Meeting of the Parliament 11 March 2026 [Draft]
I recognise that some of the amendments in the group seek to remove the possibility of improper motives influencing the process while others seek to include additional steps on assessment. It is crucial that all of that is reported and recorded, and I understand what motivated the amendments that seek to provide for that.
However, it is important to note that, although many of the amendments in the group seek to ensure that people would be asked about support and that conversations would be had and recorded, which is crucial, none of them guarantees that such support would be provided. I want to make a few points about that.
The amendments that would provide for information to be recorded but would not deliver the additional support that is needed would not address the unmet needs or health inequalities that exist throughout life and at the end of life.
The amendments that would require referrals to be made to others—especially those that relate to young people—are helpful. Given how hard it is to grow up with a disability, many disabled people have said that they would have considered using the option of assisted dying, had it been available. Therefore, those amendments are really important. However, we all know that referrals are not always actioned, waiting lists are long and referrals do not always result in the delivery of support. We must remember that in the context of what we are being asked to do.
My biggest concern is that none of the amendments in the group would address the fact that some people might have needed support, social care or otherwise throughout their lives, but it has not been there. The absence of that support and the relentless fight for it that many people can face could lead them to feel that not going on was an attractive option.
At stage 2, I lodged amendments that would have meant that support such as social care had to be available, accessible and affordable, and that packages ought to be in place to support disabled people to lead an independent life before the bill was implemented, in order to address that concern, but I was told that they were out of scope. I understand that, but I guess that that is the point. We cannot address the risks that the bill presents by providing for assessment in the bill, because of the existence of other factors that motivate the choice to end a life.
For that reason, although many of the amendments in the group seek to improve the process—I recognise that, and the motivation behind them—if we are to genuinely protect people, we must ensure not only that support is discussed or signposted, but that people are able to access the support that they need in order to live before we consider making it easier for them to choose to die. I do not think that we can ensure that that will be the case through the amendments in this group, or, indeed, through any of the amendments that we will debate over the coming days.