The introduction of an assisted dying bill in the UK Parliament has sparked intense debate among MPs and the public. The proposed legislation, championed by MP Kim Leadbeater, aims to legalize assisted dying for terminally ill adults with less than six months to live. However, the bill faces staunch opposition from some corners, with MPs Diane Abbott and Edward Leigh leading the charge against it.
The Case Against Assisted Dying
In a joint article, Abbott and Leigh argue that the current law, which prohibits assisting in suicide, provides “the only adequate safeguard” against abuse and coercion. They contend that legalizing assisted dying would put vulnerable individuals at risk, particularly the elderly, disabled, and those without access to quality palliative care.
“The law as it stands is an inhumane set of traps,” Leigh and Abbott write, referring to the 1961 Suicide Act which decriminalized suicide but made assisting it a crime. “Encouraging suicide should continue to be a crime.”
The MPs also express concern that assisted dying could become a substitute for proper end-of-life care, especially given the strains on the NHS and social care system. They fear that some may feel pressured to end their lives prematurely due to feeling like a burden on loved ones or society.
Support for Reform
However, proponents of assisted dying reform argue that the current law is broken and causes unnecessary suffering. Former Court of Appeal judge Stephen Sedley points out the contradiction in the 1961 act, which simultaneously decriminalized suicide while criminalizing assisting it.
“[The law] is predicated on something the common law has for centuries set its face against: self-incrimination,” Sedley writes, noting that current DPP guidelines essentially require individuals to incriminate themselves to avoid prosecution for assisting a loved one’s death.
Advocates say that a carefully crafted assisted dying law, with robust safeguards and oversight, would give terminally ill individuals the option to end their suffering on their own terms. They argue it is inhumane to force people to endure against their will or to travel abroad to places like Switzerland to access assisted dying.
Strict Eligibility Criteria
The proposed bill includes strict eligibility criteria, including:
- A terminal illness diagnosis with a prognosis of 6 months or less to live
- Two doctors and a High Court judge must assess and approve each case
- A mandatory waiting period to allow time for reflection
- The person must have mental capacity and make a voluntary, informed decision
Supporters say these measures would provide strong protection against abuse. However, critics argue that no safeguards are foolproof and that it would still leave the door open for vulnerable people to be pressured or manipulated.
Public Opinion Shifting
Public opinion has steadily shifted in favor of legalizing assisted dying in recent years. Polls consistently show that a majority of the British public support a change in the law, subject to strict safeguards. Many have been moved by high-profile cases of terminally ill individuals forced to travel abroad to end their lives.
Faith leaders are divided on the issue. Some, like Archbishop Desmond Tutu before his death, have come out in support of assisted dying as a compassionate option. Others maintain that intentionally ending life is morally wrong under any circumstances.
Parliament to Debate Bill
As the assisted dying bill progresses through Parliament, it is sure to continue sparking impassioned moral, ethical and practical debates. While MPs like Abbott and Leigh vow to oppose the bill, others are determined to see the law change to give the terminally ill control over their final days.
Ultimately, Parliament will have to weigh the various arguments and evidence to determine if it is time for the UK to join the growing number of places worldwide that allow assisted dying in some form. The outcome of this debate will have profound implications for how we approach end-of-life care and personal autonomy in Britain.
As a society, we must grapple with the complex realities and moral quandaries that surround assisted dying. While there are valid concerns on both sides, the fundamental question remains: should terminally ill individuals who are suffering unbearably have the right to end their lives on their own terms? The assisted dying bill offers a chance to finally settle this issue – but reaching a resolution that honors human dignity and protects the vulnerable will be no easy feat.
