Press "Enter" to skip to content

Assisted Suicide Bill Debate Delayed; Concerns Over Safeguards Persist


(Photo: Getty/iStock)

The legislative journey of the assisted suicide bill continues to unfold with new developments. Originally slated for further parliamentary debate on April 25, the discussion has been postponed to May 16. This delay, announced by Kim Leadbeater, the MP behind the bill, provides additional time for lawmakers to examine recent modifications.

Having passed its second reading in November, the bill has faced scrutiny, particularly concerning the adequacy of its safeguards. Leadbeater addressed her fellow MPs, stating, “I have listened carefully to members on all sides of the issue who have told me that they would welcome more time to consider the amendments made to the bill in committee and to consider the new version of the bill in its entirety as a result of these important changes.”

The initial version of the bill required judicial approval for medically assisted suicide, a clause that swayed many hesitant MPs. However, during committee review, this stipulation was altered to involve a panel of experts instead of a High Court judge.

Criticism has also emerged from various quarters, including over 100 “women of faith” and the Bishop of London, who expressed concerns about the potential misuse of the bill by domestic abusers to pressure victims. Additional apprehensions focus on the bill’s protection measures for individuals with learning disabilities and anorexia.

Despite these objections, Leadbeater maintains that the bill has been fortified through recent amendments, describing it as “the most robust assisted dying legislation in the world.”

Nevertheless, skepticism persists. Caroline Ansell, formerly the MP for Eastbourne and presently the Director of Advocacy and Policy at CARE, commented critically on the changes, noting, “That more than five hundred amendments were tabled to change the bill shows how unsafe it was – it still is.” She added that attempts to incorporate protections for vulnerable groups have been repeatedly thwarted by the bill’s proponents during committee discussions.

This article was originally written by www.christiantoday.com