Terminally ill adults (End of Life) Bill: Why I Voted For This Bill

This is the speech I prepared for the parliamentary debate and the reasoning for my vote

Firstly, Mr Speaker, I would like to thank the MP for Spen Valley for her courage and compassion in bringing this Bill forward. As I have said consistently to my constituents, I believe this debate is needed. We need to be able to talk more openly about death and dying well with our loved ones – and what dying well means to us as a society as a whole. Public opinion on this issue has shifted dramatically. This was also made clear in the results of the recent, careful, evidence-based, 14-month inquiry into Assisted Dying/Assisted Suicide by the Health and Social Care Select Committee.

I am also grateful to the many constituents who have taken the time to write to me, often with deeply personal, moving and often harrowing stories that have shaped their own thinking on this issue. I promised all of them that I would consider all the evidence and be open to all arguments and I feel I have immersed myself fully and can confirm that a huge amount of information and briefings has been available to us – and I have taken the time to meet constituents and campaigners and read the many handwritten and email letters sent to me.

To me, there are two fundamental questions here: whether I agree with the principle in itself and then whether the conditions, means and safeguards are in place for this to be implemented in such a way that the rights of some individuals do not cause harm to others:

1. The Principle. On the first question, after deep reflection, I do believe in the compassionate right for those few people with a terminal illness, nearing the end of their lives and mentally competent, to be allowed to have the CHOICE - in very limited circumstances - for a safe, caring, dignified and pain-free way to shorten their death on their own terms. I have heard many traumatic stories about the current situation which, as the status quo, is unsafe and cruel: with hundreds of terminally ill people a year trying to take matters into their own hands, taking their own lives in unimaginable ways  -  traumatic also for those around them, loved ones and professionals alike. One of the very powerful stories is that of Cath Shepheard, Emma Windred’s sister. Cath – a keen and active outdoors woman who loved life - died last year following her agonising personal decision to take control of the end via Voluntarily Stopping Eating and Drinking. She felt robbed of the way she wanted to die and campaigned hard for the law to change. Her sister now continues the battle for others to have the option of the gentle, dignified death her sister was denied.
2. Safeguards. On the question of safeguards, I share the concerns of many constituents and professionals, including the dedicated staff at the Arthur Rank Hospice that provides incredible palliative, end of life care under difficult conditions for people across South Cambridgeshire and beyond. There is a disgraceful crisis in adult social care – something that we as Liberal Democrats have been speaking up about consistently – and there is clear evidence that palliative care is seriously underfunded. I am of the opinion that, rather than deferring or denying the individual right to die well, this should be the rallying cry to finally bring about urgent, cross-party talks to fix and fund social care and that, as the results of the Select Committee Inquiry concluded: that high quality end of life care should be available to all. This should happen and be called for, independent of this Bill and if the debate around this Bill helps to bring this about, all the better. Without this happening, many people already are in pain, frightened and feel a burden to their loved ones - something which should be avoidable.

It is very powerful to read testimony from constituents who have had the opportunity to be there for their loved ones until the last moment, no matter how distressing and painful this was for all, and how that experience in itself was so valuable, enabling in the case of Sandra in my constituency, a very special Christmas meal that Sandra and her family will cherish for ever. I want to stress that the right enshrined in this Bill provides people with the option, the choice. Evidence shows that, with quality end of life care and pain management, this option is not always acted upon. However, having agency over the last moments of their life, knowing the option is there is sometimes enough for many to be able to plan together a dignified and caring way to die, bringing everyone around them and having those special moments – with and without acting upon the option.

It is where the conversations with loved ones can begin and careful, caring plans can be made.

There is much yet to be scrutinised in terms of the safeguards that are to be defined in the Bill. I have carefully read the briefings from experts in the legal, social care, medical, psychological and palliative fields of work. I will be voting for this Second Reading in order to provide the opportunity for that further scrutiny to happen. As it stands, it is said that this Bill does contains some of the most stringent safeguards of all existing legislation – however, contributions across the Chamber and from professional bodies have pointed to certain areas that could benefit from further scrutiny. I welcome ongoing debate and that important scrutiny if the House determines this goes to a 3rd reading, report in the Commons and the Lords.