MPs moved to tears in emotional debate on controversial assisted dying bill

There were at-times emotional scenes in the Commons on Friday afternoon as MPs from either side of the debate made impassioned arguments on the assisted dying bill.

MPs have voted in favour of the bill, meaning it has passed its second reading – a historic step, which takes it one step closer to becoming law.

A total of 330 MPs voted for the bill, which would give the right for adults with less than six months to live to choose to end their own lives, while 275 voted against. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer was among those to vote in favour, along with the majority of his Cabinet. Former PM Rishi Sunak was one of only 23 Tories to do so.

Supporters of the private members' bill, put forward by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, say it gives people with terminal illnesses, suffering with excruciating pain, an opportunity to die with dignity.

Speaking to ITV News following the result, Ms Leadbeater said: "I feel exhausted, I feel emotionally drained, but I think what we've seen today is the best of Parliament.

"We've seen a really robust debate, but we've a debate which was full of compassion and respect for people of different opinions. I'm actually really proud of what's happened today."

The MP said the bill means "that we can start to fix the problems that we have around end of life provision for people", adding that Parliament needs to "continue the debate" around palliative care, the rights of disabled people and the choices available to terminally ill people.

One of the bill’s most high-profile supporters, Dame Esther Rantzen said she was “absolutely thrilled” with the result, reflecting on the "deeply felt" debate in which members had given a "great deal of thought".

Speaking to ITV News UK Editor Paul Brand, she said the next stage of the legislation's passage through Parliament is "very important".

"I'm sure it will be taken through very, very carefully, because some of the best judicial minds, medical minds and political minds will make sure that every detail is right," she added.

Alicia Kearns, who supported Ms Leadbeater’s bill, said: “I think the decision was the right one, because it’s about bringing forward more debate and more scrutiny of this bill, which is about shortening the suffering of terminally ill people. This was the right decision.”

Conservative Former Minister Andrew Mitchell revealed he had “completely changed" his mind” on assisted dying, having found himself with “tears pouring down my face” on hearing the stories of constituents whose loved ones had died “in great pain and great indignity”.

MP behind assisted dying bill says she feels 'emotionally drained' after 'robust debate' full of 'compassion and respect

Former Tory PM Rishi Sunak said he voted for the bill, as he believed it would "reduce suffering".

Writing for the Darlington and Stockton Times – his local newspaper – he said: "I know from speaking and listening to many of you, that too many people have to go through painful, traumatic, drawn-out deaths.

“These moving, deeply personal stories have left a profound impression on me. This bill will make these ordeals, which are so traumatic for patients and their families, less frequent: it will reduce suffering.”

Labour's Marie Tidball, who has lived with a disability all of her life, said she supported the bill, but described the decision as “one of the hardest that I have had to make”.

She told the Commons: "In my career in disability law and policy I chose not to focus on debates about whether disabled people should be born, or whether we should die.

“Instead I focused on enabling disabled people to live better more fulfilling lives. Today I find myself voting in a way that I thought I never would, I will be voting in favour of moving the bill to the next stage of the legislative process.”

Sharing her personal experience, Ms Tidball said: “When I was six years old I had major surgery on my hips. I was in body plaster from my chest to my ankles, in so much pain and requiring so much morphine that my skin began to itch.

"I remember vividly laying in a hospital bed in Sheffield Children’s Hospital and saying to my parents ‘I want to die, please let me die’.

“I needed to escape from that body that I was inhabiting. That moment has come back to me all these years later. That moment made it clear to me that if the bill was about intolerable suffering I would not be voting for it.”

The Labour MP said she had since lived a “good life”, but added: “That moment also gave my a glimpse of how I would want to live my death, just as I have lived my life.

"Empowered by choices available to me. Living that death with dignity and respect and having the comfort of knowing that I might have control over that very difficult time.”

'My goodness me, was that thrilling?': Dame Esther Rantzen reacts to the Commons' historic vote

Many MPs opposing the bill have deep concerns over a lack of legal and judicial safeguards, with a cross-party group making the case that, owing to the legislation being part of a private members' bill, not enough time was given to review and scrutinise its details.

Opponents also fear mission-creep over successive years, claiming this could lead to so-called "death on demand", and people being pushed into accepting an assisted death.

“Bad law on trivial things is bad enough, and I’ve seen a lot of that in my time in this House, but bad law on matters of life and death is unforgivable," former Conservative Cabinet minister Robert Jenrick said.

“Let’s think about the role of judges. The test which is to be applied is a low one, it’s the civil law threshold, this is a balance of probabilities. This means a judge could see real risk of coercion and still sign-off this individual for assisted death; if the threshold was not reached of 50% or more, the judge would sign-off the individual.”

