Critics of Kim Leadbeater’s dangerous assisted suicide Bill continued to highlight areas of concern during day eight of scrutiny:
Family deemed unimportant
Rebecca Paul MP, a critic of the Bill, expressed concern that the three-person panel could approve a person’s assisted suicide request without any requirement that they receive information from the person’s family.
She shared a story of a family in Victoria, Australia where the person’s request was granted despite concerns from their spouse that undue pressure was being applied by their adult child. Paul noted: “Families can see things very clearly in a way that professionals… cannot see”.
Naz Shah also noted that the appeals process is one-way. If a person’s request is turned down it can be appealed, but a concerned family member cannot appeal the decision if the application is granted.
But Kit Malthouse, a co-sponsor of the Bill, argued against giving family members the right to appeal on the basis that it could encourage people to conceal their diagnosis and application from their family if they think they will object.
Centrepiece scrapped
The ditching of judicial oversight from the Bill was discussed further, following Leadbeater’s admission on Tuesday that any judge or former judge sitting on her panel would not be acting in their capacity as a judge, and that the panel “is not a judicial entity”.
Daniel Francis made the point that the late introduction of a panel to the Bill means there has been no opportunity to hear evidence on it, in the same way that the High Court Judge process was discussed. When the Committee took oral evidence, and when the majority of written submissions were also received, this was before the scrapping of the High Court judge, and so experts and the wider public have not been able to express their views to the Committee.
Danny Kruger, who is leading opposition to the Bill, and Sean Woodcock both emphasised that the judicial oversight aspect of the Bill was key in the support of so many MPs and even the general public.
Sean Woodcock explains that many constituents and MPs supported the assisted suicide Bill on the basis of the now dropped judicial oversight process. pic.twitter.com/PWTDAVSSiU
— The Christian Institute (@christianorguk) March 12, 2025
Kruger said it is astonishing that Kim Leadbeater is abandoning this “centrepiece” of her Bill.
.@danny__kruger astounded at Kim Leadbeater's U-turn to remove the High Court judge approval of assisted suicide requests.
This is a far cry from what MPs voted for at second reading. pic.twitter.com/cW9F2HrDbI
— The Christian Institute (@christianorguk) March 12, 2025
More gaps exposed
Rebecca Paul also raised the alarming prospect that, under the proposals, a person could apply for assisted suicide not primarily because of their terminal illness, but for social reasons. She cited the case of a woman in Ontario, Canada who is believed to have requested Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) because of housing problems. Kim Leadbeater seemed to deny that such a situation could arise under her Bill.
Kruger also raised the prospect of someone being killed by assisted suicide on the basis that they had failed to receive adequate care and support from the NHS or other care providers. He said neither the new panel, nor the original judicial safeguard, would be able to protect against this.
Easy access to assisted suicide VS months of waiting for appropriate care is a huge concern for MPs.
Evidence shows it would not be possible for Leadbeater's judge-minus panel (who would be responsible for approving requests for assisted suicide) to stop someone being killed by… pic.twitter.com/vmfLegTopx
— The Christian Institute (@christianorguk) March 12, 2025
Normalising suicide
Kruger warned MPs about the threat of assisted suicide becoming normalised in the UK, and doctors’ assessments becoming little more than tick-box exercises.
Public polling last June found that 56 per cent of adults believed legalising assisted suicide will lead to the normalisation of suicide in general.
