Harlow MP Chris Vince explains why he will be supporting assisted dying bill
Health / Fri 29th Nov 2024 at 06:59am
CHRIS Vince, Member of Parliament for Harlow, has issued the following statement regarding the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill ahead of the upcoming parliamentary vote:
“Firstly, I want to thank everyone who reached out to me in the run-up to this vote. Residents came forward in large numbers to share their views, their support, their concerns, and their wishes. It is clear that this vote is deeply emotive for many people, for many different reasons. I particularly want to pay tribute to those who recounted personal stories about their own experiences and those of their loved ones.
This has not been a straightforward or clear-cut decision for me. I have taken the time to read, listen, and understand the significant amount of correspondence I have received—both in favour of and against the bill. My decision to vote in favour aligns with my personal views and those of a large number of residents who have expressed their support. I also recognise the strength and sincerity of opposition on this issue.
This is not a political issue but a moral one. With that comes a free vote, meaning MPs will not be voting along party lines. I have found myself in agreement with colleagues from opposing parties and in disagreement with some on my own side.
My decision to support this bill is informed, in part, by the powerful and deeply moving stories shared by residents about the suffering their loved ones have endured. I believe in the right to choose, and I believe this right should extend to those who are suffering when it is not their wish to continue.
Having read the bill thoroughly, I am reassured by the evidence of sufficient safeguards in place to prevent misuse or abuse. I am further confident in the rigorous parliamentary scrutiny that ensures no bill can pass without intense debate and proper safeguards.
“I understand that while many will support my decision, it will not be welcomed by all. I have listened to both sides of this debate, speaking to hundreds of residents via email, letter, in person, and online. I hope that even if consensus cannot be reached, residents will appreciate that I have voted, as I am instructed to do, as a matter of conscience.”
AB
2024-11-29 08:57:14
Well done Chris, the success of this bill will be a reassurance to many.
David Forman
2024-11-29 10:11:48
Chris Vince should read the Morning Star editorial that explains how poor the Bill is on safeguards. The Equality and Human Rights Commission notes that as it is a "Private Members’ Bill the requirement under the Human Rights Act 1998 for a minister to declare its compatibility with human rights does not apply. They also note that the Bill is not accompanied by an equality impact statement." Campaign group Liberty says: "there are also far too many details left out of the Bill, which will be decided later by the Health Secretary after the Bill becomes law. Good laws do not follow a ‘details later’ approach. For an issue as serious as assisted dying, MPs must know exactly what they are voting on." See editorial at https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/issue/assisted-dying-faqs/?fbclid=IwY2xjawGzwVBleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHX_GaFzVYZThD_bSryXB5lvM1xahWmstS7meiX8kZrAvc8kXH8e2-M84hA_aem_r-HJKMKue_ufwe2vFaRhTw
Peter Henegan
2024-11-29 10:16:52
Well done Chris. Watching the debate on tv, the apparent opponents seem to have very little focus on the actual right of an individual to determine their own future.
David Forman
2024-11-29 10:17:57
Sorry, the link above is Liberty's view. The Editorial I referred to is below. It is worth highlighting one paragraph from it: "Nor is there a mechanism in the legislation by which those approving an application for assisted suicide can look into whether pressure or coercion has been applied. There is no requirement for the High Court judges tasked with approving applications even to speak to the applicant, let alone their GP or family members who might be able to shed light on factors which could have influenced the decision." See following link https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/editorial-assisted-suicide-bill-safeguards-dont-protect-vulnerable
Peter Henegan
2024-11-29 10:18:55
And perhaps David has just made my point!
Adam
2024-11-29 11:31:36
Lets just look at how the NHS behaved in covid, placing DNR on people with development difficulties, without conversation. Time and time again you hear of he NHS slapping these on without telling patients or families, especially the elderly. I am sorry but the failing and arrogant institution which is the NHS cannot be trusted with this, it is a slippery slope like MAID in Canada where people are offered medically assisted death for a range of minor issues. Mark my words before long people will be being pressured for it, on the grounds of "you do not want to be a burden to the NHS or your family do you". Government and the NHS cannot be trusted with this.
gary roberts
2024-11-29 12:27:19
I support the bill because people should have the choice of when they die or live. Just like in every other area of our lives. This is also the first step of the bill before it is vigorously examined. If passed then the proper stages and motives will be identified and dealt with. If it fails to pass at this stage then it may take another decade to be discussed again. I do not want that to happen because at 65 I would want this to be a legal choice.
TonyB
2024-11-29 12:44:41
Well done Chris. This proposed option is far better than the "The Liverpool Pathway" with many more people involved in the decision.
Matthew Gillman
2024-11-29 12:50:48
In other countries with assisted dying (assisted suicide) the "safeguards" put in place have been swept away and the eligibility criteria widened, often in just a few years. Don't vote for it, Chris!
Stuart J
2024-11-29 14:39:13
It’s passed the first hurdle 330 -175
Peter
2024-11-29 14:50:53
If I want to die and I have the mental capacity to decide why do I want or need safeguards? If I don't have the capacity then I fully trust my family to make the right decision. No way do I want to die like my Dad, 96 years old with dementia living in a home with no quality of life whatsoever. And, of course I have no idea what my Dad was really going through. If I ever think such a situation is approaching I will start drinking myself to death, something I might enjoy. As Eric Burdon sang, "its my life and I'll do what I want, its my mind and I'll think what I want". We are all going to die, surely better to die how we want, not because some unknown religious waller has decreed it is wrong.
