What should happen to the UK assisted suicide bill?

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Alex Schadenberg

I have been in the UK for several days as I spoke at an international leaders conference and I attended another international conference. 

It has been an interesting experience in the UK with the resignation of Prime Minister Keir Starmer (Labour Party) and the emergence of Andy Burnham, as his likely successor as the leader of the Labour Party and Prime Minister.

The UK is also preparing to once again debate the Kim Leadbeater assisted suicide bill, that died on the order paper in the House of Lords earlier this year. The bill passed, on November 29, 2024 at second reading, in the UK House of Commons, by a vote of 330 to 275.

The House of Lords debated multiple amendments to the Leadbeater bill but the bill was so flawed that the debate (timed-out) before voting on the bill.

All of this happened in-spite of the fact that Prime Minister Starmer was a strong supporter of euthanasia and assisted suicide.

Now, Lauren Edwards, (Labour MP) for Rochester and Strood has promised to bring back the Leadbeater bill. Edwards wants to pass an identical version of the bill to enable parliament to legalize assisted suicide without needing approval from the House of Lords.

If the UK parliament passes an identical bill in two consecutive sessions it can bypass the required support of the House of Lords.

Since the House of Lords uncovered flaws with the assisted suicide bill, it would be ridiculous to approve the bill, in the House of Commons based on procedural rules.

Starmer / Burnham

Considering the multiple parliamentary issues faced in the UK, the most reasonable approach would be that after the Labour Party choose a new leader / Prime Minister, then the new Prime Minister (7th in 10 years) would set the parliamentary agenda with a new speech from the throne.

If another assisted suicide bill is introduced then it would be dealt with in a democratic manner and likely be defeated based on the reality of legalizing assisted suicide.

As for assisted suicide in the UK, last March Scotland defeated their assisted suicide bill by a vote of 69 to 57 even though the same bill had passed by a vote of 70 to 56 at second reading. Members of the Scottish legislature changed their vote after debating the reality of assisted suicide.

The British House of Lords and the Scottish parliament essentially recognized that Canada's experience with euthanasia proves that it is impossible to legalize assisted suicide with effective oversight and without inevitable expansions.

Britain needs to focus on improving care and rejecting killing.

We oppose killing people and support caring for people.

UK assisted suicide bill will likely die in the House of Lords.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, 

Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Harry Farley, a political correspondent for BBC news wrote a commentary on the likely death of the Leadbeater UK assisted suicide bill. Farley's article provides significant information about what is happening within the British Labour party concerning the assisted suicide bill.

The article states that 100 Labour MP's warned Keir Starmer, Britain's Labour Prime Minister, that:

failing to pass assisted dying legislation would undermine trust in politics

Starmer has put significant political capital into the passing of the Leadbeater assisted suicide bill. Even though it is a private members bill, Starmer provided Kim Leadbeater with extra parliamentary staff to enable her to carry and pass the bill. It must be noted that Starmer is a long-time supporter of assisted suicide.

Now that Scotland's assisted suicide bill has been defeated with members who oppose assisted suicide and members who support assisted suicide but didn't support the McArthur assisted suicide bill.

Similar to the defeat of the Scottish assisted suicide bill, the UK assisted suicide bill has stalled in the House of Lords, based on opposition to assisted suicide but also based on the language of the bill. Farley explains:

The current bill to legalise assisted dying in England and Wales was passed by the Commons in June last year but has been stalled in the House of Lords for months and is now unlikely to pass.

Opponents warn the bill is flawed and any attempt to push it through would be unsafe and would harm vulnerable people. Downing Street (the Prime Minister) has previously said it was a matter for parliament.

Members of the House of Lords are trying to amend the bill. Farley writes:

Supporters now believe it is "effectively impossible" for the bill to legalise assisted dying in England and Wales to pass before the end of this session, expected in May.

This is largely because more than 1,200 amendments have been tabled in the House of Lords, principally from opponents to the legislation.

With only three of 14 days of debate in the Lords remaining, around half of the amendments are yet to be discussed.

Farley spoke to Jess Asato, a Labour MP who opposes the assisted suicide bill who stated:

"The sponsor of the bill has rejected 99% of suggested improvements and amendments in the House of Lords and so it still contains all the same faults and issues."

"Any MP that voted to push this bill through would do so knowing that it is unsafe and would harm vulnerable people."

Farley interviewed a source working with Labour opponents to the assisted suicide bill who said:

"For Labour MPs to continue to agitate for this unsafe, badly written and divisive bill rather than focus on the reasons people voted for us at the election is madness.

"Labour needs to work on delivering on our manifesto and running the country well, not rerunning contentious arguments about assisted dying."

With the defeat of Scotland's assisted suicide bill, it is more likely that the Leadbeater UK assisted suicide bill, that would legalize assisted suicide in England and Wales, will also die a natural death.

But as Gordon Macdonald, CEO of Care Not Killing stated concerning Scotland's assisted suicide bill:

We will need your help again in the future (“this is coming back”).

We hope that the Leadbeater assisted suicide bill will soon be declared dead, but the battle will continue as we await the next attempt in the UK, and other places, to legalize the killing of people at a vulnerable time of their life.

Assisted Suicide bill (UK) must be killed off.

The Times (UK) published, on May 14, their position on the Kim Leadbeater assisted suicide bill. Times view: Assisted dying bill must now be killed off.

Warnings about the bill are growing louder by the day. MPs must now vote down these ramshackle and dangerous proposals.

