Georgia L Gilholy is a journalist.
There is a certain genre of Conservative that enjoys licking his own wounds.
This type of character takes a peculiar comfort in being part of an ideological minority that feels itself both morally right and ostracised for being so. But romanticising one’s despair is neither wise nor helpful. It is natural to feel discouraged in tough times, but this must be balanced with pragmatism and energy, especially when it relates to an issue of life and death.
Last November MPs debated and narrowly approved Kim Leadbeater’s Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill at its second reading, with 330 votes in favour and 275 against. The Bill, which seeks to legalise assisted suicide for terminally ill adults with a predicted life expectancy of less than six months, is now set for another vote on April 25, 2025. Supporters claim it offers choice and dignity- it really offers neither.
The Bill’s so-called “safeguards”—requiring approval from two doctors and a judge—have been rightly slammed as shaky. Methods for predicting a life expectancy of six months are notoriously unreliable and therefore an unworkable criterion. Opponents point to shocking examples from other countries, such as Canada, where expanded laws have led to controversial cases, including the euthanasia of a physically healthy 27-year-old with mental health struggles.
Over 350 UK disability charities openly oppose the Bill, and none of their representatives have yet been invited to give testimony to the Bill’s newly appointed public committee. Likewise, not a single foreign or lawyer witness who is opposed to assisted suicide has been asked to offer evidence.
For weeks before November’s vote Leadbeater’s draft bill remained under wraps, despite the fact she had long since begun campaigning for it. She recently voted against hearing from the Royal College of Psychiatrists in the course of the committee, and then a member of Leadbeater’s office lied to Prospect Magazine about having done so-despite it being a matter of public record. As legal scholar Yuan Yi Zhu points out, Leadbeater and her allies “knew that proper scrutiny would kill her bill. Now, they are following the same playbook for its committee stage.”
Despite these shenanigans, political support for the plan is far from solid. While November’s vote was a setback for its opponents, it was hardly decisive. Fewer than 30 MPs would need to change their position at the third reading to stop the Bill. Analysis suggests that as many as 36 MPs who supported it in November are reconsidering. Additionally, 21 MPs—18 Labour and three Conservatives—did not vote, meaning their decisions in April could be critical.
Some parliamentarians admitted voting to advance the Bill not out of unassailable conviction, but to allow further debate. Significant lobbying from campaigners on both sides could still sway the final outcome. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has publicly backed the Bill, but there are clear divisions within Parliament.
The debate raises uncomfortable questions about human dignity, medical ethics, and how the state manages end-of-life care. It also comes at a time of low public trust in institutions, with concerns about whether the NHS could implement such a policy fairly. Whatever one’s instincts, assisted dying laws have led to vulnerable people feeling pressured into ending their lives in far more well-functioning societies than ours, why would we be an exception?
The next few months will be crucial to defeat this push to demote the value of human life. Voters and politicians alike must be made aware of the huge risks of this legislation. Persuading MPs to closely examine the Bill’s flaws and learn from other countries’ experiences will be key. Even supporters of assisted suicide in principle, including Tory leader Kemi Badenoch, have expressed concerns about this specific proposal.
There is simply no concrete Commons majority for this precise Bill. The “Ayes” won last autumn merely because reluctant MPs were pressured to push this modish cause past Second Reading, allowing the debate to continue. Their scepticism, whether tied to personal beliefs or anxiety over constituents’ unease, did not disappear when they sidled off for a late lunch that gloomy Friday.
Leadbeater and her alliance – including Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer – may have won one battle, but their victory is far from sealed.