Skip to main content

Assisted Dying Fri May 15th 2025

Will Our MPs Support or Reject the Terminally Ill Adults Bill Today?

Shaun Davies Labour MP Telford

Later today, the House of Commons is set to debate a controversial piece of legislation known as the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill. This bill has sparked heated debates and divided opinions across the political and medical communities. But the latest twist? The Royal College of Psychiatrists has just withdrawn its support for the bill in its current form. So, what does this mean for the bill’s future? Will enough MPs listen to the College’s concerns and pull back their support, or will they push ahead regardless?

Mark Pritchard Conservative for The Wrekin 

What’s the Bill About?

The bill aims to provide a legal framework for assisted dying for terminally ill adults in England and Wales. Essentially, it would allow certain individuals with terminal conditions to choose to end their lives with medical assistance. The legislation requires a panel—including a psychiatrist—to review and approve each case, ensuring safeguards are in place.

The Royal College’s Stance



The Royal College of Psychiatrists, a leading authority in mental health, has just made a significant move by withdrawing its backing. Dr. Lade Smith, the College’s president, explained, “After careful consideration, the RCP has determined that we do not have confidence in the Terminally Ill Adults Bill as it is currently written, and therefore, we are unable to support it in its present form.”

This is a notable development because the College’s support often influences MPs’ decisions, especially on sensitive issues like assisted dying.

Why the Change of Heart?

The College’s main concern revolves around the bill’s failure to include a holistic assessment of unmet needs. They argue that many individuals might consider ending their lives not solely because they are terminally ill, but because of treatable issues such as severe pain, financial hardship, or inadequate care and housing. The bill, as it stands, doesn’t require assessments of these factors or involve others who are involved in the person's care.

Dr. Smith emphasised, “There should be a requirement for a comprehensive assessment of unmet needs. The absence of this could overlook key factors influencing a person’s wish to die.”

What’s Next for MPs?

Today’s debate will see MPs decide whether to support the bill in its current form or push for amendments that address these concerns. The question is: will enough MPs heed the Royal College’s warning and withdraw their support? Or will they believe the bill’s safeguards are sufficient and proceed as planned?

The outcome hinges on whether MPs see the College’s objections as deal-breakers or mere details. Some may argue that the bill’s safeguards are enough, while others might feel the need for more comprehensive assessments to protect vulnerable individuals.

The Bottom Line

This is a pivotal moment in the bill’s journey. The Royal College’s withdrawal of support signals serious concerns about the legislation’s current form. If MPs choose to ignore these concerns, it could set a precedent that prioritizes individual choice over comprehensive safeguards. Conversely, if enough MPs listen and seek amendments, it could lead to a more careful, balanced approach.

Later today’s debate will reveal whether MPs are ready to stand by the current bill or if they’ll heed the warning from one of the country’s leading psychiatric bodies. Whatever happens, it’s clear that the future of assisted dying legislation in England and Wales is hanging in the balance.

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