Scarcely has a piece of legislation been about to become law amid such dire warnings. The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill will return to the House of Commons on Friday, when MPs will ­decide whether to allow the legalisation of assisted dying to proceed. In the earlier stages of this bill fears were voiced about the lack of safeguarding to avoid abuses such as coercion. Legal experts ­expressed their worries that the poorly drafted text would provide a starting point for eventual mission creep in assisted suicide rather than ­defining strict limits on its use.

Since the bill was given the initial approval by MPs last November, these fears have only grown. Some are due to the haphazard nature of the ­legislation: such a fundamental change in the role of the state should not have been conducted via a ­private member’s bill. It has been uneasily guided by its originator, the Labour MP Kim Leadbeater. Too often she has failed to engage or show understanding to those with legitimate concerns, ­instead adopting a recalcitrant attitude. But it is not too late for MPs to think again.

If any further proof were needed that the bill is a ramshackle affair, sorely lacking in precision, MPs should look to the Royal College of Psychiatrists. The professional body this week changed its mind on the bill, expressing “serious concerns” about the proposed legislation as drafted in ­relation to mental illness.

The college is ­worried that the physical effects of mental illness (such as anorexia) should not be used as a pretext for ­assisted suicide. MPs should be particularly alarmed by the fact that the college does not ­display an institutional aversion to assisted dying; its official position is neutral. Given that psychiatrists would play a critical role in the process, with one required on each panel adjudicating an ­application for assisted dying, the objections of their college should be terminal for the bill.

Dr Trudi Seneviratne, the college registrar, ­stated on Wednesday that it was Ms Leadbeater’s bill in particular that was the problem. She also warned that Britain simply did not have enough consultants to deal with the workload that could be generated by assisted suicide. With the government estimating that more than 7,500 terminally ill people could seek state support to end their lives each year, the burden on the NHS would be substantial.

Ms Leadbeater’s bill has been through a turbulent legislative journey. The decision to loosen safeguarding measures by removing the oversight of a High Court judge in each case may have been well-intentioned in trying to ease the strain on the legal system, but it has spooked MPs who bought into Ms Leadbeater’s assurances that there would be no slippery slope. Although her bill passed the House of Commons with a majority of 55, there are indications that support is ebbing away. This newspaper has reported that 42 per cent of MPs polled say they will vote against the bill with 36 per cent in favour.

Some MPs may be minded to use Friday’s vote to improve the proposed law but sticking plaster will not do on such a fundamental matter. Ms Leadbeater has shown herself unwilling to ­listen to the concerns of experts and her bill’s dangerous flaws remain unfixed. The Royal College of Physicians also expressed concern this week about its deficiencies, saying changes were needed to ­protect patients and medical staff. A BBC survey of GPs suggests a majority are opposed.

It is striking that Sir Keir Starmer will not be present for the votes. The prime minister, who has tacitly endorsed assisted dying, will be away at a summit in Albania. It is his fault that assisted dying was relegated to a private member’s bill, with all too predictable results, presumably to distance Labour from any backlash. That hasn’t worked: voters believe the bill is government policy. This a bad bill beyond repair. It needs to be killed off.

Voices opposing assisted suicide are vital.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Sonia Sadha

Sonia Sodha wrote an excellent article that was published in the Guardian on February 16, 2025. In her article, Sodha challenges Kim Leadbeater, who sponsored the UK assisted suicide bill, and her colleagues who are pushing through the assisted suicide bill and ignoring the concerns with the bill. Sodha writes:

There could not be more at stake: legalising the prescription of lethal drugs to terminally ill people raises the spectre of vulnerable people being wrongfully subjected to an assisted death with state assistance. It is critical that the bill’s proponents engage constructively with the doctors, psychiatrists, social workers, lawyers and domestic abuse experts who have this concern. Yet Leadbeater appears affronted by the opposition to her bill; she has characterised it as “noise”, described those who oppose her change in the law as unconstructive, and has complained about their “clear mobilisation”. (Yes, when people are worried that legislation could have tragic consequences, that’s what they do.) The implication seemingly being that, unless you agree with her on the principle, there’s no legitimate role for you in scrutinising her bill.

This is not a new approach by those who are pushing to legalize or expand assisted death laws. In Canada, a committee that examined changes to the law refused to extend expert testimony to myself. One Liberal Member of Parliament contacted me to inform me that I was not being asked to speak before the committee because the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition opposes euthanasia. That committee was concerned with expanding the law (Bill C-7).

Sodha continued by challenging the assisted suicide bill committee:

This attitude seems to be driving the way the bill’s proponents are approaching its scrutiny. Leadbeater picked the bill committee and on the opposition side left off seasoned MPs with relevant experience, such as the psychiatrist Ben Spencer, instead selecting a relatively inexperienced group. The committee heard just three days of oral evidence, heavily skewed to those in favour of the bill. It took no evidence from experts in domestic abuse, and had to be shamed into allowing the Royal College of Psychiatrists to give evidence. Almost 400 pieces of written evidence have been published just in the last couple of weeks; when are the MPs on the committee supposed to read and digest them? Meanwhile, the bill’s proponents appear to be cherrypicking evidence from those who agree with them while ignoring the medical experts pointing out the risks of their approach.

Sodha then outlines amendments that have been made to the UK assisted suicide bill without effective input from those who oppose assisted suicide or who would oppose the amendments and the committee has outright rejected proposed amendments from legislators that would have tightened the bill.

Sodha concludes:

The kindest reading is that the bill’s proponents feel so passionate about the rights of those whom it is designed to assist that they may have minimised its risks in their own heads. This would explain their flat-out denials that their bill is unsafe, and their failure to engage with genuine attempts to try to improve it by those who might oppose it but would rather its risks were reduced if it does become law.

If it continues, the hyper-partisanship this benevolent self-delusion has produced will mean people will suffer wrongful deaths, and the buck for that doesn’t stop with Kim Leadbeater, but with Keir Starmer himself.

