Film star Adam Pearson says he is ‘heartbroken’ by Commons vote: ‘We have a government who are willing to help disabled people die whilst doing nothing to help them live’
Concerns remain: Labour’s Sarah Jones says she has reservations about the Assisted Dying Bill, but still voted in favour
All four of Croydon’s MPs – three Labour, one Conservative – voted in favour of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill when it had its second reading in at the House of Commons yesterday.
But some disability rights groups and activists reacted with dismay that the Bill passed this stage with a vote of 330 for and 275 against.
The private member’s Bill, brought by the Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, would give terminally ill adults with less than six months to live the right to die once the request has been signed off by two doctors and a High Court judge.
Steve Reed (Labour, Streatham and Croydon North), Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon West), Natasha Irons (Labour, Croydon East) and Chris Philp (Conservative, Croydon South) all voted in favour. The vote was unusual in that it was a “free vote”, without the intervention of the whips’ offices, with MPs able to vote with their conscience, or based on submissions from their constituents.
Safeguards: the Assisted Dying Bill has checks and balances, but not everyone is assured that they do enough
In a near-1,000-word posting on social media, Jones, who has been a Croydon MP since 2017, wrote, “I have concerns around some aspects of the Bill that I would like to see changed. So whilst I voted to continue to debate this legislation, I have not yet made up my mind whether I will support it further down the line.”
Jones thanked constituents who had sent her “personal and sometimes painful letters about their experiences and beliefs”, after having held meetings in the past week with those in favour and against the Bill.
“Everyone is agreed that palliative care is not good enough in this country. I agree that we must act to improve it. I also agree that this legislation has sparked a debate about end-of-life care, and shone a light on the postcode lottery that we see across our country…
“Passing this legislation does cross a new and significant line in the law and we need to proceed with caution to ensure there are protections and safeguards in place.”
And Jones warned, “I cannot imagine anyone trying to coerce people into ending their lives. But we know that coercion happens, that it can be hidden and that it can be evil.” The MP referenced one speech in the debate, by Diane Abbott, who voted against the Bill because of serious, unresolved concerns over the possibility of coercion.
In favour: Tory MP, and shadow Home Secretary, Chris Philp voted for the Bill
“Fundamentally,” Jones concluded, “I was persuaded by the argument that people should have the right to take control of their final weeks when they are dying, should they want to. There are some conditions or intractable cases where palliative care cannot help. Where pain and suffering is unbearable. Giving those people the right to make a decision to end their lives does not take away anyone else’s right to continue to fight for theirs.”
The Bill is not yet law. It has passed its Second Reading and will be scrutinised by the Commons and the House of Lords and will only become law if MPs vote for it again at its Third Reading.
Because yesterday’s was a free vote, it appeared that the standard of MPs’ behaviour in the chamber, and the quality of debate, was much improved.
“All too often debates in the Commons are partisan affairs, punctuated by jeers and braying. Where reason is superseded by dogma and ill-temper,” noted John Crace, The Guardian’s parliamentary sketchwriter.
“This was a very different occasion. Parliament on its very best behaviour. Where necessary, people – mostly politely – agreeing to disagree. MPs heard in silence. Some in tears… The quality of argument was a cut above the average.”
Tory MP Kit Malthouse had said during the debate: “The deathbed for far too many is a source of misery, torture and degradation. A reign of blood and vomit and tears. I see no compassion and beauty in that, only profound human suffering.”
As MP Jones suggested, the debate also highlighted further shortcomings in the NHS, around palliative care and end-of-life hospice provision, much of which has to be provided by charities.
‘Heartbroken’: actor Adam Pearson
James Sanderson, the chief executive of the palliative care and bereavement charity, Sue Ryder, said, “Ahead of the vote on assisted dying, the health secretary recognised the need to strengthen end-of-life care, and the Prime Minister said he would invest in it regardless of the result.
“The government cannot now backtrack. It must fix end-of-life care.
“MPs have a duty to ensure no one feels an assisted death is their only option simply because the care they need isn’t available.”
And Adam Pearson, the Croydon-based film star and disability rights activist, said: “I’m heartbroken today that we have a government who are willing to help disabled people die whilst doing nothing to help them live.
