Photo credit: www.bbc.com
Opposition Grows Against Assisted Dying Bill in UK Parliament
The upcoming debate in Parliament concerning the assisted dying bill has drawn significant attention, particularly from the United Kingdom’s two longest-serving Members of Parliament (MPs), Diane Abbott and Sir Edward Leigh. Both have publicly expressed their opposition to the proposed legislation, highlighting their concerns despite their differing political affiliations.
In a joint piece featured in the Guardian, Abbott and Leigh emphasized that their political ideologies may vary greatly, yet they share a common apprehension regarding the bill’s potential implications for vulnerable groups in society.
Proposed by backbench Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill aims to provide individuals diagnosed with terminal illnesses and given a prognosis of six months or less to live, the right to choose to end their own life. Leadbeater has asserted that the bill features “the strictest safeguards anywhere in the world” to protect those considering this option.
The legislative process requires the involvement of two independent doctors and a judge to verify that the individual meets the defined criteria for assisted dying, including a clear, independent desire to proceed without any coercion. However, Abbott and Sir Edward have raised alarms, suggesting that the speed at which the bill is being introduced into Parliament limits thorough examination and discussion.
Their concerns are particularly centered on data from regions where assisted suicide has been legalized, indicating that marginalized groups often face heightened risks of feeling compelled to choose assisted death. They pointed out that economically disadvantaged individuals might feel obligated to opt for such measures, fearing they are a burden to society and their families.
“Imagine the pensioner whose children’s financial constraints prevent them from owning their own homes, watching their savings deplete on social care,” they wrote. “Or consider the elderly widow who worries that her hospital stay is occupying a critical NHS bed. They may find themselves feeling a ‘duty to die’.”
Although they acknowledged that such cases may be infrequent, Abbott and Leigh firmly believe that the legalization of assisted dying would inevitably lead to similar pressures, which could not be sufficiently mitigated.
With nearly 80 years of collective parliamentary experience, Abbott and Leigh—referred to as the Mother and Father of the House—expressed concerns about the limited time allowed for examination of the legislation. They noted that the previous similar proposal in 2015 permitted MPs seven weeks for review, whereas the current bill has presented just 18 days before its scheduled debate.
The two MPs underscored that this condensed timeline is particularly challenging given that a significant number of MPs have recently entered Parliament and may be unfamiliar with the legislative process. They pointed out that the Parliament will have met for only 12 weeks by the time the vote on such a crucial bill occurs.
Following the debate, MPs will have the opportunity to cast a free vote, free from party discipline. Should the legislation secure a favorable outcome in its initial vote, it will undergo additional evaluation within both the House of Commons and the House of Lords before it can become law.
Meanwhile, former Labour deputy leader Harriet Harman recently stated that the bill would receive as much time for discussion as needed, asserting that the only deadline is the requirement for completion of all legislative stages by November 2025. “I don’t think the government is showing any signs of wanting to restrict debate,” she added.
Source
www.bbc.com