More articles on this topic:

• Patients applying for assisted suicide won't need to tell their family (Link). 
• UK assisted dying bill is being rushed (Link).
• Why is the UK Labour party putting assisted suicide ahead of social care (Link).
  

Why we need to kill the UK assisted dying bill.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Kevin Yuill

Kevin Yuill has written some excellent articles opposing assisted suicide. His latest article was published by Spiked on December 30, 2024 explaining the direction of the assisted suicide lobby and the need to kill the UK assisted suicide bill. Yuill wrote:

This past year has exposed the moral bankruptcy of the ‘assisted dying’ lobby. Dignity in Dying placed ads on the London Underground that gleefully celebrated people taking their own lives. Times columnist Matthew Parris called for legalising assisted suicide in order to cull the elderly. We witnessed the unveiling of the dystopian Sarco ‘suicide pod’. There can now be no doubt: far from being built on compassion, the ‘assisted dying’ movement is built on a blatant disregard for human life.

The low point of this year arrived in November, with the parliamentary vote on legalising assisted suicide in England and Wales. After having fewer than three weeks to consider Kim Leadbeater’s Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, and fewer than five hours to debate it, MPs voted by 330 to 275 in favour of it.

This vote was the culmination of years of emotionally manipulative propaganda, dominated by assisted-suicide lobby groups like Dignity in Dying. The issue of ‘assisted dying’, as proponents euphemistically call it, was brought back to the centre of political discussion late last year, when former TV presenter Esther Rantzen revealed that she was suffering from terminal lung cancer and might ‘buzz off’ to Dignitas in Switzerland. She called for a change in the law, complaining that, as it stands, police could prosecute her loved ones if they accompany her.

Keir Starmer, then leader of the opposition, was quick to agree with Rantzen. ‘I am an advocate to change the law’, he said. He went on to promise Rantzen that, should Labour win the upcoming General Election, he would give MPs a free vote on legalising ‘assisted dying’. Once Labour got into power in July, Starmer made good on that promise. In October, Leadbeater, Labour MP for Spen Valley, introduced her assisted-dying private members’ bill to parliament.

Starmer’s office successfully convinced many of the 231 new Labour MPs that this vote was simply about the principle, rather than the bill itself. They were reassured that there would be a chance to vote again on the details of the bill, which even some assisted-suicide advocates acknowledged had been poorly drafted.

Now, Leadbeater is handpicking a committee to consider amendments to the legislation. Unsurprisingly, this committee noticeably lacks critics of assisted suicide, or indeed MPs with medical training. So we shouldn’t put much stock in its ability to smooth out the bill’s many loopholes – such as potentially allowing anorexics and people with Type 1 diabetes to access assisted suicide, despite Leadbeater’s reassurances to the contrary.

The notion that assisted suicide has widespread public support is also misleading. Polls show that while most people back ‘assisted dying’ in principle, they have little understanding of what it entails in practice. The ‘assisted dying’ campaigners’ linguistic games, aimed at disguising the fact that they are advocating for state-sanctioned suicide, appear to have paid off. One poll conducted ahead of the vote in parliament found that 10 per cent of Brits thought ‘assisted dying’ meant access to hospice care. Forty-two per cent thought it meant the right to stop medical treatment, which is already legal. When people were informed that ‘assisted dying’ means helping people to kill themselves, support plummeted to just 11 per cent.

We need only to look to Canada to see what disasters await the UK, should Leadbeater’s bill become law. This year, Canada released its fifth annual report on its medical assistance in dying (MAID) programme, which has been in place since 2016. In that time, 60,301 Canadians received either euthanasia or assisted suicide. Last year, the number of total MAID procedures was more than 15 per cent higher than the year before. Euthanasia now accounts for nearly one in 20 deaths in Canada. Half of those who die at the hands of MAID are aged under 75.

Plenty of stories came out of Canada this year that showed the inevitable horrors that legalising assisted dying creates. In one case that came to court, a father desperately tried to stop the assisted death of his 27-year-old daughter, who, despite being diagnosed with ADHD and autism, was otherwise physically healthy as far as he knew. Tragically, many more such stories are bound to follow when, in 2027, the criteria for MAID will expand to include those suffering solely from mental illness. Despite Leadbeater’s claims that her bill will contain plenty of ‘safeguards’ to stop UK law expanding to these levels, anyone who has been paying attention to places like Canada knows that the slippery slope is very real.

You can also look to the Netherlands, where assisted suicide has been legal since 2002. This year, there was a spate of Dutch cases in which physically healthy people were euthanised. Twenty-nine-year-old Zoraya ter Beek and 35-year-old Jolanda Fun were both killed because they suffered from severe depression.

Leadbeater would have us believe that such a situation is impossible in the UK. Earlier this year, she claimed that ‘wherever [an assisted-dying] law has been introduced… and it’s got strict, limited criteria and proper safeguards and protections, it hasn’t been widened’. This is demonstrably untrue. There is not a single jurisdiction in which assisted suicide has been legalised where the eligibility criteria have not been relaxed or expanded. We have no reason to believe that the UK would be the exception to this rule.

Despite the depressing news on assisted suicide, there are still rays of light. That 275 MPs voted against the bill is in many ways incredible, given the political pressure exerted by Starmer and his large majority. Meanwhile, among the general public, polling shows that most Brits have their doubts about ‘assisted dying’.

In 2025, the debate must continue. And this time, it must be centred on facts, thoughtfulness and human dignity.

Kevin Yuill taught American studies at the University of Sunderland. His book, Assisted Suicide: The Liberal, Humanist Case Against Legalisation, is published by Palgrave Macmillan.

