A new law has been proposed to legalise assisted dying in England and Wales.
Here, the PA news agency takes a look at the details of Kim Leadbeater’s Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill.
– Who would be eligible?
Only terminally adults who are expected to die within six months and who have been resident in England and Wales and registered with a GP for at least 12 months.
They must have the mental capacity to make a choice about the end of their life and be deemed to have expressed a clear, settled and informed wish – free from coercion or pressure – to end their life.
– How would the process work?
The terminally ill person must make two separate declarations, witnessed and signed, about their wish to die.
The process must involve two independent doctors being satisfied the person is eligible and the medics can consult a specialist in the person’s condition and get an assessment from an expert in mental capacity if deemed necessary.
A High Court judge must hear from at least one of the doctors regarding the application and can also question the dying person as well as anyone else they consider appropriate.
– How long would it take?
There must be at least seven days between the two doctors making their assessments and a further 14 days after the judge has made a ruling, for the person to have a period of reflection on their decision.
For someone whose death is expected imminently, the 14-day period could be reduced to 48 hours.
– What safeguards are there?
It would be illegal for someone to pressure, coerce or use dishonesty to get someone to make a declaration that they wish to end their life or to induce someone to self-administer an approved substance.
If someone is found guilty of either of these actions, they could face a jail sentence of up to 14 years.
– How soon could an assisted dying service be running?Ms Leadbeater has suggested an assisted dying service would not be up and running for around another two years from the point the law was passed, with “even more consultation to make sure we get it right” at that stage.
– Would doctors have to take part?
No. Doctors would not be under any obligation to take part.
Doctors who do would have to be satisfied the person making their declaration to die has made it voluntarily and not been coerced or pressured by anyone else.
They would also be required to ensure the person is making an informed choice, including being made aware of their other treatment options such as palliative and hospice care.
Doctors would not be under a duty to raise the option of assisted dying with a patient.
The Bill states that there is nothing to stop them “exercising their professional judgment to decide if, and when, it is appropriate to discuss the matter with a person”.
– What about judges?
It is not thought judges would have the same right to decide whether or not to take part in the process.
Although the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has suggested this might be something Parliament can consider.
Ms Leadbeater has said while it would be a new area of work for judges, they are “used to making these difficult and complex decisions and being part of this process”, citing current procedures around decisions on turning off life support machines for terminally ill people.
Former director of public prosecutions Sir Max Hill, who is supportive of the Bill, said High Court hearings to decide on applications could be held in public.
– Who would administer the medication?
The dying person must take the medication themselves.
No doctor or anyone else can give the medication to the terminally ill person.
It has been suggested it might be the case a terminally ill person might be able to take such medication by pushing a button.
– How many people are likely to use an assisted dying service?
Ms Leadbeater said evidence from elsewhere in the world where it is legal suggests assisted deaths account for between 0.5 and 3% of deaths.
She said it is likely take-up would be in the hundreds, rather than thousands.
– Will there be any scrutiny of how the new law operates?
The chief medical officers in England and Wales and the Health Secretary would be required to monitor and report on the operation of the law.
The Health Secretary would also be required to report on the availability, quality and distribution of appropriate health services to people with palliative care needs, including pain and symptom management, psychological support for those people and their families, and information about palliative care and how to access it.
– Has the issue been voted on at Westminster before?
Not for almost a decade. An Assisted Dying Bill went before the Commons in 2015 and was rejected by MPs.
There was also a Bill proposed in the House of Lords during the 2021/2022 session which reached a second reading in the chamber, while Westminster Hall debates on assisted dying took place in July 2022 and April 2024.
– What comes next if it’s a yes vote on Friday?If the Bill passes the first stage in the Commons, it will go to committee stage where MPs can table amendments, before facing further scrutiny and votes in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords, meaning any change in the law would not be agreed until next year at the earliest.
– Are MPs guaranteed a vote on the Bill on Friday?
No. Bills such as this are known as private members’ bills (PMBs) and are considered during Friday sittings. The time available to consider them is from 9.30am until 2.30pm.
If the debate is still ongoing at 2.30pm then it is adjourned and the Bill falls to the bottom of the list, which means it is highly unlikely to make any further progress.
A closure motion can be moved to curtail the debate and force a vote. It may be moved at any time during proceedings.
On Friday sittings, an MP seeking to move such a motion tends to do so at around 1pm. If approved, the House then votes on whether or not to give the Bill a second reading.
If rejected, the House resumes the debate and the Bill is unlikely to progress.
– Could it be talked out?
On previous Friday sittings, some MPs have been accused of filibustering – making overlong speeches in a bid to deliberately waste time to try and talk out a Bill.
It is not customary for the Speaker to impose a time limit on speeches when MPs debate private members’ bills, although the occupant of the chair retains the right to impose a formal limit if demand is high.
MPs are likely to be given guidance on how long they should speak for in a bid to give as many of them a chance to speak as possible.
– What about the amendment tabled by some MPs to stop the Bill?
A group of six cross-party MPs have put forward an amendment which would “decline” to give a second reading to the Bill.
It argues that a PMB is does not “allow for sufficient debate on and scrutiny of a Bill on a matter of this importance”.
Whether or not the amendment is debated will depend on whether it is selected by the Speaker of the House of Commons, Sir Lindsay Hoyle.
Debate on the main Bill would go ahead, with this amendment, if chosen, being debated as part of that.
If the amendment is selected for consideration and a majority of MPs vote in favour of it, then the House is saying it does not want the Bill to progress.
It in effect reverses the question initially put to MPs – from asking if they want it to progress at second reading to asking them if they want to reject it.
If the amendment is not selected by the Speaker, then the debate will focus on whether or not to approve the Bill at second reading in a straight yes or no vote.
