Tomorrow MPs will be voting on The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill 2024-25. This is obviously a hugely emotive and sensitive issue, and one which I have taken significant time to consider and form my views on. 

I want to thank everyone who has taken the time to contact me about this Bill. I have received lots of communication and correspondence from constituents, attended multiple meetings, events, briefings with experts, academics and activists from around the world, to hear and understand views from across the spectrum. 

Taking all of this into consideration, I have ultimately decided I will be voting against the Bill. 

Words matter, terminology matters, and I know that even the name of this Bill and wider issues are hotly contested. For some it’s the choice of assisted dying, for others it’s assisted suicide and I completely understand the sensitivities surrounding this. 

Life is precious, and this piece of legislation is quite literally a matter of life and death. Considering this, it’s natural that emotions are heightened with people on both sides holding strong ethical and moral views. It’s exactly why I have given this serious issue a great deal of thought.  

While I appreciate the immense pain and suffering endured by some in the later stages of their life, I ultimately do not want to vote for legislation which may lead to the unnecessary and avoidable deaths of others, who may fall through the safeguards of this legislation. I certainly would not want that on my conscience. 

Theory and practice are often very different. What may work in theory, I fear often proves inadequate in practice.  

I worry this Bill would forever change the relationship and power dynamic between doctors and their patients. Many doctors I have spoken to feel that their primary duty is to save lives, rather than be involved in a process that ends life. 

This Bill will mean doctors making determinations on how long a person has left to live, when doctors themselves admit that their powers of prediction are poor when it comes to estimating a person’s life expectancy. 

We know that a person’s health outcomes are often linked to their social and economic situation. I therefore cannot ignore the risk that assisted dying, if allowed, may become a class issue, leading to the unnecessary deaths of those living in poverty. Those in less privileged positions, struggling to pay their bills and cope with the day-to-day demands of life, would be acutely impacted by the Bill; feeling they would be better off ending their lives, so as to not be a burden on their families.  

For me, the most moving testimonies and evidence were from disabled people and charities supporting the most vulnerable. The fact that many of them were incredibly concerned about potentially being a burden on their loved ones and society at large has weighed heavily on my mind. Hearing their perspectives and how they felt the Bill could be a slippery slope, eventually leaving them with little option but to be explicitly or implicitly coerced into taking the decision to end their lives, has left a lasting impression on me. 

This is not an unfounded concern. As we’ve seen in other countries, what starts off as assisted dying for those with terminal illness, is gradually expanded. We see cases of people ending their lives not because of terminal illness, but because of chronic or mental health conditions, which could be treatable, manageable or improvable. 

We, as a society, must ensure that people can die comfortably, with dignity and respect. What became clear during my conversations with terminally ill people who support this Bill is that often their desire is not to have an assisted death, but rather to have much better care at the end of their life. 

Our NHS is sadly in crisis, including how it is providing palliative care to those who would be affected by this Bill. Hospices that provide a significant amount of end-of-life care are grappling with a grave funding crisis. I strongly believe that these structural problems need comprehensively addressing, before we embark upon this legislative path.  

My sincere gratitude to everyone who has taken the time to express their views to me, and I hope in explaining the reasoning for my vote, you can understand how I have come to this position. 

No matter the outcome of the vote on this Bill tomorrow, I will continue to work tirelessly to advocate for my constituents and for better outcomes for those in end-of-life care. 

We should continue open, honest and frank conversations about this sensitive topic, and remain committed to finding a pathway to improve end-of-life care for those who find themselves in the immeasurably difficult circumstance of having a terminal illness.