Previous articles by Kevin Yuill:

• Ten myths about assisted suicide (Link).
• The dystopian horror of the Sarco Suicide pod (Link).
• No safe way to legalize euthanasia (Link).
• Why are Dutch doctors euthanizing young healthy women? (Link).
• UK Labour Party leader is wrong about assisted suicide (Link).

Assisted suicide not the answer to NHS financial crisis

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

While Canada's parliament debated the expansion of the euthanasia law in 2020 to remove the requirement that a person be terminally ill, the Parliamentary Budget Officer projected that Canada's provinces would save at least $149 million per year if the expansion bill (Bill C-7) passed. An examination of the data reveals that this cost saving estimate was very conservative.

James Orr, an associate professor at the University of Cambridge, published an article in Newsweek on November 27, 2024. Orr discusses the financial crisis within the British National Health Service (NHS) and the proposal to legalize assisted suicide. 

The Labour party won a majority government in the July 2024 election giving Prime Minister Keir Starmer, a long-time supporter of assisted suicide, the responsibility of financially saving the National Health Service (NHS).

  Orr explains:

Labour's watershed budget exposed an existential challenge that threatens to drain our collective coffers. For the first time, the National Health Service's (NHS) annual budget has surpassed an eye-watering £200 billion. Taxpayers must pour ever-increasing resources to this bottomless void to prevent its total collapse.

The Chief Secretary's admission that "everyone recognises that the system is broken" rings hollow against the £20 billion emergency infusion for operational costs—a lifeline offered without any corresponding demands for enhanced efficiency, reduced waiting times, or structural reform. The arithmetic is unforgiving: Even substantial tax increases cannot satiate this growing appetite.

Starmer encouraged Labour MP Kim Leadbeater to sponsor a private members bill to legalize assisted suicide.

Orr writes:

Since this sobering fiscal reality check, parliamentarians are now racing to pass legislation that would enable physicians to facilitate their patients' deaths through assisted suicide. Although initially restricted to those with terminal diagnoses of six months or less, the experiences of Belgium, the Netherlands, and Canada serve as stark warnings: As surely as night follows day, such "safeguards" will disintegrate on contact with the messy reality of physical suffering and psychological discomfort to encompass an ever-widening circle of patients.

The economic calculus underlying assisted suicide advocacy has always haunted it. Consider the chilling prediction of Jacques Attali, former president of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, that euthanasia would become "one of the essential instruments of our future societies" once humans persist beyond their productive years, or Baroness Warnock's nakedly utilitarian arguments that those who burden their families or the state ought to be "allowed" to die.

What makes the assisted suicide debate in Britain even more telling is the lack of alternative policies that are being considered concerning the NHS economic woes.

 Orr warns that economic pressures will lead to more assisted suicide:

What begins as a right will shade rapidly and imperceptibly into an obligation, not least because the raw economic pressures are impossible to ignore. While inpatient hospice care costs £3,000 to £4,000 weekly, the administration of a cocktail of poisons or treatment in a portable gas chamber will cost a negligible fraction of that. One does not need to be an expert in public policy to recognize that such stark cost differentials will shape future policy decisions.

Orr urges the Labour government to protect society's vulnerable:

Whatever noble intentions Kim Leadbeater and her supporters may harbor, public policy must be evaluated by a concrete evaluation of its likely consequences. If this government truly aspires to progressive ideals of protecting society's most vulnerable, it must resist the temptation to sacrifice human dignity on the altar of fiscal expediency.

 

 Articles on this topic:

• Balancing Canada's Healthcare Budget with Euthanasia (Link) 
• Is the assisted suicide debate about healthcare savings? (Link).
  
• Canada's Healthcare Savings Attributed to Euthanasia (Link).

 

British Parliament passes assisted suicide bill at second reading

It is not the final vote. We will work to defeat this deadly bill.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, 

Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

I have sad news. Members of the UK Parliament voted 330 to 275 at second reading to support Kim Leadbeater's assisted suicide bill.

 

Not Dead Yet UK responded by stating that they will continue to protest this unsafe and discriminatory bill.

The battle is not over. The bill will be further scrutinised and committee hearings will occur before the final vote.

Let's be clear. If this bill passes, doctors will be given the right to assist the suicide of British residents. This is a life and death debate.

The good news is that the vote was closer than originally projected.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer, the leader of Britain's Labour Party, is a long-time promoter of assisted suicide. The July 4, 2024 election resulted in the Labour Party winning a massive majority with 411 out of 650 seats in parliament. A large number of the recently elected Labour members voted NO on the assisted suicide bill.

With further debate, MP's will have the opportunity to reflect on the deadly implications of legalizing assisted suicide.

Many MP's supported the bill because they were told that the Leadbeater assisted suicide bill was tighter than other assisted suicide laws.

We will continue to publish and circulate articles on how every jurisdiction that has legalized euthanasia and/or assisted suicide, that the laws were later expanded in scope and numbers of deaths.

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition opposes killing people.

UK debating an Oregon-style assisted suicide bill. The Oregon law lacks oversight.

Let's be clear. If this bill passes, doctors will be allowed to assist the suicides of British residents. This is a life and death debate.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director,

Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

British Members of Parliament will be voting on a private members assisted suicide bill on (November 29) that is sponsored by Kim Leadbeater.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer, leader of Britain's Labour Party, is a long-time promoter of assisted suicide. During the election Starmer promised that an assisted suicide bill would be introduced with a free-vote in parliament. Based on MP's statements the vote will likley be closer than Leadbeater and Starmer originally projected. (Link to Article).

The British bill is similar to the Oregon assisted suicide law, nonetheless the Oregon law also lacks effective oversight.

