Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Ellie Chowns Excerpts

Friday 16th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[Christine Jardine (Edinburgh West) (LD)]

rose—

[Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)]

rose—

[Rebecca Paul]

I would love to give way, but—

--- Later in debate ---

[Dame Meg Hillier]

I do not have time to completely unpick the hon. Lady’s points, but to have something positively suggested is a big issue for young people, so the social media aspect is important.

The social network matters. At the point of puberty, teenagers will look to their social group, which will massively influence their behaviour in a way that their families will not. Adolescents are more likely to take risks: their neurodevelopmental underpinnings are different, and pathways between the rational and the emotional parts of the brain are not fully developed. In “a hot situation”, where there is a lot of emotion, they take more risks, particularly because they do not have the ability to think about the counterfactual. In this case, the counterfactual is not being here anymore; that is a very difficult thing for a lot people to understand, particularly young people.

The ability of young people to think flexibly and change their minds is in the front of the brain, which does not always react to the—

[Ellie Chowns]

On that point, will the hon. Lady give way?

[Dame Meg Hillier]

I need to make some progress. Madam Deputy Speaker, I am trying to speak at great pace.

Teenagers are passionate about their beliefs and peers can change their minds in a way that their parents often cannot. There is not always a logical decision-making path. A doctor would carry weight. In response to the point made by the hon. Member for Edinburgh West (Christine Jardine), a child may be thinking about dying but somebody—that doctor or professional—could make their decision a legitimate option.

There are many issues in palliative care. We talked about Gillick competency, but to be clear, young people under the age of 18 can make their own decisions about healthcare. Even young people under the age of 16 can have such conversations because of Gillick competency, which is a good principle, but the issues around mental capacity and Gillick competency are often not well put in place—

--- Later in debate ---

[Anneliese Dodds]

I very much appreciate my hon. Friend’s efforts, and those of my hon. Friend the Member for Spen Valley, to ensure that these matters were covered in Committee. Sadly, because of the patterns of behaviour that we see time and again with those who have been subject to coercion, I do not believe that the safeguards go far enough. That is my assessment, and I know that other Members will come to a different view.

[Ellie Chowns]

Will the right hon. Lady give way?

[Anneliese Dodds]

I will make some progress, because I know others wish to speak.

I want to speak briefly about subsection (1)(b) of new clause 16, which relates to mental disorder. Colleagues will dispute whether analogies are appropriate, but it is important that the House is aware—this was covered in Committee—that in the Netherlands, which of course has a different regime from the one proposed in the Bill, two cases involving psychiatric suffering were subject to assisted dying in 2010; in 2023, that figure was 138. That is a very substantial increase. I understand that, as was said earlier, it is a completely different set of circumstances in the Dutch case, but I am concerned that there is some confusion about the scope of the mental capacity provisions in the Bill.