Parliamentarians will soon be asked to vote on whether or not to legalise assisted dying here in the United Kingdom.
This is a devolved issue, and I am aware that there is a similar Bill proceeding through its stages in the Scottish Parliament. However, as an elected member to the UK Parliament, I have a responsibility to vote on all legislation put before us - especially on something as consequential with such far reaching consequences as this.
Firstly, I and many of my colleagues are deeply unhappy with how this issue has been handled by the Government. We were a little over five weeks from the vote when any detail at all was published and are expected to vote following only five hours of debate on the floor of the House due to this not being “Government Business” – essentially, the Government have outsourced this hugely contentious bill to a back-bencher to bring in through the Private Members Bill process. This, it has to be said, is deeply worrying to many and, whatever your view on the issue, I think the British people deserve for this issue, one that would signal a marked change in how we perceive life, death and the role of medical professionals in that process here in this country, to have far more time and consideration before voting.
However, I have to take a decision and, as an MP, defend my position to my constituents and the country. I will be voting against the Assisted Dying legislation.
Not only for the reasons set out above, but because I fundamentally believe in the sanctity of human life and, whilst understanding the obvious, heartfelt, sometimes heart-rending calls for it and do not doubt for one moment the motivations behind those pushing for this change in the law, I would be unable to square my belief that all life is sacred and that the voluntary taking of it should be done only in the most extreme circumstances.
I am also concerned by the examples in Oregon, Canada and the Netherlands - all of which legalised Assisted Dying with the same safeguards as are being proposed in this bill, but that now see far more people, for a fare wider variety of reasons that were ever envisaged, now seeking to end their lives. Instead of heading down this path we should be investing more in palliative care and in the services needed to support those with the complex situations that lead them to a place where the only option, they see, is to take their life.
We must not, in my view, ever move towards a place where someone requiring intense care feels they are a burden on the state or on their family, for whatever reason. In that scenario, too many could feel duty bound to choose to end the suffering of their loved ones by ending their life.
I know the supporters of this bill will say that the safeguards proposed will prevent this from happening. But that is what they said in Canada. We cannot allow it to happen here.
This is a serious debate with heartfelt views on all sides. I respect all of those on each side of this debate. Indeed, some of my greatest friends are arguing passionately for this change. But this Bill requires far more time, thought and consideration before it is presented to the House of Commons for a vote.
And for that reason, as well as the others listed above, I will be voting against it when it comes before us.