Subscribe free to our weekly newsletter for exclusive and original coverage from ITV News. Direct to your inbox every Friday morning.

During the debate, Labour MP Dame Meg Hillier wiped away tears as she spoke of her daughter’s admission to hospital with acute pancreatitis and how “good medicine” can relieve the pain.

She said of the bill: "This is a fundamental change in the relationship between the state and the citizen, and the patient and their doctor. If we have a scintilla of doubt about allowing the state that power, we should vote against this today.”

Dame Meg said a “failure in palliative care and support is not a reason to continue” with the bill.

Of her daughter, the MP said: “She was admitted to hospital with acute pancreatitis as a teenager so this bill would not have covered her at that point, but I did not know for five days, in fact many months, whether she would live or die.

“Those first five days she did not sleep and she was crying out in pain. But I saw what good medicine can do that palliated that pain, that got her to a place where although for two-and-a-half months she was unable to eat, she was saved and the key was she was not in pain – well, she was in pain but it was managed.”

Conservative Danny Kruger, in his concluding remarks, said he believes Parliament can do “better” for terminally ill people than a “state suicide service”, adding MPs need to offer safeguards for the most vulnerable.

Mr Kruger, whose mother Prue Leith is a high-profile campaigner backing the law, went on to argue "the line between disability and terminal illness is a very blurred one".

He also voiced concerns over whether terminally ill people would feel pressured to seek an assisted death, telling the Commons: “The process doesn’t even attempt to answer the question properly.

"There’s no investigation, no requirement for the medics to interview the friends and family, no need for a psychiatrist or the family doctor to be consulted.

“The medics just need to satisfy themselves – who knows how – to the best of their knowledge that the person has not been pressured.”

He said he was "disappointed" by the vote's result, but that he was pleased MPs “recognised that the bill is very dangerous”.

Division list analysis shows that Labour MP Emma Hardy voted in both the aye and no lobby to register a formal abstention.In a statement put out on Friday, the MP for Kingston upon Hull West and Haltemprice said it was a “deeply personal issue” for her and “one that I have struggled with”.She said: “It strikes at the heart of my fundamental desire to both ease suffering and protect the most vulnerable in society – goals that, at times, seem to conflict in these discussions.

"The stories of horrific deaths are heart-breaking, and my instinct is to find a way to end suffering. But I have to ask myself, and all of us: Is assisted dying truly the right answer?“I believe that everyone deserves dignity in dying, and that every person has the right to a good death. Unfortunately, the law as it stands today is inconsistent.

"For instance, people who travel abroad for assisted dying face the threat of prosecution, while at home, the only option available to hasten death is the withdrawal of food and water.

“Despite these inconsistencies, I have serious concerns about the bill currently before Parliament. I do not believe it fully addresses the complex realities of a legal right to assisted dying.”

Nada, a campaigner in favour of changing the law, told ITV News she believes the current laws present an “unbelievably horrible” situation for those in support of assisted dying.

“We are talking about people who are full of fear, who are full of pain, who might desperately want the choice to die,” she said.

"It just seems unbelievably horrible to them to not allow somebody to actually give them a quiet, painless, loving death with their family around them, and they know that they can leave this world in peace.”

However, Christian Concern described today as a “very Black Friday for the vulnerable in this country”, with the campaign group's chief executive Andrea Williams saying: “The proposals in this dangerous bill have been completely exposed. The proposed safeguards are completely meaningless, and more and more MPs are waking up to that reality.

“This bill will create more suffering and chaos in the NHS, not less, and if it goes through, the vulnerable will become more vulnerable.

“MPs are voting for the bill at this stage in the hope that it will be fixed, however, the legislation is framed in a way that means it can’t be changed.

“It must be stopped at third reading, and we will not give up working to protect life and the most vulnerable in this country from these reckless and rushed proposals.”

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), Britain's equality regulator, has said it is neutral on assisted dying, but has said Parliament should be given “adequate time, expertise and the supporting materials required to effectively scrutinise” the bill.

The last time MPs voted on the issue in 2015, the bill was defeated by 330 votes to 118, but the composition of the Commons has significantly changed since then following this year's general election with more Labour MPs sitting.

With Friday's bill passing it's second reading, it will go to committee stage where MPs can table amendments, before facing further scrutiny and votes in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords, meaning any change in the law would not be agreed until next year at the earliest.

Have you heard our podcast Talking Politics? Every week Tom, Robert and Anushka dig into the biggest issues dominating the political agenda…