The Assisted Dying Bill poses more of a threat to disabled people after months of parliamentary scrutiny, a disabled academic and campaigner has warned.
Dr Miro Griffiths MBE, an expert adviser on disability issues who gave evidence on the bill earlier this year, has penned an open letter to MPs urging them to vote it down.
It comes as more than sixty disability groups signed a separate letter to MPs warning that the bill as it stands “remains deeply flawed”.
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, brought forward by Kim Leadbeater MP, is expected to reach third reading on Friday, when MPs could vote to halt its progress.
In his letter, Dr Griffiths states that he has always believed the bill “poses a threat to disabled and marginalised people” but “flawed scrutiny and the rejection of key safeguarding measures” have made it an “especially perilous piece of legislation”.
The academic notes that “parliament rejected an amendment that would have prevented doctors from raising the option of assisted suicide with patients if they have not raised it themselves”, adding, “I fear that this will increase the likelihood of disabled people choosing to end their lives – especially those who are vulnerable and lack crucial forms of support”.
He continues, “disabled people already feel like their lives are not worth living because of the struggles they face – in terms of accessing services… Doctors raising the option of assisted death with such individuals will be engaging in a form of coercion. Disabled people will ask themselves, ‘is it worth me continuing to fight for support, when I could just die?’”
“Amendments to carve out protections for groups at disproportionate risk of abuse have been voted down – especially at the committee stage, where proponents of Ms Leadbeater’s bill exercised a strong majority. These included moves to safeguard people with learning disabilities, people with anorexia, and people with historic suicidal ideation. It is disturbing to me that reasonable safeguarding measures have been cast aside.
“Please do not endorse this unimproved bill, which is also less robust than it could be due to the removal of a clause requiring High Court approval of applications.
“Instead of voting for ‘assisted dying’, I would ask you to devote your energy to improving ethical and progressive forms of support: blanket suicide prevention, palliative care, and measures that create a more just and inclusive society for disabled people. This is the better way forward.”
ENDS
Notes for Editors
Dr Griffiths’ open letter to MPs is below. Better Way campaign opposes assisted suicide, sets out an alternative vision, and provides a platform for marginalised voices. The campaign is supported by experts in several fields including medicine, disability advocacy, and sociology.
You can access a HD picture of Dr Griffiths here. Please credit ‘Better Way’.
Disability expert’s letter to MPs:
I am writing to ask you to vote against the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill. I have always believed that this bill poses a threat to disabled and marginalised people, but flawed scrutiny and the rejection of key safeguarding measures during the committee and report stages have made it an especially perilous piece of legislation. Even if you support ‘assisted dying’ in principle I would urge you not to back this bill at third reading.
On Friday, after a second day of report stage debate, parliament rejected an amendment that would have prevented doctors from raising the option of assisted suicide with patients if they have not raised it themselves. If ‘assisted dying’ is going to be classified as a treatment, doctors may actually be required to raise it as an option. As a disabled person, campaigner and academic, I fear that this will increase the likelihood of disabled people choosing to end their lives – especially those who are vulnerable and lack crucial forms of support.
It is a tragic fact that many disabled people already feel like their lives are not worth living because of the struggles they face – in terms of accessing services. Disabled people struggle to see their GPs, and consultants associated with their conditions. Doctors raising the option of assisted death with such individuals will be engaging in a form of coercion. Disabled people will ask themselves, ‘is it worth me continuing to fight for support, when I could just die?’
Some proponents of Ms Leadbeater’s bill have sought to create a division between disability and terminal illness. This is nonsensical. I have had meetings with clinicians where they have referred to my condition as terminal. Other doctors have referred to it as life-limiting, and still others as a progressive condition. People who are terminally ill constitute as disabled people under the clauses of the Equality Act. Disabled people are directly in scope of the bill.
The disabled people’s community are not the only community at risk if this bill becomes law. In recent debates, parliament has heard that ‘assisted dying’ would endanger the elderly, ethnic minorities, women victims of domestic abuse, and others. Many marginalised people will face pressure to remove themselves from society because society has not resolved the inequalities they face. Please heed the warnings of those advocating for these groups.
Amendments to carve out protections for groups at disproportionate risk of abuse have been voted down – especially at the committee stage, where proponents of Ms Leadbeater’s bill exercised a strong majority. These included moves to safeguard people with learning disabilities, people with anorexia, and people with historic suicidal ideation. It is disturbing to me that reasonable safeguarding measures have been cast aside.
Please do not endorse this unimproved bill, which is also less robust than it could be due to the removal of a clause requiring High Court approval of applications. Instead of voting for ‘assisted dying’, I would ask you to devote your energy to improving ethical and progressive forms of support: blanket suicide prevention, palliative care, and measures that create a more just and inclusive society for disabled people. This is the better way forward.
Dr Miro Griffiths MBE BSc (Hons), MA, PhD, FRSA, AFHEA
Lecturer in Social Policy and Disability Studies