‘Assisted suicide Bill fails to protect people with anorexia’, MP warns

Kim Leadbeater’s proposals do not protect patients with anorexia nervosa from assisted suicide, an MP has warned.

Liberal Democrat MP Sarah Olney, who sits on the committee selected to scrutinise the backbench MP’s Bill, said it will allow vulnerable people with eating disorders to ask for medical help to kill themselves.

The MP for Richmond Park voted against the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill in November, and wrote to her constituents that “the worst possible outcome” in framing the legislation “would be a flawed bill that potentially puts vulnerable people at risk”.

Capacity vs ability

Under the Bill, a terminally ill person must possess “the capacity to make a decision to end their own life”. It also states that “references to a person having capacity are to be read in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005”.

But Olney, who is calling for it to be amended, told The Guardian: “The Mental Capacity Act is not designed to enable people to make a decision about ending their own life”.

She added: “As the Royal College of Psychiatrists have pointed out, people could have a co-occurring mental disorder which impacts their decision and still be considered to have capacity.”

By replacing “capacity with a functional test of ability”, Olney hoped it would be possible “to protect those suffering from eating disorders” who may be unable to “fully understand the nature of their decision” to request assisted suicide.

Evidence

Her comments were bolstered on day two of the Bill committee’s oral evidence sessions.

Chelsea Roff, founder of eating disorder support group Eat, Breathe, Thrive, warned MPs: “There is a false distinction being made between a mental disorder and its somatic or its physical manifestations in this Bill.”

She asked members to consider whether the proposed legislation could have “knock on effects that affect some of your most vulnerable constituents”. She added: “And how many deaths are you okay with?

“If the safeguards fail once, that is a human being who may be in a despairing moment who was handed a lethal medication instead of the care, and the treatment, and the help they need.”

“How many deaths are you OK with?” pic.twitter.com/ZyjnHccngn

— The Christian Institute (@christianorguk) January 30, 2025

Coercion

Earlier this month, dozens of MPs who voted in favour of Kim Leadbeater’s assisted suicide Bill suggested they may withdraw their support if medics are not prohibited from suggesting assisted suicide to their patients.

Labour MPs Chris Webb and Mike Tapp, both of whom voted for the Bill, are in favour of amending it to try to reduce scope for coercion.

Webb said: “I’m uncomfortable that it allows doctors to suggest to patients they could take their own lives and believe this needs to be removed from the bill.”

And Tapp told BBC News: “It should only be discussed if it is raised by the patient. This helps mitigate the risk of accidental coercion, or the perception of a hint, at a time of immense emotional distress and vulnerability.”

Inadequate

Former Cabinet minister David Davis also voted in favour of legalisation, but told the Commons: “I say to both the Bill’s sponsors that it has a number of areas that they know I think they have to put right – about a dozen, in truth.”

He added: “After the ‘Do not resuscitate’ scandal during the Covid crisis, I do not want that at any price – I do not want the state initiating this process. That is critical for me.”

Josh Fenton-Glynn MP, a member of the Health and Social Care Select Committee, said: “I’ve seen how family coercion works around care budgets. I have seen dreadful things.”

He noted that there are “more safeguards if you want to give a kidney than if you want to access an assisted death”.