Meeting of the Parliament 10 March 2026 [Draft]
I do not intend to say too much about my amendment 156, because my points have been largely covered in colleagues’ amendments. A number of amendments in the group seek to do the same thing: mandate that regulations are laid on the training to be offered to medical professionals to identify
“coercion, undue influence and coercive control”
and
“situations of dependency arising from illness, disability, age, social care needs or caring arrangements.”
Those are the words of my amendment.
In the debate on the previous group, in the wider debate that we had on coercion and coercive control and in the debate on this group, we have identified that medical practitioners do not always have the specialist training that is required to recognise the complex and often conflicting issues that arise in cases of abuse and in the patterns of behaviour that are associated with coercive control. Such patterns have to be monitored over a longer time. Colleagues have highlighted the challenges that arise from the fact that a patient’s relationship with their general practitioner is not what it was many years ago, when patients were more likely to see the same practitioner consistently. That issue has to be looked at more broadly.
That is why I have raised the need for wider multidisciplinary input, including from social workers and other professionals, which will help to identify coercive control much more easily.
Looking at the evidence that has been provided on other jurisdictions, I note that the Jersey review panel’s recent examination of assisted dying safeguards concluded that assessments should draw on as broad a range of professional expertise as possible. It acknowledges that medical training alone cannot provide what is required to identify coercion or coercive control. I say that to back up my previous point about social work, but also to make it clear that training is important and it is going to be required. It will allow us to deal with some of the issues that have been raised about the capacity of medical professionals to identify these pernicious issues.
As I said, I do not intend to labour points that have already been made. I am grateful for the time that I have had to add to the debate.