Joey
2024-11-29 16:24:07
Whilst it is the first step of the bill, there are so many loop holes all ready in it. And whilst dementia is an awful disease, has anyone else the right to take a persons life? I think not. If I get dementia I do not want someone else making that decision for me. And that’s only one danger. The disabled and the elderly, among others, are now terrified. I agree safeguards will soon disappear, but even to begin with there are not enough in place. This really has been rushed through and is not a complete bill anyway, as so much is missing before we’ve even begun. If you’d really cared you would have abstained Chris and not taken sides.
Matthew Gillman
2024-11-29 16:25:10
Peter, you might well have capacity, and have a trustworthy family, but not everyone is as fortunate. Section 15 of the Bill concerns those making a declaration (that they wish to die) by proxy. The proxy must have known the person personally for 2 years, or be "a person who is of good standing in the community". In other words, someone who is of "good standing in the community", whatever that means, who doesn't even know the person, can make a proxy declaration on the person's behalf. Chilling.
Joey John
2024-11-29 16:26:45
Whilst it is the first step of the bill, there are so many loop holes all ready in it. And whilst dementia is an awful disease, has anyone else the right to take a persons life? I think not. If I get dementia I do not want someone else making that decision for me. And that’s only one danger. The disabled and the elderly, among others, are now terrified. I agree safeguards will soon disappear, but even to begin with there are not enough in place. This really has been rushed through and is not a complete bill anyway, as so much is missing before we’ve even begun. If you’d really cared you would have abstained Chris and not taken sides.
Guy Flegman
2024-11-29 17:14:26
If we had a real NHS and real palliative care, this bill would never have even been raised. It beggars belief that we react this way to a system that is failing people, instead of improving the system so people get the dignity they deserve. It’s also worth noting that for years now every bill that goes through the House of Commons has had more holes in it than a piece of Swiss cheese
Matthew Gillman
2024-11-29 17:19:09
The Bill text was only released very recently, so there was not time for the necessary lengthy reflection required by MPs before today's debate and vote. It was rushed through, despite the fundamental changes it will make to our society.
Guy Flegman
2024-11-29 18:42:46
@Matthew. Absolutely right. You will see from the debate that it was obvious many MP’s had clearly not read the text of the bill, let alone reflected on it. Lazy politics at its worst. A truly dreadful state of affairs for something that will have such a huge social impact on this nation.
Frank
2024-11-29 18:46:06
This is a liberal law to satisfy those that what a designer death, are all MPs and journalists clueless. All people with a terminal illness living at home have a secret injection medication delivered and stored safely. This is an end of life injection that is administered by a Dr and nurse being used for years.
Seamus
2024-11-29 23:09:26
By some of the comments above, it's clear some are making comments without actually having read the bill. Let's start with the title, it is NOT called the assisted dying bill, it's called The terminally ill Adults (End of Life) bill. The person who would qualify is already dying, they need no assistance for that. What they are asking for is the right how to die, they have no choice in whether they will die or not, that is already happening. Safeguards then? I'm amazed so many of those complaining, are actually on the comittee and you've already you've reached your decision. Wait, you're not on the committee? This bill, like the gay marriage bill, were created as a members bill which has now been passed and it now goes to the comittee stage twhich discusses he fine print of operation, safeguards will be debated and then goes to the house for any amendments which when concluded, are brought back to the house. For those saying it was rushed through, it hasn't been finalised yet so no, not rushed through. it also goes through the lords for any tooing and throwing and then and only then a final vote back in the house, hardly a rushed procedure. As to designer death, death is inevitable there is no designer about it. If we can make it more humane for those with a terminal disease and only 6 months to live, then why shouldn't they have their personal decision in how to die? Wouldn't you?
Peter Henegan
2024-11-29 23:57:54
Good to see the comments on here, and like the vote in Parliament, they are quite balanced. But where are our would be MPs, Hannah Ellis especially. We need to know where you stand.
Ray Barr
2024-11-30 19:23:36
Whilst it’s not called assisted dying bill, most of the news either in papers, radio or tv, refer to it as assisted dying, or assisted suicide. Doesn’t matter what it’s called really. We all know what we’re referring to. And whilst people who are dying and expected to live no longer than six months, yes they may have a choice, there will come a time when some very vulnerable people will begin to be coerced into asking for it. Recently there was a story about a couple making a suicide pact to go to dignitas in Sweden and end their lives together because she has dementia and he has a neurological condition, meaning he soon can’t help care for his partner anymore. Note it’s his decision not hers. She doesn’t fully understand what she’s agreeing too and she sure won’t be the only one! How do we protect the vulnerable? No one’s answered that yet, other than to talk about 2 doctors and a high court judge making final decisions. There is a lot lacking in this bill and even today there are many MPs who voted in favour, are now saying already that changes need to be made to it. That says a lot doesn’t it! Why didn’t they abstain or vote against if they know it’s not safe yet!
Seamus
2024-11-30 21:54:33
Ray, what it's accurately called is important as it's key to the purpose of the bill. Accuracy will be important at the committee stage when the proposed safeguards will be discussed, altered, improved. Then again as it moves between the House and the Lords for discussion and ammendments. I'm confident that our process and safeguards will be cautious and effective, more like New Zealand and Australia, than Canada and Holland. Accuracy would also make sure that anyone wanting to go to Dignitas would buy a ticket to Switzerland and not Sweden where there isn't one.
Leave a Comment Below:
22 Comments for Harlow MP Chris Vince explains why he will be supporting assisted dying bill: