As I said in the House of Commons last September, the issue of assisted dying is a highly sensitive and controversial issue. I have received a large amount of correspondence from my constituents which was divided almost 50-50 in support and opposition of the Bill.
Given the highly emotive nature of this Bill, I met with constituents prior to the debate and read through the hundreds of letters and emails my office received in order to better understand how the Bill would work in practice for potential users and the competing viewpoints surrounding this issue.
I had a number of prior reservations that I planned to highlight in the chamber, namely the length of time it takes for authorisation, given that the applicant must have only 6 months to live and the process is likely to take over a month. In addition whether anyone who has just been told they only have 6 months to live can form the voluntary, clear, settled and informed wish the Bill stipulates. Though like many others I had reservations about the quality of the Bill and how it had been drafted, I went into the chamber erring slightly onto the side of voting yes, with the proviso that my concerns would be addressed at the committee stage.
Having attentively listened to the arguments from all sides, it became clear to me that this Bill was not appropriate. I redrafted my speech a number of times whilst sitting and listening to my fellow ministers. In particular, the speech delivered by Dr Philippa Whitford, the SNP member from Central Ayrshire, finally solidified my decision to vote against the Assisted Dying Bill in its current form. She spoke about how a so called ‘good death’ could be achieved with the right palliative care and the journey she had experienced with cancer patients when the treatment was unsuccessful.
It is my contention that this Bill is not what the public wanted. While many proponents of assisted dying highlight the relief that these power would give to sufferers of locked in syndrome, such patients would not be aided by the Bill as it only covers those who are told they have 6 months to live. A large number of sufferers then, my own grandmother included who had 8 years of strokes and Alzheimer’s, would not benefit from this Bill.
I remain wholly open to a more appropriate and better drafted Bill coming to the floor of the house which I will judge based on its merits alone. Currently however, my position remains the same. I think the House of Commons made the right decision on Mr Marris’ Bill.