

Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, the proposer of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, asserted on Tuesday that the suggested legislation is among the most stringent globally.

The bill, expected to be debated on Nov. 29, stipulates that only mentally competent adults with terminal illnesses, anticipated to live less than six months, and a clear wish to end their lives can apply for assisted suicide.

According to the bill, the application must be endorsed by two physicians and a High Court judge.

Coercion into agreeing to assisted suicide would be punishable by up to 14 years in prison under the proposed legislation.

Leadbeater affirmed that the process, applicable to England and Wales, would incorporate numerous safeguards and protections, potentially making it the strongest legislation of its kind worldwide.

‘Rush It Through’

Advocates for the right to life have expressed reservations regarding the swift timeline for reviewing Leadbeater’s bill, cautioning against hasty decision-making without adequate scrutiny.

Right to Life UK highlighted that during the last vote on the matter in 2015, MPs had almost two months to review the bill before casting their votes. Following thorough scrutiny, MPs decisively rejected the measures in a 330 to 118 vote.

Catherine Robinson, the spokesperson for Right to Life UK, stated on Monday: “It’s unacceptable that MPs and the public are only seeing this Bill a mere two weeks before it is put to a vote.

“The proposed changes are significant, and the rush to pass it without proper review is unjust and undemocratic.”

Christian Action Research and Education (CARE) echoed these concerns, arguing that a two-week window is insufficient for such an important decision.

CARE suggested that this short timeframe might indicate an intentional attempt to pressure MPs into hastily deciding on critical matters involving complex ethical and practical considerations, which is both undemocratic and irresponsible.

No ‘Pressure’ From Starmer

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer assured that there would be a free vote in Parliament if a Private Members’ Bill was presented concerning the legalization of assisted suicide.

Starmer previously expressed his personal support for a change in the law but refrained from automatically endorsing Leadbeater’s bill, emphasizing the need for a detailed examination of the proposals.

Speaking from COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, the prime minister reiterated that he “will not be putting pressure on any MP to vote one way or the other.”

Several prominent Labour lawmakers have already indicated their opposition to the measures, including Secretary of State for Health and Social Care Wes Streeting, who expressed concerns about coercion and the perceived obligation for individuals to end their lives. He also highlighted the inadequate state of palliative care to offer terminally ill individuals a genuine choice.

Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood also stated that she would vote against the bill due to religious convictions, emphasizing that “death is not a service the state should provide.”

The Labour-controlled Welsh Senedd also rejected a proposal urging the devolved assembly to endorse a change in the law in Westminster. Those opposing assisted suicide included First Minister Eluned Morgan and Secretary for Health and Social Care Jeremy Miles.

No Safeguards Strong Enough

Critics of the proposals caution that even with asserted “robust” safeguards, vulnerable individuals could potentially be coerced into accepting state-administered suicide.

Campaign group Our Duty of Care, representing medical professionals, wrote to the prime minister, contending that drafting assisted suicide laws with foolproof protections against coercion and future expansion is impractical. They pointed to Canada as an example where safeguards deteriorated within five years.

“The existing law prohibiting killing serves as a safeguard. The current legal framework protects the vulnerable,” stated Our Duty of Care’s letter authored by Dr. Gillian Wright and Dr. David Randall.

MPs are encouraged to invest in improved support systems for terminally ill individuals instead of endorsing assisted suicide through legislation.

CARE asserted, “We believe that the UK’s current approach, focusing on life-affirming care addressing physical, mental, and spiritual needs of individuals grappling with illness, is the most ethical and compassionate, and we urge lawmakers to uphold this approach in the future.”

PA Media contributed to this report.

Source link