New assisted dying bill set for parliamentary debate
The bill would bring the UK in line with several European countries where assisted dying is already permitted in different forms.
Disability campaigners from 'Dignity in Dying' hold placards as they demonstrate outside The Palace of Westminster on April 29, 2024, during a gathering in favour of the proposals to legalise assisted suicide in the UK. (Photo: Getty Images)
By EasternEyeOct 16, 2024
A LABOUR MP is set to introduce a bill in parliament that could legalise assisted dying, marking the first vote on the issue in almost ten years.
Currently, euthanasia is illegal in the UK, but if Kim Leadbeater's proposed legislation passes, it would give terminally ill individuals the option to choose how they end their lives. The bill would bring the UK in line with several European countries where assisted dying is already permitted in different forms.
In England, Wales, and Northern Ireland, assisted suicide carries a maximum penalty of 14 years in prison. In Scotland, although not a specific offence, aiding someone's death can result in charges like murder. Efforts to legalise assisted dying have been rejected in the past, but public opinion appears to be changing. Scotland, with its own legal system and health policies, is currently pursuing a similar change.
The last time the parliament debated assisted dying was in 2015, and the proposal was defeated. However, surveys now indicate growing public support for terminally ill people to have the option to end their lives. Keir Starmer had promised during his recent election campaign to allocate parliamentary time for the discussion.
The issue has gained further momentum due to a campaign led by TV broadcaster Esther Rantzen, who has terminal cancer.
Leadbeater has criticised the current law, stating that it "hasn't changed for more than 60 years" and can be "cruel and unjust, not only to terminally ill people but to their families and loved ones, too." She wrote in a recent article for The Guardian, "I strongly believe that we should give people facing the most unbearable end to their life a choice about what that end is like."
Opposition to the legislation remains strong, including from Cardinal Vincent Nichols, the UK's highest-ranking Roman Catholic cleric, who has urged followers to contact MPs to oppose the bill.
Alistair Thompson from the group Care Not Killing, which opposes euthanasia, warned that changing the law could lead the country down a "very dangerous route." He referred to Belgium and the Netherlands, which have extended assisted dying to minors, and expressed concern that it could pressure vulnerable individuals to end their lives prematurely.
The details of Leadbeater's bill are expected to resemble a recent proposal in the House of Lords. The proposed law would allow terminally ill people with six months or less to live to choose assisted dying, with the approval of two doctors.
A debate and vote on Leadbeater's bill are expected on 29 November. It is being introduced as a private member’s bill, meaning it is not part of the government’s official legislative programme. The Labour government has promised a free vote for its MPs, leaving the outcome uncertain.
This bill would apply only to England and Wales. In Scotland, separate legislation was introduced earlier this year to legalise assisted dying. Meanwhile, the Isle of Man and Jersey are also progressing towards similar laws.
Belgium and the Netherlands were the first European countries to legalise euthanasia in 2002. Spain authorised it in 2021, and Portugal followed in 2023.
Dr Malhotra, an advisor to US health secretary Robert F Kennedy's Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Action, also serves as Chief Medical Advisor to Make Europe Healthy Again, where he campaigns for wider access to vaccine information.
Dr Aseem Malhotra, a British Asian cardiologist, and research psychologist Dr Andrea Lamont Nazarenko have called on medical bodies to issue public apologies over Covid vaccine mandates, saying they have contributed to public distrust and conspiracy theories.
In a commentary published in the peer-reviewed journal Science, Public Health Policy and the Law, the two argue that public health authorities must address the shortcomings of Covid-era policies and acknowledge mistakes.
They note that while early pandemic decisions were based on the best available evidence, that justification cannot continue indefinitely.
“Until the most urgent questions are answered, nothing less than a global moratorium on Covid-19 mRNA vaccines — coupled with formal, unequivocal apologies from governments and medical bodies for mandates and for silencing truth seekers — will suffice,” they write.
Dr Malhotra, an advisor to US health secretary Robert F Kennedy's Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Action, also serves as Chief Medical Advisor to Make Europe Healthy Again, where he campaigns for wider access to vaccine information.
In the article titled Mandates and Lack of Transparency on COVID-19 Vaccine Safety has Fuelled Distrust – An Apology to Patients is Long Overdue, the authors write that science must remain central to public health.
“The pandemic demonstrated that when scientific integrity is lacking and dissent is suppressed, unethical decision-making can become legitimised. When this happens, public confidence in health authorities erodes,” they write.
They add: “The role of public health is not to override individual clinical judgment or the ethics that govern medical decision-making. This is essential because what once appeared self-evident can, on further testing, prove false – and what may appear to be ‘safe and effective’ for one individual may be harmful to another.”
The article has been welcomed by international medical experts who say rebuilding trust in public health institutions is essential.
“It might be impossible to go back in time and correct these major public health failings, which included support of futile and damaging vaccine mandates and lockdowns and provision of unsupported false and misleading claims regarding knowledge of vaccine efficacy and safety, but to start rebuilding public confidence in health authorities (is) the starting point,” said Dr Nikolai Petrovsky, Professor of Immunology and Infectious Disease, Australian Respiratory and Sleep Medicine Institute, Adelaide.
“This article is a scholarly and timely review of the public health principles that have been so clearly ignored and traduced. Without a complete apology and explanation we are doomed to pay the price for failure to take up the few vaccines that make a highly significant contribution to public health,” added Angus Dalgleish, Emeritus Professor of Oncology, St George’s University Hospital, UK.
By clicking the 'Subscribe’, you agree to receive our newsletter, marketing communications and industry
partners/sponsors sharing promotional product information via email and print communication from Garavi Gujarat
Publications Ltd and subsidiaries. You have the right to withdraw your consent at any time by clicking the
unsubscribe link in our emails. We will use your email address to personalize our communications and send you
relevant offers. Your data will be stored up to 30 days after unsubscribing.
Contact us at data@amg.biz to see how we manage and store your data.