Starmer Reaffirms Commitment to Assisted Suicide Vote
Pro-life campaigners have warned that making assisted suicide legal ‘is a very dangerous idea’ which poses a ‘clear threat’ to the vulnerable and disabled.
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has repeated his commitment to holding a debate and free vote on assisted suicide.
Starmer made the pledge in response to a public request from Dame Esther Rantzen to remember his promise to her that he would allow the vote if he became prime minister.
Speaking to reporters on Tuesday, Starmer said that he had given the terminally ill veteran broadcaster his word when they last spoke in March that he would allow time for debate with a private member’s bill, “and I repeat that commitment.”
“I made it to her personally and I meant it, and we will,” he said.
The remarks come after former Labour Justice Secretary Lord Falconer introduced the Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults Bill in the House of Lords in July, which is expected to be debated in mid-November.
Labour MP Jake Richards has also previously signalled his intention to bring forward a private member’s bill on assisted suicide after he had secured a spot to introduce a proposal in the House of Commons. Richards posted to social media platform X on September 5 that he had “made it clear that my first preference for a bill would be to reform our archaic assisted dying laws.”
Starmer had previously said that he was “personally in favour of changing the law” and when asked on Tuesday if he would support a law, said that he would “look at the legislation first.”
“In principle, I think there’s a case to be made for changing the law,” he said, adding he wanted to see what safeguards would be proposed.
‘Dangerous Idea’
Campaigners in favour of a change in law say it is needed to give people with terminal illnesses a dignified death.
Safeguards which campaigners say would be put in place to stop abuse of the system include eligibility being restricted only to those with a terminal illness with a life expectancy of six months or less and where the person is experiencing unbearable pain.
But pro-life groups warn that changes to the law could leave the vulnerable subject to being coerced into ending their own lives.
Right to Life UK, which campaigns to promote the value of human life at all stages, say that making assisted suicide legal “is a very dangerous idea” which poses a “clear threat” to those with disabilities.
The organisation’s spokeswoman Catherine Robinson said on Wednesday that “in the context of a struggling healthcare system, the notion that assisted suicide would be freely chosen rather than a result of coercion cannot be taken seriously.”
“Evidence from Canada and Oregon clearly show that, for many people who end their lives by assisted suicide (or euthanasia in the case of Canada), concerns about being a burden are very real. We would be naive to think, in our highly atomised society, that such trends would not be operative in our own country too,” Robinson added.
During a non-binding debate in Parliament in May, MPs raised similar concerns, with Stephen Tims saying that legalising assisted suicide would “impose a terrible dilemma” on the elderly, frail, and vulnerable “who don’t want to die but don’t want to be a burden.”
Slippery Slope
Critics of such proposals also warn that eligibility restrictions would not remain limited to those with terminal conditions, with MPs at the May debate listing cases overseas where young people with PTSD and depression have accessed state-sponsored euthanasia.
Historian and CEO of Humanists Against Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia Kevin Yuill had similarly warned of the slippery slope effect, saying that in every country where assisted suicide had been introduced, it has been expanded beyond its original intentions: for the terminally ill with six months to live.
Yuill told NTD’s “British Thought Leaders” earlier this year that countries like Belgium, The Netherlands, and Canada all started their assisted suicide campaigns with those restrictions in place, only for the scope to widen, predicting that the situation would be no different if the law were changed in the UK.
A UK government spokesperson said earlier this month: “Successive governments have taken the view that any change to the law in this sensitive area is a matter for Parliament to decide.
“This Government has made clear that time will be provided for a proper debate and vote on any legislation brought forward.”
PA Media contributed to this report.
Victoria Friedman
Author
Victoria Friedman is a UK-based reporter covering a wide range of national stories.