Everything You Need To Know About The Second MPs' Vote On Assisted Dying
Labour MP Kim Leadbeater spoke at a press conference about her assisted dying bill on Thursday (Alamy)
6 min read
MPs are set to debate and vote for a second time on a bill which could legalise assisted dying for terminally ill people.
Labour MP Kim Leadbeater introduced the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill as a private member’s bill last autumn.
On Friday, MPs have a 'free vote' on whether to allow the bill to proceed further. If it eventually passes into law, the bill would make it legal for terminally ill adults with fewer than six months to live to access medical assistance to end their lives.
Here's everything you need to know:
What is a free vote?
In UK parliamentary terms, a free vote allows MPs and ministers to vote according to their conscience, rather than along party lines, particularly on sensitive moral or ethical issues, such as abortion.
The government's position on assisted dying is neutral, but Cabinet ministers can also choose to vote with their conscience.
This will be the second free vote for MPs in the Commons this week, after they voted in favour of an amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill which decriminalised abortions for women who end their own pregnancies.
What is a private member’s bill?
A private member’s bill is a type of proposed law introduced in Parliament by a backbench MP or member of the House of Lords, allowing them to raise issues they believe are important or under-addressed.
The government has chosen not to propose an assisted dying bill of its own, instead maintaining a neutral stance on the topic and allowing Leadbeater to take her own bill forward.
What are MPs voting on?
The bill already cleared its second reading in November, with MPs voting 330 in favour and 275 against.
Friday is the bill’s third reading in the House of Commons, presenting MPs with the opportunity to have a ‘free vote’ again on whether the bill should proceed. If it does pass the MP vote again, it will continue to the House of Lords for further scrutiny.
While they are voting on the same bill as they did in November, a number of new amendments have been added to the bill to strengthen safeguards. It now includes a prohibition on the advertising of assisted dying services, more safeguards to prohibit initiating discussions about assisted dying with under-18s, and clarifies that two independent doctors must separately assess the person’s capacity and eligibility for an assisted death.
A new amendment has also strengthened protections for healthcare professionals who object to assisted dying on ethical or religious grounds, with no medical professional to be compelled to participate in any part of the process.
MPs will therefore now be voting for or against the bill at the third reading, with these amendments included.
What are the arguments for?
Pro-assisted dying campaigners argue the bill is about choice, compassion and dignity at the end of life, and the majority of the British public support assisted dying for terminally ill people. A recent YouGov poll found 72 per cent of the public are, in principle, in favour.
In the UK, some terminally ill people choose to travel abroad while in significant pain to seek an assisted death in countries such as Switzerland, where it is legal.
Leadbeater claims the bill includes strict safeguards, including medical assessments and judicial panel approval.
The bill has so far been subject to scrutiny, including over 100 hours of debate in Parliament, and other countries such as Scotland, Jersey and the Isle of Man have already enacted their own assisted dying laws.
What are the arguments against?
Critics of the bill fear that legalising assisted dying may pressure vulnerable individuals, such as the elderly, disabled, or those with mental health conditions, to end their lives prematurely.
Labour MP Jess Asato wrote that the bill would largely apply to older people, “the group perhaps most let down by professionals when it comes to abuse”.
There is also concern that a previous clause requiring a High Court judge to approve assisted dying applications has been dropped since the bill was first brought to Parliament. Leadbeater has suggested replacing the judge with a three-person panel including a senior legal figure, a social worker and a psychiatrist.
Critics worry that this law could be a slippery slope, eventually leading to assisted dying for non-terminal conditions, including mental illness, as seen in some other jurisdictions.
Some medical and palliative care experts have expressed concern about the potential impact of assisted dying on the NHS, the palliative care system, and the role of doctors. King’s College London’s Professor Katherine Sleeman wrote in The House that legalisation of assisted dying may lead to hospices losing financial support from donors, and staff and volunteers leaving.
While some Cabinet ministers – including Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Chancellor Rachel Reeves – voted for the bill at second reading, others, including Health Secretary Wes Streeting and Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood – voted against it.
Streeting told Times Radio that legalising assisted dying would have "resource implications" which would "come at the expense of other choices" for the NHS.
While some have argued that the bill has been rushed, the Hansard Society’s Ruth Fox and Matthew England wrote that the legislative process overall is “no longer fit for purpose” and needs reform.
Some MPs and religious groups oppose assisted dying on moral or theological grounds, arguing life should not be intentionally ended, even by choice.
How likely is the bill to pass to the next stage?
Leadbeater herself has said she is “confident” it will pass, despite the likelihood that some MPs will change their vote from supporting it to opposing it.
Multiple MPs from both sides of the debate told PoliticsHome they agreed with this assessment, with the number of switchers unlikely to change the balance in opposition to it.
Most MPs usually spend Fridays in their constituencies, but given the societal importance of this particular legislation, many are expected to stay in Westminster to cast their vote.
What comes next?
If MPs vote in favour of the bill again, it will continue to the House of Lords. However, the debate would be far from over, with some parliamentarians deeply divided on the issue.
A furious Labour peer told PoliticsHome that they had spoken to MPs who were unhappy with the detail in the bill, but were intending to vote it through on principle and leave it up to the Lords to carry out the thorough scrutiny later on. They described this approach as "extraordinary", arguing it shouldn't be left to peers to improve such a consequential piece of legislation.
One Labour MP who opposes the bill claimed they had also spoken to colleagues who would be voting for it, despite describing it themselves as a “mess of a bill”.
However, an MP in support of the bill insisted they "wouldn’t support it if there weren’t adequate safeguards”.
"A lot of the arguments against it are emotional arguments," they said. "I would hope colleagues will show up to vote for it."