There are unanswered questions, related to abuse and under reporting concerning the Oregon assisted suicide law.

Let's look at the data.

The 2023 Oregon assisted suicide report indicates that there were 367 reported assisted suicide deaths up by 21% from 304 in 2022.

The number of lethal poison prescriptions written under the Oregon assisted suicide law increased to 566 in 2023 up by 29% from 433 in 2022.

There were more than 367 assisted suicide deaths in 2023. Every year the Oregon assisted suicide report updates the number of assisted suicide deaths in the previous year. 

The 2022 Oregon assisted suicide report stated that there were 278 assisted suicide deaths while the 2023 Oregon assisted suicide report stated that there were 304 assisted suicide deaths in 2022. The same has been true in every report. The increased number of assisted suicide deaths is based on late reporting. Based on this reality, I suggest that there were likely 400 assisted suicide deaths in 2023.

Since Britain has more than 16 times the number of citizens as the State of Oregon, there would likely be at least 6400 assisted suicide deaths and 9000 lethal poison prescriptions written yearly, if Britain legalizes assisted suicide.

Let's be clear. If this bill passes, doctors will be allowed to assist the suicides of British residents. This is a life and death debate.

Lack of oversight of the law.

The 2023 Oregon assisted suicide report states that the "ingestion status" was unknown in 141 of the 566 lethal poison prescriptions. This means that the Oregon Health Authority does not know how 141 people who were approved and received the lethal drugs died. Some of them are assisted suicide deaths that will be reported in the 2024 report. Some of these people died a natural death and some of these people died by assisted suicide but the death was not reported.

Considering that the Oregon assisted suicide law employs a self-reporting system, meaning the doctor who carried out the death is also the one who is responsible for reporting the death, therefore it is not surprising that unreported assisted suicide deaths would be happen in Oregon.

Only 3 of the 566 people who were prescribed lethal poison in 2023, were referred for a psychiatric assessment.

In Oregon, complications are only reported when a health care provider is present at the death. In 2023, there were 10 known complications based on 102 reported deaths representing almost a 10% complication rate. Based on the 367 reported assisted suicide deaths, there would be approximately 36 complications in 2023.

It is important to note that the longest time to die, in 2023, was 137 hours (more than 5.5 days).

Nearly every US state that has legalized assisted suicide has expanded their laws.

The assisted suicide law is well aware that it is harder to legalize assisted suicide than to expand the law once legal. Therefore assisted suicide bills are designed to sell the legalization of assisted suicide with the intention of expanding the law later.

It is important to note that no new US state has legalized assisted suicide in the last three years.

In 2019 Oregon expanded their assisted suicide law by giving doctors the ability to waive the waiting period when a person was deemed "near" to death.

In 2021 California expanded their assisted suicide law by: reducing the waiting period, forcing doctors who oppose assisted suicide to be complicit in the process (later struck down by the court) and it forced all medical institutions to post their policy on assisted suicide.

In 2022 Vermont expanded their assisted suicide law by removing the waiting period, (allowing a same day death), removing the requirement that an examination be done in person, (allowing approvals by telehealth), and it extended legal immunity to anyone who participates in the act.

In 2023 Oregon removed the assisted suicide law residency requirement which allows anyone to die by assisted suicide in Oregon.

In 2023 Vermont also removed the assisted suicide law residency requirement to also allow anyone to die by assisted suicide.

In 2023 Washington State expanded their assisted suicide law by: allowing advanced practice registered nurses to approve and prescribe lethal poison, reducing the waiting period, and to force healthcare institutions and hospices to post their assisted suicide policies.

In 2023 Hawaii expanded their assisted suicide law by: reducing the waiting period, allowing the waiting period to be waived if the person is "near" to death and allowing advanced practice registered nurses to approve and prescribe lethal poison.

In 2024 Colorado expanded their assisted suicide law by: reducing the waiting period, allowing the waiting period to be waived if the person is "near" to death and allowing advanced practise registered nurses to approve and prescribe the lethal poison.

The assisted suicide lobby launched a lawsuit challenging the New Jersey state assisted suicide residency requirement.

The goal of the assisted suicide lobby is to legalize assisted suicide by devising a bill that will sell the legalization to politicians. The assisted suicide lobby will then expand the scope of the assisted suicide laws after legalization either through legislation or by launching court cases. Once legal the assisted suicide lobby will argue that the safeguards stand in the way of equality.

UK assisted suicide bill. The vote will be close.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

A private members bill to legalize assisted suicide in the UK, that is being sponsored by Kim Leadbeater MP was recently released and is scheduled to have it's first debate on November 29.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer, the leader of Britain's Labour Party, is a long-time promoter of assisted suicide. During the election Starmer promised that an assisted suicide bill would be introduced with a free-vote on the bill. The July 4, 2024 election resulted in the Labour Party winning a massive majority with 411 out of 650 seats in parliament.

An article by George Eaton that was published in the New Statesman on November 14 not only suggests that the vote on Leadbeater's bill will be close and may in fact be defeated. Eaton states that:

Until recently, the consensus was that assisted dying would pass. Back in 2015, MPs voted by 330 to 118 against changing the law but the Commons now includes many more Labour and Liberal Democrat members (who have generally been sympathetic)...

Eaton explains that the mood in the UK parliament is changing:

Yet the mood is changing fast. Last month, Wes Streeting (Health Secretary) told a Parliamentary Labour Party meeting that he intends to vote against assisted dying on the grounds that palliative care is too poor to allow people a genuine choice. Yesterday the Health Secretary went further, warning that a change in the law could force the NHS to cut services elsewhere. “There would be resource implications for doing it. And those choices would come at the expense of other choices,” he said (having ordered an analysis of the costs by civil servants).

