Skip to main content

Assisted Dying Progress & Pitfalls

Navigating the Complexities of the Assisted Dying Bill: Progress & Pitfalls

One of the many tasks as a Disability Officer for The Green Party Telford and Wrekin is keeping a close eye on bills as they go through the Commons and the Lords.

I have been watching with keen interest the progress of the Assisted Dying Bill. On Tuesday 28th January, the committee charged with overseeing the bill came together. The only people that were called to speak with them were so called "professionals", none of which have any disability or experiance of disability, a major concern to myself, and many DPO's (Disabled Peoples Organisations). 


The ongoing debate around the assisted dying bill is no small matter. With its potential to profoundly impact the lives of countless individuals, particularly those with disabilities, the proposed amendments, creating another 35 pages of changes, have been met with both praise and criticism. As we delve into these changes, it’s clear that while the bill is moving in a positive direction, significant gaps remain that must be addressed.


Strengthening Safeguards

One of the most commendable aspects of the proposed amendments is the emphasis on protecting vulnerable individuals from undue influence. By incorporating terms like "unduly influenced" and "encouraged," the bill gains an essential layer of protection against external pressures. This ensures that decisions about assisted dying are made freely and independently, a crucial step in safeguarding personal autonomy.


Furthermore, the requirement for decisions to be made for one's own sake, rather than for the benefit of others, adds another robust safeguard against coercion. This change is vital in ensuring that the motivations behind such profound decisions are genuinely personal.


The specification for the Secretary of State to regulate and update conditions provides clarity and consistency. By excluding mental illness and disability as criteria for terminal illness, the bill offers significant protections for disabled individuals, preventing their conditions from being misinterpreted, but still need strengthening further.


Addressing the Weak Spots

Despite these strengths, the bill is not without its weaknesses. A major point of concern is the shift from "capacity" to "ability." While capacity is a well-established legal concept, the term "ability" is more ambiguous and open to interpretation. This change could lead to inconsistencies in application, potentially weakening the bill’s protective intent.

Another area that demands attention is the prognosis requirement. While requiring "reasonable certainty" strengthens the rigor of assessments, removing the six-month requirement could broaden eligibility in ways that might lead to inconsistent applications. A careful balance is needed to ensure that eligibility criteria remain both fair and precise.


The Unaddressed Necessity: Palliative and End-of-Life Care

A glaring omission in the bill is the lack of a legal requirement for fully funded palliative care and end-of-life care. This is a critical issue that must be addressed before the bill can progress to the statute books. Without ensuring that individuals have access to comprehensive care options, the bill falls short of providing a truly compassionate framework for those facing the end of life.


Building on Progress

The detailed capacity assessment requirements and training for medical practitioners are positive steps forward, enhancing protections and ensuring that practitioners are equipped to assess patient circumstances accurately. Additionally, mandatory palliative care options and independent interview requirements further bolster the bill’s integrity.

However, as it stands, the bill requires further refinement. The introduction of regulatory procedures and alignment with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 are promising, yet the absence of mandated palliative care funding is a significant flaw that cannot be overlooked.


While the assisted dying bill is on the right path with its thoughtful amendments and strengthened safeguards, it is imperative that Members of Parliament address its critical shortcomings. By ensuring comprehensive care options and clarifying the term "ability," the bill can better serve its intended purpose, offering protection and dignity to those making the profound decision to end their life.


Mark Webster

Disability Officer 

The Green Party 

(Telford and Wrekin)

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Wolf in Reformist Clothing

A Wolf in Reformist Clothing: Dissecting the Structural Ableism of Reform UK's SEND "Vision" As a Green Party Disability Officer with three decades of experience, and as a parent who has spent 15 years battling intransigent local authorities for my neurodivergent son, and others, I watched Richard Tice’s press statement with a familiar, corrosive fury. This is not a blueprint for reform. It is a masterclass in the very structural ableism and neoliberal betrayal that has manufactured the SEND crisis. So come with me, and let’s dissect it with the critical eye that it demands. The Insidious Linguistics of Erasure Tice with his core creed: “Nobody's disabled, people are differently abled.” This phrase is not progressive; it is erasure. It is a feel-good, ablest euphemism designed to sanitise the reality of disability in a society structured against us. Disability is not a matter of “different ability”; it is an interaction between impairment and t...
Post a Comment
Read more

Farage's Cruelty-Autism

Farage's Cruelty & Misinformation on Autism: A Call for Compassion and Truth in Autism Awareness Month - by Mark Webster, Disability Officer with The Green Party Telford and Wrekin  As Autism Awareness and Acceptance Month 2025 draws to a close,  the need for understanding, compassion, and factual discussion about autism and the SEND (Special Educational Needs and Disabilities) system has never been more urgent. Yet, Nigel Farage and Reform UK have chosen this crucial moment to spread harmful and inaccurate narratives about autism diagnosis, compounding stigma and misunderstanding for autistic people and their families across the UK. SEND (Special Educational Needs and Disabilities) is a blanket term that refers to conditions or difficulties that make it hard for a person to learn or access education compared to others, such as learning disabilities, physical disabilities, or emotional and behavioral challenges.  Farage’s Harmful Claims In a series of recent statemen...
Post a Comment
Read more

LibDem Conference 2025

Following last week's observations of the Reform UK Ltd conference, I had hoped that there would be nothing to report from the Liberal Democrats conference as far as disability is concerned. How wrong was I? While at the conference their leader, Sir Ed Davey, stocked the fires of the hostile environment towards the sick and disabled, using tired old tropes and unsupported figures! See video For istance, Sir Ed, sounding very right wing himself, regurgitated the "fact" that there is widespread fraud by those claiming PIP (Personal Independence Payments) while talking with a radio broadcaster see video While fraud has seen an increase, from 0.0% to 0.4% which is approximately £1.2 billion, and is born out by the governments own 2025 figures. To put that in context, the welfare bill is £303.3 billion per year. Further comparison shows that tax fraud in the UK figures were £48.8 billion a year, and known tax evasion was £0.7 billion. So it would take a person on a...
Post a Comment
Read more