Image Source: (L) UK Parliament | (R) SPUC Pro-Life
Liberal Democrat MP for the South Cotswolds Dr Roz Savage has this weekend authored an explanation of why she decided to vote against the resurrected Terminally Ill Adults (End Of Life) Bill at its Second Reading, despite having a mother who was a long-time member of Dignity in Dying.
In a column for the Wilts and Gloucestershire Standard she tries to reason with her constituents about why she changed from supporting assisted suicide in 2025 to voting against in 2026–one of a few full switchers who clinched the narrow sixteen vote victory.
Dr Savage starts by affirming that she does “continue to support assisted dying in principle” and talking about her own desire to one day choose a state-sanctioned suicide were she to be terminally ill. Yet, she felt the need to actively vote against the proposed legislation as she “was not confident that this specific Bill provided a safe and workable framework.”
After seeking counsel from four doctors in her constituency and other healthcare professionals she claims, “the concerns they raised ultimately tipped the balance for me.”
Despite knowing people who have tried to leave for Switzerland unaccompanied, she didn’t let the emotional arguments cloud her judgement as a parliamentarian. “On a matter of life and death, MPs have a responsibility to keep listening to the evidence, right up until we vote,” she wrote.
Her main concerns with Lauren Edwards’ Bill, which the proposer openly admitted would not be allowed to be amended, was whether medical professionals “could reliably distinguish a free and settled choice to end one’s life from one influenced by depression, loneliness, financial pressures, inadequate care or feeling like a burden.”
Lamenting the lack of universal access to palliative care, she said, “assisted dying must never become an alternative to providing people with the care and support they need.”
Concluding her remarks she said she could not vote for the Bill assuming [her] concerns could be fixed later,” continuing with, “I had to judge the legislation actually before me and concluded that I could not support it.”
“I know this decision will disappoint some who welcomed my previous vote, while others believe I should oppose assisted dying altogether. I find myself in neither camp. I still believe there is a compassionate case for assisted dying, but this Bill did not clear the bar for me. This was a matter of conscience.”
“I listened carefully and wrestled seriously with the arguments on both sides.”
Speaking of her mother, a former Dignity in Dying campaigner, she said, “While my mother believed passionately in assisted dying, I believe she would also have respected that I had a duty to reach my own conclusion.”
SPUC’s Executive Director Michael Robinson commended Savage, saying, “Credit to this responsible parliamentarian for explaining her change of mind with honesty and seriousness. Her concerns about coercion, people feeling a burden, and the lack of universal palliative care are precisely why this dangerous Bill could not be allowed to pass. SPUC is incredibly thankful to every MP who, even if it felt unnatural to them, voted against the death lobby to defend the most vulnerable from assisted suicide.”