For several reasons, Streeting’s voice carries weight in Labour. As Health Secretary he would be tasked with implementing the bill and he is popular among new MPs in particular (a crucial swing group), with some regarding him as a future party leader. Streeting also voted in favour of legalising assisted dying in 2015 – and converts are often the most persuasive advocates of a position.

Eaton continues by outlining further how views on the bill are changing:

The Health Secretary is one of three cabinet ministers explicitly opposed to assisted dying, the others being Shabana Mahmood – who would be a central figure to the legislation as Justice Secretary – and Jonathan Reynolds, the Business Secretary. Angela Rayner, David Lammy and Darren Jones, the chief secretary to the Treasury, are also expected to vote against (three are publicly supportive: Ed Miliband, Lisa Nandy and Hilary Benn). Ed Davey, one of 72 Liberal Democrat MPs, is another notable opponent of the bill.

Eaton ends his article by stating that the rise of key cabinet ministers opposing the bill and with the lack of time allocated to the debate that the bill may be defeated.

As stated previously, the assisted suicide bill is scheduled for debate on November 29.

The UK will soon debate assisted suicide. Canada's euthanasia regime should cause caution.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

On October 9, 2024, The European Conservative published an interview by Jonathon Van Maren with Alexander Raikin. Raikin has recently published a research article titled: The Rise of Euthanasia in Canada: From Exceptional to Routine. Van Maren begins the  article by commentary on the fact that an assisted suicide bill will soon be introduced in the UK.

I recently completed a speaking tour in the UK to awaken people to the reality of Canada's euthanasia experience. Van Maren writes in relation to the upcoming UK assisted suicide bill:

...Keir Starmer, is planning to fast-track a bill legalizing assisted suicide, telling the BBC on October 4 that he is “pleased” to be able to do so. Euthanasia activists have been waiting for this moment and are ramping up their campaigns. Labour MP Kim Leadbeater wrote an editorial for the Guardian in which she stated, with admirable honesty: “Life is precious. But so is choice.” She makes it clear—although without moral clarity—that between life and choice, we must always pick choice. 

Starmer has promised to allot extra time to enable Leadbeater's assisted suicide bill to be debated and likely receive a second reading vote before Christmas. Van Maren continues:

Wes Streeting, Starmer’s Secretary of State for Health, has stated that he opposes legalizing euthanasia because the state of end-of-life care in the UK is horrifying—and because the notion of choice, considering the availability of palliative care, is farcical: “When I think about this question of burden, I do not think that palliative care … in this country is in a condition yet where we are giving people the freedom to choose without being coerced by the lack of support available.” Similar concerns were raised in a 2023 parliamentary report that emphasized the need for “major improvements” in end-of-life care.

Labour’s disabilities secretary, Sir Stephen Timms, also expressed his opposition. In 2022, he stated, “If we were to legalise assisted dying, we would impose an awful moral dilemma on every conscientious frail person nearing the end of their life … If ending their life early were legally permissible, many who do not want to end their life would feel under great, probably irresistible, pressure to do so. There is no way to stop that happening.” At least five senior ministers have already indicated that they plan to vote against assisted suicide.

Starmer, the leader of the Labour party, won a massive majority government. One of Starmer's election promises was to bring forth an assisted suicide bill. Van Maren continues:

The most insidious aspect of this is that Starmer knows what will happen if assisted suicide and euthanasia are legalized. His own health secretary has made it clear. So has the disabilities secretary. In fact, Canada—a Commonwealth country—has provided a singular case study over the past several years, with many euthanasia horror stories being featured prominently in the UK press. None of those supporting euthanasia have taken the trouble to rebut the assertion that ‘choice’ will play little role in many deaths. Considering the prevalence and prominence of the evidence, it is difficult not to conclude that they believe that is an acceptable price to pay.

Starmer is a long-time supporter of euthanasia and assisted suicide. The UK assisted suicide bill can be defeated if, during the debate, Canada's experience with euthanasia is continuously brought up. 

The UK cannot ignore how Canada's euthanasia law is out of control.

The many new Labour party MP's who were recently elected in the UK need to be open-minded and willing to research Canada's euthanasia reality. There are ample Canadian examples of what can happen when euthanasia or assisted suicide are legalized. 

Letter opposing UK assisted suicide bill.

People who oppose assisted suicide in the UK need to write letters to their representatives. 

Letter from Ann Farmer to UK political representatives.

I am writing to you once again regarding news reports about the proposed Private Members’ Bill submitted by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater to legalise ‘assisted dying’, aka assisted suicide. 

As a disabled person I am very concerned about this Bill, not only for myself but for vulnerable groups, particularly the elderly, sick and disabled, especially given severe pressure on the NHS, which Sir Keir Starmer has referred to as ‘broken’, as well as a recent Marie Curie report exposing significant shortcomings in palliative and end-of-life care in this country. 

The risks of legalizing assisted suicide were highlighted by the actor and disability rights campaigner Liz Carr in her recent BBC One documentary ‘Better Off Dead?’ (youtube link) which I encourage you to watch if you have not already done so. It warns of the dangers of such legislation for the disabled and poor, dangers highlighted in a recent article by Sir Stephen Timms MP.  Such warnings are based on the reality in countries that have legalized ‘assisted dying’, only to see a steady relaxation of the law; indeed, it is now clear that the allegedly strict safeguards accompanying such laws are considered necessary to calm public fears, enabling the passage of the law, which is then broadened in scope.

Furthermore, despite campaigners’ claims that ‘assisted dying’ enjoys public support, a recent opinion poll found that this issue ranked 22nd out of a list of 23 possible priorities for the new Government. 

