Legalised assisted suicide threatens the vulnerable and is impossible to control. That is the experience of countries that have introduced the practice according to its opponents. In a packed Westminster Hall, MPs from across the political spectrum warned that changing the law would radically alter the provision of healthcare and send a message to the sick and disabled that they would be better off dead.

The three-hour debate came in response to an e-petition calling for Parliamentary time to be made available for a vote on changing the law. The high-profile campaign launched by Dignity in Dying, with the backing of the Daily Express and Dame Ester Rantzen, gathered over 200,000 signatures. It became clear during the debate that it had also gained significant backing within the House of Commons. The majority of speakers who voiced their support for assisted suicide related personal stories of the death of loved ones or constituents. While several MPs argued that a change would be a compassionate response to the suffering of the terminally ill, others insisted that it was a matter of personal autonomy for everyone to have the right to end their life at a time of their choosing. 

The reality of assisted suicide

While opponents of change made fewer contributions to the debate, their arguments relied less on emotion and personal stories, instead, they cited evidence from other jurisdictions where rates of assisted suicide have exploded in recent years. 

Among the first MPs to speak was Sir Peter Bottomley (Conservative MP for Worthington West), who drew attention to the potential scale of assisted suicide that would be likely to follow a change in the law, He said, “There are about 5,000 to 6,000 suicides a year in this country. Do people think we are talking about 100 people a year extra or 1,000? I put it to the people here that if we had a Dutch level of medical assistance in death, we would add 15,000 deaths a year—we would treble the number of existing suicides and, including the existing figure, take it up to four times.”

One after another the e-petition’s supporters emphasised that any legislation would have strict guardrails to protect the vulnerable but no one outlined the kind of protections they had in mind. Their opponents, however, pointed to a list of countries in which safeguards were gradually eroded and criteria expanded.

Vulnerbale people told they would be better off dead

In a powerful intervention, Danny Kruger (Conservative MP for Devizes), warned that while spending on palliative care declines in real terms when assisted suicide is legalised, what does increase is suicide itself. 

“The fact is that suicide is contagious. Suicides among people who would not be eligible for assisted suicide increased in countries that have legalised it. I am afraid that is understandable when we consider that the Government have told society that some people would be better off dead,” he said.

The slippery slope

During the debate Sir Stephen Timms (Labour MP for East Ham), also warned of the radical implications of a change in the law and where it would lead, arguing: 

“…it is clear from what happens elsewhere that if that did happen, it would not remain subject to that narrow criterion. It would not end there. Indeed, the campaign to broaden the scope has already begun. Matthew Parris wrote in his column in The Times that we need assisted suicide because old people cost too much.”

He concluded by saying: “The argument I want to set out is that this road is not one that those of us who subscribe to the founding principles of Nye Bevan’s health service should be willing to go down.”

Decline in public support for assisted suicide 

In a well-argued intervention, Fiona Bruce (Conservative MP for Congleton) revealed how support for assisted suicide declined sharply when details of proposed legislation were explained to members of the public.

Citing the example of a 2014 ComRes poll she said: “…the proportion of people who supported assisted dying stood at seven out of 10 when initially asked, but fell dramatically to four in 10 when presented with the full picture of the arguments against assisted dying, and so equipped to make a more informed decision.”

Before the debate, a coalition of campaign groups and individuals gathered outside Parliament to demonstrate their opposition to any change in the law — representatives of the Humanist movement, faith-based organisations, disability advocates and members of the medical profession came together to urge MPs to defend the vulnerable and safeguard the health service. 

Attempts to legalise assisted suicide will resurface

Despite the evidence from other nations that assisted suicide threatens the most vulnerable members of society, both the Government and the Labour opposition have indicated that they would be prepared to provide Parliamentary time for a Bill to legalise the practice. While Monday’s debate did not propose the adoption of specific legislation, this issue is certain to resurface. There can be no doubt that the fight against the introduction of assisted suicide represents a major challenge for the pro-life movement ahead of the next general election.