The Commons: Britain Moves Closer Towards Assisted Dying

This month saw the island of Jersey taking the landmark step of legalizing Assisted Dying, permitting euthanasia for those with terminal illnesses that have been found to cause unbearable suffering, and where they are expected to die within six months in any case, or in 12 months, for those with neurodegenerative conditions.

This comes a year after the Isle of Man had also decided to legalize Assisted Dying. As such, each of these island territories has become the first part of the British Isles in which taking such action has been legal. This has come whilst similar motions have been furiously debated within Westminster and in Scotland, both of which are in the process of potentially following suit.

As crown dependencies, both the Isle of Man and Jersey recognize King Charles III as their Head of State and are dependent on the UK for defence and for international representation. However, whilst not their own sovereign states, owing to historic precedent, they continue to be autonomous from the UK itself, and have their own governments, make their own laws, and have separate tax systems. The bill allowing for Assisted Dying was voted on in the Jersey Assembly at the end of February, with 32 members voting for it, and 16 against. 

As in the rest of the British Isles, this change in the law has not been without controversy. The campaign group Care Not Killing has noted that this vote is not the end of the process, and that there are “significant legal and constitutional obstacles”, including the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights, and the UK’s obligations under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

“When matters as sensitive and life-altering as assisted dying are brought before a legislative body, there is a clear requirement to protect vulnerable people,” states Dr Gordon Macdonald, CEO of Care Not Killing. “In some cases, this means treating them differently to ensure they are not pressured into ending their lives. There are also significant unanswered questions with the Bill as to how it will operate with many doctors. We need to care for people who are suffering, not encourage them or provide them with a mechanism to end their lives. This is why we champion the extension of high-quality palliative care to all those who need it and better support for their families. This is the real progressive agenda, and why we argue for care not killing.”

This vote will mark another important step in the debate that is still ongoing around whether the UK itself should follow suit. For over a year, this has been stalled in Westminster, after the Labour MP for Spen Valley, Kim Leadbeater, put forward a bill allowing for Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill in late 2024. The bill was voted on in the House of Commons in June of last year, with 314 MPs voting in favour and 291 voting against. The Senedd earlier this month also voted in support of the Commons’ motion, giving their express consent for it to become law across England and Wales.

However, the bill appears to have been blocked at the House of Lords, who are currently still in the process of reviewing it. Numerous amendments have been attached to the bill by peers, including a lifting of the minimum age to be considered to 25, a ban on eligibility for pregnant women, and restricting it only to those whose suffering cannot be relieved with treatment. Former Justice Secretary Lord Falconer has accused the Lords of “filibustering”, due to the amount of time taken on each reading. 

Lord Falconer stated that it will be “very, very difficult" for this bill to pass into law this year without "fundamental change" in the House of Lords' approach, and has called for an unprecedented use of the Parliament Act to override peers' objections if it is not passed before the King's Speech in May.

At the same time, the Scottish Parliament is also currently debating the issue, it being a policy area that is devolved to the Scottish government, with numerous MSP’s raising objections and attempting to add their own amendments. More than 300 separate amendments have been tabled to the bill, with the timetable for these debates being pushed back to the end of the week as a result.

Jackie Baillie, deputy leader of Scottish Labour, stated that “this process feels slightly chaotic, and I don’t think it shows the Parliament in a terribly good light.” She went on to describe the bill, which had been brought forward by Liberal Democrat MSP Liam McArthur, as probably the “most consequential member’s bill” yet brought forward at Holyrood, and accused the Scottish Parliament of having “consistently underestimated” the amount of time that would be needed for legislation. 

As in England and Wales, the motion has brought intense debate on both sides of the argument, with campaigners passionately arguing for the right to die with dignity, whilst others have warned of the potential dangers surrounding such a bill. Religious denominations such as the Free Church of Scotland have encouraged people to pray “for those in authority and to seek the welfare of our nation,” cautioning against the impact such a bill could have on the treatment of the vulnerable and a culture of care. 

Meanwhile, John Swinney, leader of the SNP and First Minister of Scotland, has himself intervened in the debate in Holyrood, arguing that such a bill may fall outside the powers and the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament.

Scotland Secretary Douglas Alexander has stated the UK government will not “stand in the way” of ensuring legal competence for Holyrood passing such a bill, adding that “the position of the UK government, both in relation to Liam’s bill here in Scotland and the assisted dying bill at Westminster, is one of policy neutrality. But we have been very clear that we are not seeking to inhibit the ability of the Scottish Parliament to reach its own decision on assisted dying. We have made sure that the appropriate conversations and steps have taken place in that regard.”

As such, whether this will pass into UK law in the imminent future, either in England and Wales or in Scotland, remains highly contentious. The move by Jersey to make this legal will act as further impetus for UK lawmakers to move this forward, a point emphasized by Dave Sowry, the Co-Chair of the campaign group, My Death, My Decision. 

“These are separate jurisdictions, but Westminster cannot ignore what is happening on its doorstep,” Sowry stated. “When neighbouring jurisdictions move ahead, it increases the pressure on Parliament to bring the debate in England and Wales to a clear conclusion, and to do so in a way the public can trust.” 

With Assisted Dying now being made legal in certain areas of the British Isles but not in others, the pressure will be mounting on the House of Lords going forward to prevent any further delays and provide a resolution to this debate, one way or the other.