The same poll also highlighted public concerns over the practicalities of legalizing assisted suicide, with over half of respondents revealing fears that there are too many complicating factors to make assisted suicide a practical and safe option.

Although a recent ‘Citizens’ Jury’ supported legalising assisted suicide, doubts were cast on the impartiality of the Jury’s findings after revelations that Danielle Hamm, the Director of the organisation commissioning the project, was previously the head of ‘Compassion in Dying’, sister charity to assisted suicide pressure group Dignity in Dying. In addition, the project was funded by a charity that had previously given a significant grant “towards work on legalising assisted dying”, while a majority of Jury members seem to have held settled views in support of legalising euthanasia as well as assisted suicide, with more members also favouring ‘assisted dying’ for under-18s and the non-terminally ill.

Clearly, Citizens’ Juries do not reliably reflect public opinion.  In contrast, whenever Parliament has studied these issues in depth, objectively considering the risks, it has decisively rejected legalization, as with the last such Bill in 2015, when more Labour MPs and more Conservative MPs voted against legalization than in favour, while only three Liberal Democrat MPs supported it.

I would be grateful for your reassurance that you will oppose rushing through such dangerous and complex legislation into law and will do whatever you can to ensure Parliament focuses instead on measures to provide authentic end-of-life care to all who need it.

Thank you for your consideration and for all your efforts, and I look forward to receiving your response.

Yours sincerely, 

Ann Farmer
Woodford Green
Essex IG8 7NQ.

The UK will debate assisted suicide bill this year.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

I am currently in the UK on a speaking tour speaking about Canada's experience with euthanasia (MAiD).

The Care Not Killing Alliance announced on October 3rd that Labour MP Kim Leadbeater said that she will introduce a Private Member’s Bill (she has the first private members bill spot) to instroduce an assisted suicide bill.

The Leadbeater bill has not been released yet. 

There have been several assisted suicide bills debated in the UK over the past few years. The last bill was debated in 2015 which was overwhelmingly defeated in the House of Commons. But sadly times are different after the election of Keir Starmer as Prime Minister.

Starmer, the leader of Britain's Labour Party, is a long-time promoter of assisted suicide. During the election Starmer promised that he would introduce a bill and allow a free-vote on assisted suicide. The July 4 election resulted in the Labour Party winning a massive majority with 411 out of 650 parliamentary seats.

After the election Starmer reiterated his support for assisted suicide and promised a free-vote within the year. BBC news reported:

Sir Keir Starmer has insisted he remains committed to giving MPs a free vote on assisted dying laws at some point.

The prime minister said he would provide parliamentary time for a vote if a backbench MPs proposed changing the law, but stressed the government had other "priorities for the first year or so".

In the House of Lords, Lord Falconer introduced his private members bill in the second spot. Falconer, who has sponsored previous assisted suicide bills, introduced the Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Adults bill on Friday July 26.

I reported on October 2 that Scotland's assisted suicide bill is likely to die a natural death. It is possible that Leadbeaters bill will attempt to legalize assisted suicide in all of the UK, including Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Britain needs to fully examine Canada's experience with euthanasia and reject it. Hopefully the House of Lords will defeat the Falconer assisted suicide bill.

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition will keep you up-to-date on the British assisted suicide bills. We will continue to work with the Care Not Killing Alliance and other groups in the UK that oppose assisted suicide.

Scotland's assisted suicide bill will die a natural death.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

On March 28, 2024, Liam McArthur (LibDem) MSP introduced the Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill bill that was expected to receive its first debate sometime this fall in Scotland's legislature (Holyrood).

On October 1, 2024 Scottish Health Secretary, Neil Gray said that Liam McArthur’s Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill was “outside the legislative competence.” Therefore, McArthur's assisted suicide bill will die because sections of the bill are outside of the jurisdiction of Scotland's legislature.

Simon Johnson reported for the Telegraph that:

In a memo to the Scottish Parliament’s health committee, he said the Bill’s proposal that ministers specify which drugs can be used to end people’s lives related to Westminster’s powers over “medicines, medical supplies and poisons”.

The document also warned that the legislation’s plan to shift the role of medics from “protecting/enhancing patients’ lives to assisting in termination of life” could change reserved UK regulation of health professionals.

The memo argued that “further processes” would have to be gone through to bring the Bill within Holyrood’s competence.

Keir Starmer, leader of Britain's Labour Party, has been a long-time promoter of assisted suicide. During the election Starmer promised that he would introduce a bill and allow a free-vote on legalizing assisted suicide in the UK. The July 4 election resulted in the Labour Party winning a massive majority with 411 out of 650 parliamentary seats.

After the election BBC news reported that Starmer reiterated his support for assisted suicide and promised a free-vote within the year.

It is likely that Scotland will not consider an assisted suicide bill until after London (Westminster) has debated the issue.

More information on this topic:

• Scotland's deceptive euthanasia bill redefines terminal illness to include people with disabilities (Link).

Liberal Democrat (UK) leader is skeptical about assisted suicide.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Faith Ridler reported for Sky News (UK) on September 16, 2024 that: 

Sir Ed Davey

Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey is 'sceptical' of the case for assisted dying for 'quite personal' reasons. Ridler reported that during an interview with Sky News' deputy political editor Sam Coates, Davey stated that MP's must deeply and carefully listen to all sides of the debate, considering it's outcome. Davey also urged MP's not to rush a vote on assisted suicide.

Keir Starmer, the leader of the Labour Party, won a majority government in the last election. Starmer, who is a long-time supporter of assisted suicide, stated that he may fast-track legislation to legalize assisted suicide.

