Analysis
England and Wales approved assisted suicide with broad support
The countries join the likes of Canada, the U.S. state of Oregon and the Netherlands, which have given some relief to many who find themselves trapped in conditions of excruciating and prolonged suffering.
In 2015, at the height of the Tory era, it had been soundly defeated, albeit in a different form. But on Friday, the Terminally Ill Adults (End of life) Bill comfortably passed “second reading,” the stage of the process that is a prelude to the continuation of debate and amendments to a text that will then be debated in the Lords.
The vote was 330 in favor, 275 against: a substantial majority of 55 in support of a bill that in a couple of years is set to revolutionize the relationship between the state and citizens regarding death. In England and Wales – as Scotland and Northern Ireland are legislatively “devolved” – mentally able adults with an incurable disease who have a life expectancy of less than six months will be allowed to end their own lives with the help of two independent physicians. To protect the free will of patients, anyone found to have pressured them into making the decision will be punished with 14 years in prison. Unlike in the other 27 countries which recognize this right, a High Court judge will have to give final approval.
But it was certainly not this last point alone that divided the for and against camp, both of which included members of all parties in Parliament. It was the ethical dilemma that transcends political affiliations, as evidenced by the positions that cut across party ideology. This was also the reason why Prime Minister Starmer avoided a party line and allowed all Labour MPs to vote freely according to their conscience.
The historic result came at the end of five hours of debate in the Commons, marked by touching and emotional testimonies from all who were able to speak (no less than 160 MPs registered to do so), laying bare their own relationship with mortality and death, both their own and that of their loved ones.
Visibly moved after the vote, the Bill's sponsor, Labor MP Kim Leadbeater – a Yorkshire native and sister of the late Jo Cox, murdered in 2016 by a racist assassin in camo gear – was cheered by supporters of the cause. She thanked all those who voted in favor and urged constructive dialogue with those against to make improvements to the text in the next stages. It will now take at least another six months to complete the process, and from enactment at least a year and a half for the new law to be “road tested.”
The votes laid bare how diverse the base of support was: in addition to Starmer and Finance Minister Reachel Reeves, former Tory premier Rishi Sunak, former Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt, acting Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, and Environment Secretary Ed Miliband all voted in favor. Predictable “no” votes included Tory leader Kemi Badenoch, Nigel Farage (Reform UK), Liz Truss, Theresa May, but also some big Labour names such as Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner, Foreign Secretary David Lammy, and particularly Health Secretary Wes Streeting, who said he had voted against both because of his Christian convictions and because of the extra pressure the legislation will put on the NHS, stretched to the brink.
Starmer, who had insisted that those in his cabinet tamp down their attacks on the bill, was particularly bothered by Streeting's speech and ended up giving him a stern talking-to. It was much the same with Justice Minister Shabana Mahmood, currently the country's most prominent Muslim woman, who railed against the law, as expected, on religious grounds.
England and Wales will now join the likes of Canada, the U.S. state of Oregon and the Netherlands, which have legislated along the same lines to give some relief to many who find themselves trapped in conditions of excruciating and prolonged suffering without being able to decide to end it. But none of these countries involve the justice system as much as the U.K. will – another aspect that has drawn criticism beside the “natural” ethical, religious and moral reasons invoked by those who have opposed this decision.
In addition to setting a precedent that could broaden the option of taking one's own life and make it available to a potentially growing category of ill people – who might be induced to feel like a burden on their relatives, in a near future in which the number of the elderly will tend to increase – there is concern about an increasing percentage of such requests affecting the already-overburdened national justice system. On the other hand, the condition that the terminally ill have a life expectancy of no more than six months has also drawn criticism: a large number of people doomed by their illness to a painful as well as lengthy decline will not be able to avail themselves of this law.
Originally published at https://ilmanifesto.it/morte-assistita-il-primo-passo-di-inghilterra-e-galles on 2024-11-30