The debate on the assisted dying bill in the House of Commons is deeply polarized, with varying opinions on its safeguards. Supporters, including sponsor Kim Leadbeater, argue the bill has rigorous protections, while critics, such as Naz Shah, see it as weakened by removing High Court oversight. Personal stories support broader access, especially for those with neurodegenerative diseases. Polls show public division, with over half finding new safeguards sufficient, but warnings about potential coercion and the quality of palliative care are prevalent.
The debate over the assisted dying bill in the House of Commons has intensified, with MPs deeply divided over its safeguards and scope.
While sponsor Kim Leadbeater insists the bill includes world-leading protections, critics argue it has been weakened, particularly after the replacement of High Court oversight with an expert panel.
Supporters like Marie Tidball and Liz Jarvis shared moving personal stories, backing amendments that would expand access to those with neurodegenerative diseases.
In a poll, 56 percent said the new safeguards were enough. Many argued for greater autonomy and compassion, referencing the suffering of loved ones.
Collection
[
|
...
]