Assisted dying private members’ bill: ‘The compassionate case for reform’

Assisted dying is an issue that has long weighed on my mind, not just because of my personal convictions about bodily autonomy and choice, but because of a personal experience that profoundly affected my family. A close family member lived with a degenerative neurological condition for many decades which over time severely affected the way she lived. 

Eventually she was unable to eat and she relied on artificial nutrition for a long period. In what became her last months, the type of artificial nutrition she needed changed to a more invasive technique. For her, this was a turning point and she made the decision that, for her, enough was enough; she didn’t want to live in this way.

In a final act of agency, she refused further artificial nutrition, choosing to starve to death rather than prolong a life which had become progressively more restricted. As a mentally competent adult, under current law she was allowed to do this; the law recognised her autonomy in refusing treatment.

I cannot tell you what she would have chosen if assisted dying had been legal in this country. Maybe she would have opted for a faster, more peaceful end. Maybe she would have chosen to wait longer knowing that this was an option. The point is, she should have had the choice. Every person enduring intolerable suffering from an incurable condition should have that option—an option that is currently denied by our laws.

Making decisions

This is what motivates my support for a compassionate assisted dying law. I have always believed in the importance of choice and bodily autonomy, but this experience deepened my conviction that our laws need to change. People like my relative, and many others in similar situations, deserve the right to decide how and when their suffering ends.

The bill has not yet been written, and we don’t even know the title, but one thing is clear: it must be compassionate. It must be for people who are adults, mentally competent, and enduring intolerable suffering from incurable conditions. Unlike the public, parliament may well prefer to limit it to people who are terminally ill, but it should at least not be restricted to those with only six months left to live as previous failed bills have been.

READ MORE: ‘How can Keir Starmer deliver his pledge to rebuild trust in politics?’

The Scottish parliament has been looking at this question for months already. They’ve had international experts, two massive public consultations and a group of well-regarded medical professionals examine this question in depth. The definition of terminal illness they’ve defined is: ‘an advanced and progressive illness from which they are not expected to recover and that can reasonably be expected to cause their death.’ I think this is a compassionate and workable compromise. 

Many conditions bring about unbearable suffering long before the end is in sight. We need to ensure that the law reflects the complexity of these situations and does not impose an arbitrary time frame on someone’s suffering. The length of prognosis has little bearing on the levels of suffering endured.

The discussions around assisted dying in Parliament have been in-depth and thoughtful. Colleagues from all parties and walks of life have been engaging in serious debates, not guided by faith or party lines, but by how this law could be enacted in the most responsible and compassionate way. We have to listen to all voices, especially those who bring invaluable lived experience to the table, such as disability rights activists.

Addressing concerns

I understand the concerns raised by some disabled people. Their voices must be listened to carefully as we draft this legislation. Safeguards will need to be robust and unequivocal to ensure that no one feels coerced, either directly or subtly, into making a decision they do not truly want. This law must never be used to devalue the lives of disabled people or anyone else. The focus must always be on providing choice for those suffering unbearably, not on imposing an option that anyone feels obligated to take.

It’s also important that we move beyond the fear that a compassionate assisted dying law will open the floodgates to abuse. This has not been the experience in the countries where it is already legal. Places like Switzerland and the US state of Oregon, which have had assisted dying laws for decades, show us that with proper regulation and oversight, this option can exist. We should learn from their legislation to craft a law that fits the UK’s needs.

Recap on all of the news and debate from party conference 2024 by LabourList here.

At its heart, this debate is about choice. It is about allowing people who are suffering intolerably to decide for themselves how their lives should end, rather than forcing them to endure unthinkable pain or take matters into their own hands in unsafe, desperate ways. It is about compassion and respecting people’s autonomy to make the most personal and profound decision any of us could face.

As we continue these discussions in Parliament, I urge my colleagues to keep in mind the real people behind the campaign for a compassionate assisted dying law. Think about those who are suffering today, who will suffer tomorrow, and who have suffered in the past without any option for relief. Think about what it means to have control over your own body and your own life. This is not a debate about abstract principles—it is about dignity, choice, and compassion.

We have a chance to craft a law that gives people the choice my relative never had, a choice many in this country are crying out for. Let’s ensure we get it right, with all the care and attention it deserves.

SHARE: If you have anything to share that we should be looking into or publishing about this story – or any other topic involving Labour– contact us (strictly anonymously if you wish) at [email protected]. 

SUBSCRIBE: Sign up to LabourList’s morning email here for the best briefing on everything Labour, every weekday morning. 

DONATE: If you value our work, please donate to become one of our supporters here and help sustain and expand our coverage.

PARTNER: If you or your organisation might be interested in partnering with us on sponsored events or content, email [email protected].