“The ‘better off dead’ rhetoric of disability and terminal illness appears to be alive and well – and in 2024 I guess I’d hoped for better.”
- The Garwood Foundation is Inside Croydon’s nominated charity for 2024.
- To find out more about their vitally important work, click here
- To donate, click here
- If you have a news story about life in or around Croydon, or want to publicise your residents’ association or business, or if you have a local event to promote, please email us with full details at inside.croydon@btinternet.com
As featured on Google News Showcase
- Our comments section on every report provides all readers with an immediate “right of reply” on all our content. Our comments policy can be read by clicking here
Inside Croydon is a member of the Independent Community News Network
- Inside Croydon works together with the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, as well as BBC London News and ITV London
ROTTEN BOROUGH AWARDS: In January 2024, Croydon was named among the country’s rottenest boroughs for a SEVENTH successive year in the annual round-up of civic cock-ups in Private Eye magazine
It would take you two years to get two doctors, the bill is completely pointless.
There’s some doubt it will pass the Third Reading, too
Is there already an NHS waiting list measured in x years for getting doctors to agree to ending someone’s life ?!
I have huge sympathy for people suffering towards the end of their lives and their familiy and friends supporting them through this time. This is why I think there needs to be massive improvements in palliative care and support to enable people to have the best life they can. I think it is very worrying that the state could be bringing in support to die before it is bringing in enough support to live.
While there has been justified worries about the details of this bill and safeguards to prevent coercion, I think opening up the option to die also creates a moral pressure that some will feel to take that option because they feel they are a ‘burden’ on their family and friends. This moral coercion would happen regardless of how the bill is amended.
Having read through this draft bill, it also feels to me like very bad legislation. It seems to be an attempt to put a flawed process into law. I can understand why even those who agree with assisted suicide want this bill to be changed. I feel that amendments will not be able to bring this bill up to a standard that will satisfy many MPs who are still unsure whether to vote for this bill again at future stages.
But, for me, my biggest problem with this legislation is the principles it puts in place. First, it gives the state legal power to end someone’s life and, second, it establishes in law that there is such a thing as a life not worth living. I don’t agree with either of those and history has shown that once those principles exist they are likely to be extended to groups of people that the state or society do not value or who are seen as burden. I completely understand the fears of many groups of people who see this bill as a growing threat – it should be noted that many organisations for disabled people have spoken out strongly against this bill.
For all of these reasons I do not feel that I could have voted in favour of this bill if I was an MP.
They frame this has humane and yet with the state of palliative care, where’s the humanity? They won’t be having an Assisted Living Bill for that will they. With the removal of the Winter Fuel Allowance for some of the poorest in society, now this, the cynic in me is thinking maybe they are thinking how much this can help fill their ‘black hole’. I’m finding it all a little sinister to be quite honest. My friend is a carer for their elderly mother with dementia, every time this came on the news she said with fear in her eyes, “I want to die naturally”, she won’t be the only person thinking that.
Strange that The Green Party favours the mother’s access to aborting her baby, without its say or consent, but would deny the same mother the right to end her own life.
It’s not “strange” Peter. That’s because you are wrong.
The Green Party’s website says that “Elected Greens will support a change in the law to legalise assisted dying for people suffering from terminal disease who wish to avoid prolonged unnecessary suffering, if this is their clear and settled will. Proper safeguards would be put in place.”
Right now only wealthy people can afford to travel to Switzerland to die with dignity and without pain. That end of life care should be available here, from a properly-funded NHS
I don’t want to be cared for if I become incapable. I have always been independent. I don’t want anyone helping me to the toilet and wiping my bum. I don’t want anyone showering me. I don’t want to have someone feeding me or dressing me. As soon as I am unable to do any of these things myself, I want to die. Who is anyone else to say that I shouldn’t have the right to die if that is what I want?
I have a terminal illness with a rather gruesome ending. I want to choose to go when I want rather than suffer needlessly. There is a myth that palliative care has some magical power to take away pain and suffering; it doesn’t. Maybe those against it can tell me how much suffering I’d have to go through for them to be okay for me to leave this Earth with some dignity.