In the run-up to the vote on legalising assisted suicide in the UK parliament last November, Labour MP Kim Leadbeater boasted about how ‘safe’ the practice would be. Her bill, the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, had a number of safeguards that, she claimed, made this piece of legislation uniquely robust. In particular, she made much of the fact that it would require every patient who wished to die to be signed off by a High Court judge. She and her supporters argued that this would ensure that England and Wales did not go the way of virtually every other country in the world that has legalised assisted suicide and euthanasia, with ever-more people qualifying for the procedure. More than 60 MPs specifically cited this safeguard as a reason why they voted for the bill at the second-reading stage.
Now, Leadbeater has taken a sledgehammer to that safeguard. It has been fully dismantled, after the committee charged with reviewing the legislation voted 15 to seven in favour of its removal. Now, if the bill passes, applications will be assessed by a three-person panel, including a psychiatrist, a social worker and a ‘senior legal figure’. A commissioner, who must be either a sitting or former judge, will oversee it.
Leadbeater’s reversal will hardly ease the concerns of her critics, particularly those worried that the more vulnerable members of society remain at risk of being coerced into an assisted death. The panel members who have to approve applications will not be required to know the patients in question. They will be under no obligation to meet with them in person. In certain circumstances, they will have no communication with the patients at all. The new clause that would introduce Leadbeater’s panels states that under ‘exceptional circumstances’ the panel members would not be obliged to hear from the person seeking assisted suicide. There is no detail, however, about what would constitute such ‘exceptional circumstances’.
It seems extraordinary that, under Leadbeater’s new plan, there could be occasions where a panel signs off on a request for an assisted suicide having had no contact at all with the applicant. How on Earth can anyone consider this an adequate safeguard? There seems ample scope for abuse.
This is far from the only problem raised by Leadbeater’s new panel system. The process for becoming one of these panel members is almost certain to be self-selecting. In other words, those who wish to be on them will likely be supporters of assisted suicide. The commissioner overseeing the panel will be appointed by prime minister Keir Starmer, an avid supporter of assisted suicide.
The role and expertise of the social workers and psychiatrists, meanwhile, will be heavily restrained by the fact that they won’t know the applicants and may never meet them in person. Their ability to grapple with what may be highly complex cases involving potential coercion will be extremely limited.
Leadbeater’s bill is now weaker than it was when the committee started its proceedings. Vulnerable people who were already at risk are now even more so. If this bill were to pass in its current form, large numbers of the most marginalised people in our country would be in grave danger of being coerced into early deaths.
For those representing the Down’s Syndrome community, people with anorexia and a number of other groups, these are troubling times. Good-faith amendments to explicitly protect a number of these groups were rejected by Leadbeater and her allies. In the House of Commons earlier this month, one Leadbeater supporter, Tory MP Kit Malthouse, even sought to silence critics from expressing concerns about the committee. Given how high the stakes are, the key focus should be on the arguments for and against the bill, not on the sensitivities of its supporters.
Later this month, when the committee process is likely to come to an end, responsibility will pass over to all MPs in parliament. They will have an opportunity to be the collective voice and safeguard for some of the most vulnerable people in our society, by voting down this dangerous bill. They must grab this opportunity with both hands.
Tom Hunt is a former Conservative MP.
