Should Children Be Part of the Assisted Dying Debate? MPs Say No!

In a significant move, MPs have voted to ban health professionals, including doctors, from discussing assisted dying with individuals under the age of 18. This decision is part of the ongoing review of the Terminally Ill Adults Bill, which currently limits assisted dying to adults aged 18 and over, who have a prognosis of less than six months to live. The amendment, proposed by Labour MP Meg Hillier, underscores fears about the potential expansion of assisted dying laws to include minors.

The vote marked the first defeat for Kim Leadbeater, the bill’s main supporter, in the House of Commons, illustrating growing skepticism surrounding its provisions. Critics, including a group of Labour MPs, argued that this outcome signifies a ’vote of no confidence’ in the bill, countering claims that it represents the safest assisted dying legislation worldwide. Opposition voices, like that of Conservative MP Neil Shastri-Hurst, cautioned that preventing young patients from discussing sensitive topics with professionals could lead them to navigate painful decisions alone, through online communities.

While Hillier’s successful amendment was a significant ruling, her other proposal, which sought to prevent health professionals from initiating discussions about assisted dying altogether, was defeated. The bill has seen numerous amendments designed to refine its various aspects including advertising restrictions for assisted dying services and ensuring that actions taken under the bill aren’t automatically labeled as unnatural deaths, which would require referral to a coroner.

The legislation, which had received initial approval from MPs back in November by a 55-vote margin, is now facing more intense scrutiny, with some MPs who initially supported it expressing intentions to oppose the bill in future votes. The debate recently centered on how practical measures of the bill would operate rather than its ethical underpinnings, with a consensus forming around the prohibition of assisted dying advertisements.

Controversy continues regarding whether assisted deaths should be investigated by a coroner, with arguments from both sides highlighting the importance of oversight in assisted deaths versus the desire for flexibility in future applications of the law. Detractors warn that inadequate investigation could obscure potential errors or abuse, while proponents assert that assisted deaths under the bill will already undergo rigorous scrutiny.

As the debate progresses, the next significant discussion of the bill is set for 20 June, where it faces potential rejection or the next step towards the House of Lords for further evaluation. The ongoing decisions are pivotal not only for the bill itself but also for the broader conversation around assisted dying and its implications for young individuals and vulnerable populations.