Assisted dying Bill verdict simply as Brit mum ends her personal life in Swiss clinic

The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill had been passing through Parliament for the past year and a half and it comes just as a Brit mum ended her life in a Swiss assisted dying clinic today

View 3 Images

Assisted dying will not become law in England and Wales after proposed legislation branded “hopelessly flawed” by opponents ran out of time amid claims of a “denial of democracy” from supporters.

The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, which had been progressing through Parliament for the past year and a half, collapsed on Friday with peers in the House of Lords speaking passionately on both sides of the debate.

While the Bill had successfully cleared two votes in the House of Commons, albeit with a narrower majority on the second occasion, it did not face a vote in the Lords. It instead ran out of time, with Lord Charlie Falconer – who had guided it through the upper chamber – saying he felt “despondent” that a piece of legislation which he said was “so important to so many, has not failed on its merits, but failed as a result of procedural wrangling”.

It comes on the same day that a Brit mum travelled to Switzerland to end her life in an assisted dying clinic after the death of her only son. Wendy Duffy, 56, a former care worker from the West Midlands, paid £10,000 to end her life at the controversial Pegasos, a Swiss assisted dying clinic, after losing her son Marcus, 23, four years ago.

The mum has gone through therapy and been given treatment involving antidepressants, but has been unable cope with his death. Speaking just days before her planned death, Wendy said: “I won’t change my mind. I know it’s hard for you, sweetheart. It will be hard for everyone. But I want to die, and that’s what I’m going to do. And I’ll have a smile on my face when I do, so please be happy for me. My life; my choice.”

The Bill had proposed permitting adults in England and Wales, with fewer than six months to live, to apply for an assisted death subject to the approval of two doctors and an expert panel.

More than 1,200 amendments to the Bill had been suggested in the Lords, with more than 800 of those tabled or sponsored by seven peers.

Lord Falconer described the process of the Bill as “horrible”, saying it had not failed to complete its journey through the Lords due to a lack of time, but rather “because a small minority were not willing to co-operate, as we normally do, to ensure that there can be proportionate debate”. Tory former cabinet minister Lord Baker of Dorking accused critics of the Bill of conducting a “prolonged filibuster”, describing the situation as a “denial of democracy”.

Paralympian Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson, who had voiced opposition to the Bill, said it had collapsed because “there are too many gaps in it” adding that she believed there was “a lot of misunderstanding about what people might get” under a law change.

Those against the Bill have labelled it “unsafe and unworkable” and “bad law”, expressing their worries about potential coercion of vulnerable individuals and insufficient safeguards for those with disabilities.

Baroness Campbell of Surbiton, a former commissioner at Britain’s rights watchdog the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), said disabled people had contacted her to say this “particular Bill frightens them, and they want me to explain to your Lordships why it is dangerous for them”.

The crossbench peer, who has spinal muscular atrophy, and addressed the chamber remotely, said disabled people “fear unequal access to care shaping their choices, they fear subtle coercion that cannot be easily detected”.

Conservative former deputy prime minister Baroness Therese Coffey said she worried “that many peers and many MPs are putting choice for some ahead of concern on coercion for others”.

Lord Falconer said many terminally ill people and their relatives “who have shown such courage and forbearance” have been “utterly bewildered by the way we (peers) have behaved”. Supporters have pledged to attempt bringing the Bill back in Parliament’s next session, with its Commons sponsor Kim Leadbeater – who observed proceedings from the gallery on Friday – saying she will once again enter her name in the private members’ bills ballot.

As the draft legislation collapsed, Ms Leadbetter rose and placed her hand over her mouth, shaking her head.

Campaigners have indicated they could utilise the Parliament Act to push the Bill through if it was selected.

That Act, a seldom-used piece of legislation, permits Bills that have received Commons backing in two consecutive sessions but faced Lords rejection to become law without peers’ approval.

Lord Falconer told peers: “It is clear that the issue will not go away, nor should it, until it is resolved. Parliament can and must come to a decision. It is now for the other place to decide what we do next.”

Dame Sarah Mullally, the senior bishop in the Church of England and a former chief nurse, said if the Bill returns “we need to do our work differently”.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, who sits in the Lords and has voiced opposition to the Bill, said: “There is no doubt in my mind that this is one of the biggest societal shifts that we are seeing or will see. Therefore, as we have done, we need to take our role seriously.” The Government maintained its neutrality on the matter and MPs cast their ballots according to their personal convictions rather than party allegiances, but one Conservative peer claimed he had been informed by several Labour MPs they “felt intimidated” into supporting it.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer backed the proposal while Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch opposed it.

Former Tory treasurer Lord Farmer informed the Lords: “I’ve spoken to a number of Labour MPs since, and what was not known, possibly, is that there was considerable pressure from Number 10 (to) pass the Bill.”

He stated it was “known that the Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer supported it”, and implied Bill advocates were “standing at the entrance to the lobbies taking note of who was going through”.

He continued: “I’m just passing on what Labour MPs have said to me, that they felt intimidated.”

When questioned by journalists on Friday whether the PM was disappointed to witness the Bill’s failure, a Number 10 spokesperson responded: “He’s spoken about the importance of the Government being neutral on the issue, therefore, explained why he hasn’t spoken on it.

“As a result, it’s a matter for MPs, it’s a matter for parliamentarians, and that remains the case.”

Ms Badenoch has stated the Bill should not be reintroduced in the next parliamentary session, branding it as “hopelessly flawed”. Speaking to journalists during a visit to Swindon, she implied that the Government had “used a private members’ Bill to push through its agenda” and highlighted there were “all sorts of problems” with the legislation.

She stated, “It’s something that Keir Starmer wants to see. He said he made a promise to Esther Rantzen. I think he should focus on the rest of the country.”

Dame Esther Rantzen, a prominent figure in the campaign to legalise assisted dying, has criticised peers against the Bill for “condemning generations of terminally ill patients to die in agony”.

The broadcaster and Childline founder, who is terminally ill, expressed her “bitter disappointment” that some of those in the House of Lords “have conspired to sabotage our democracy”.

Meanwhile, charities involved in palliative and end-of-life care have cautioned Health Secretary Wes Streeting that the momentum generated by the national conversation on death must not be “wasted”.

Mr Streeting, who voted against the Bill in the Commons, is being encouraged by specialist palliative care and hospice organisations to utilise this “critical moment” to instigate the improvements they believe are desperately needed for dying individuals.