Rachel has confirmed to constituents that she will be voting in favour of a change in the law on assisted dying.
In a letter to constituents released on Monday 18 November, she said:
I welcome that my colleague and friend Kim Leadbeater MP has introduced this bill, because I believe that now is the right time for parliament to debate this difficult issue. I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain some of the background to the proposed legislation and why I intend to vote for a change in the law when it comes to a vote.
This is of course a highly emotive and sensitive subject, but I know that those on opposite sides of the debate can agree on the need to place the wishes and interests of those experiencing the immense trauma and suffering of terminal illness at the centre of this debate. Quite rightly, the debate will be treated as a conscience issue, where Keir Starmer has made clear that the government is not taking a position and therefore MPs have no obligation to vote along party-political lines.
This is an issue that has long been debated in Britain. When he was the Director of Public Prosecutions, Keir Starmer published legal advice that made clear that those who assisted someone with a terminal illness to die who had freely chosen to end their life would not face prosecution, providing they were motivated by compassion. I believe that was absolutely the right guidance, and I think that same spirit of compassion and understanding should continue to guide our policy in this area.
Nevertheless, it remains unacceptable to me that those with the financial resources to do so are currently able to circumvent the law by travelling to Switzerland to end their lives, while for others that simply isn’t an option. That present situation does not feel just or fair to me.
It has been nearly ten years since the House of Commons last had the opportunity to vote on a change in the law itself. In that time, much has changed both in this country and around the world. The evidence of how assisted dying works in practice and the problems with the current legislation were explored in depth by Parliament’s cross-party Health and Social Care Select Committee earlier this year – you can read their conclusions by clicking here.
As Kim Leadbeater has explained, her bill will seek to give people who are terminally ill with less than six months to live the option to end their own life at a time and in the manner of their choosing, and will include strict eligibility criteria, effective medical and judicial oversight, and strong protections against coercion or abuse.
It’s important to stress that the bill would not in any way detract from the vital importance of the very best palliative care. Nor would it undermine the demands of people with disabilities to lead their very best possible lives with all the care and support they need and deserve. I feel very strongly about both of these issues and would not support a bill if adequate safeguards were not included.
But I believe that with the right safeguards and protections in place, people who are already dying and are mentally competent should be given the choice of a shorter, less painful death, on their own terms and without placing family and loved ones at risk of prosecution. Fundamentally, this bill is about allowing people, in very tightly defined circumstances, to have choice and control over how their lives will end.
There are some arguing that a Private Members Bill is not the right mechanism by which to change the law on assisted dying, and that this Bill is being rushed. I do not accept those arguments. After all, Private Members Bills have long been used to further progressive change in Britain – for example the decriminalization of homosexuality that took place back in the 1960s – and the Leader of the House of Commons has made clear that she is allocating a considerable amount of time towards the scrutiny of this Bill, should it pass ‘Second Reading’ on the 29 November.
Should this Bill pass that vote at the end of the month, the Bill when then move to the next stages of the parliamentary process, where it will be scrutinised in a number of different ways by MPs and by Peers in the House of Lords, with the opportunity for it to be amended if necessary. At the end of that process there will be a final vote in the House of Commons that could change the law sometime next year.
As that process continues, I will continue to listen carefully to the views and perspectives raised in Parliament and those shared with me by constituents – some of whom have already shared immensely personal experiences of death and loss that have shaped their own views on assisted dying. I am immensely grateful to all those who have shared their views with me, and I will continue to keep the experiences they have shared in mind when voting on this difficult issue.
Ultimately, I want to see those suffering the trauma of a terminal illness given the ability to make their own decisions about the time and manner of their death, subject to strict safeguards, and that is why I will be voting in favour of a change to the law on 29 November.