Ridler reported that Davey told Coates in an interview that:

He said: "My concerns are both quite personal. I asked my mother as a teenager when she was dying of bone cancer. And I saw someone with a very painful disease."

The Liberal Democrat leader said that through nursing and palliative care "she was able to enjoy life and be with us".

Separately, Sir Ed has concerns about the pressure legalising assisted dying could place on elderly people.

He said this wouldn't "necessarily" be from relatives, but "from the inside, internally, which they may not express".

Ridler stated that Sir Ed Davey is a skeptic concerning assisted suicide and believes that any vote on the issue must be a free vote.

Ridler pointed out that Scotland's Liberal Democrat MSP, Liam McArthur, is leading efforts to change the law in Scotland with a private member's bill on the issue.

Governments in the UK need to examine the experience with Canada's euthanasia law and outright reject legalizing euthanasia or assisted suicide.

Conservative leadership (UK) candidates who oppose assisted suicide.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The 2024 UK Conservative Party leadership election began on 5 July 2024 when Prime Minister Rishi Sunak declared his intention to resign as Conservative Party leader following the party's defeat in the July 4, 2024 general election.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer (Labour) who won the election has been a long-time supporter of assisted suicide.

Kitty Donaldson, the INews Chief Political Commentator wrote on September 5, 2024 that Robert Jenrick, the front-runner in the Conservative leadership campaign, has changed his position on assisted suicide. Donaldson reported:

Jenrick, who emerged as the front-runner after comfortably coming top in the first round of voting among Tory MPs on Wednesday, has been on a political journey. Once seen as a liberal Tory and close friend of Rishi Sunak’s – the two played computer games together – Jenrick both stormed out of Sunak’s government over immigration while also becoming more socially conservative over the last few years. Despite voting for legalising assisted dying in 2015, his about-turn has been informed by Canada’s experience of changing the law, his allies said.

Jenrick is one of many politicians who may philosophically support assisted suicide but based on Canada's experience, is now opposing it. It is unknown whether his position is based on winning the leadership race or is a real change in position.

Donaldson also reported that Conservative leadership candidate James Cleverly remains opposed to assisted suicide.

Fellow leadership contender James Cleverly voted against assisted dying in 2015 and is understood not to have changed his position, but wants to support improving palliative care.

Even though Tom Tugendhat is currently running fourth in the leadership race, he has also voted against assisted suicide in the past.

The position of the next UK Conservative leader is important since the Labour Party won the last election and it's leader, Keir Starmer, is a long time supporter of assisted suicide. 

We expect a bill to legalize assisted suicide will be debate in Britain in 2025.

Disabled campaigners' warn about Lord Falconer's aim to legalise assisted suicide in the UK

Not Dead Yet UK published the following article on the Falconer assisted suicide bill.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton (Charlie Falconer) introduced a Private Members Bill (there’s an explanation of what they are here) to make it legal to assist people who are terminally ill to die.

As a group of disability rights campaigners, Not Dead Yet UK are deeply concerned about this course of action.

Like many disabled people, we are conscious that attempts to build legalised suicide into healthcare can be profoundly discriminatory – if a non-disabled person wants to die, their doctor does not give them the means to kill themselves.

We want the same care and respect to be given to terminally ill people if they are suicidal.

Rather than legalising the suicides of disabled people, we argue that the only safe way forward is better investment in palliative care and a commitment to improving the things that people often cite when they apply to die in other parts of the world, such as a lack of dignity and feeling like a burden.

Can an assisted suicide law ever be “safe”?

Charlie Falconer told The Guardian, 

“My bill is designed for people who will die in the near future. I don’t think the state should be helping people who are not terminally ill to take their own lives.”

However, this does not reassure us.

We have seen, again and again, across the world, that laws that begin with relatively strict parameters, such as terminal illness, expand and expand until people with treatable conditions, children, and people who simply can’t afford accessible housing end up being approved to die by assisted suicide.

While Falconer assures us there will be “safeguards”, in reality, these safeguards are virtually impossible to implement effectively. Even the idea that doctors can accurately predict when a person has six months left to live does not reflect reality.

And in a world where there is growing awareness of coercive control, and where we know that many do not receive adequate or appropriate medical care, pain management or social care, we are creating the conditions for people to find themselves agreeing that yes, they should probably die, including to avoid feeling like a burden, when providing them with what they actually need to live could allow them to enjoy and participate in their own life again.

What if good care stopped us from wanting to die? Where are the proposed laws to provide everybody with compassionate and appropriate care instead?

Can Falconer succeed?

Falconer has already failed at changing laws in the area of assisted suicide six times, as detailed here, but he hopes that this iteration of the Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults Bill will be the one that enables assisted suicide for terminally ill people.

Private members’ bills, especially from Lords, are generally thought to be an ineffective way to create a new law. According to Politics Home, “almost all Private Members’ Bills fail. In all sessions of each Parliament between 1997 and 2015 generally only between three per cent and six per cent of bills succeeded”

What could be different this time is that Keir Starmer, the new Prime Minister, seems to be keen on legalising assisted suicide. Earlier this year, he said that if he became prime minister, he would ensure parliamentary time was made available to debate the issue and he would allow a free vote (where politicians vote according to their conscience and personal beliefs, not according to what their political party wants).

Falconer told LBC that he “strongly feels the time for this reform has come”, but presumably he felt the same when he introduced attempts to change the law in 2009, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2019 and 2022 too.

However, with the Prime Minister on side, this time, disabled people could find ourselves under threat in an unprecedented way in this country. Follow Not Dead Yet UK on Twitter / X to stay on top of our campaign to ensure that disabled people are helped to live, not to die.