Campaigners who are opposed to legalising assisted dying are criticising a decision to scrap the need for a High Court Judge to give cases final approval.
MPs voted yesterday evening to remove a clause in the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill for England and Wales which had ensured a judicial safeguard. It would have meant that only cases approved by two doctors and a High Court judge would be allowed.
But on Wednesday, a committee of MPs voted 15 to seven to remove this judicial oversight.
Instead, a three-person panel comprising a psychiatrist, social worker and lawyer would make the final decision.
It comes after MPs examining the Bill rejected amendments aimed at protecting vulnerable people.
Jamie Gillies from the Christian social policy charity CARE told Premier:
“We at CARE are disappointed. The legislation was marketed to MPs last year as having the strongest safeguards in the world, and it was talked about a lot that a High Court judge would be required to sign off individual cases, and this was billed as a very strong safeguard.
“So for us this is a rolling back on safeguards, it's a rolling back on the promise made by the bill sponsor and her allies, and it just shows that there is this tendency to water down assisted suicide legislation to remove barriers.”
He said there are fears that a proposed panel of experts would be largely in favour of allowing assisted dying cases:
“The decision these panels will make will be subjective and based on their own particular views on the issue. So people who apply to be on these panels will undoubtedly be people who are comfortable with assisted suicides, who perhaps have a lot of support for it in principle, so the decisions they make will be based on their own personal views.”
The Bill was introduced to Parliament in November by the MP Kim Leadbeater. It proposes allowing terminally ill adults with less than six months to live to receive medical assistance to die.
Former Conservative MP Caroline Ansell, who is now director of Advocacy and Policy at CARE, said:
“As a former MP, I have felt deeply uneasy whilst following committee scrutiny of the Bill. A series of amendments designed to safeguard vulnerable Britons have been voted down. Now, the High Court provision has been removed from the bill in favour of widely criticised, unworkable panels.
“Amendments voted down at committee were designed to protect disabled people, people with anorexia, people who have a history of suicidal thinking, and children. Organisations representing these groups understandably feel like their voices aren’t being heard in this debate.
“MPs across the House expressed concern about the potential implications of assisted suicide last year – including those who backed the Bill at second reading. They believed that further scrutiny would see the concerns they and their constituents have addressed. They have not been.”
The Bill is now set for its third reading.