Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Marsha De Cordova Excerpts

Friday 13th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Dr Spencer]

I think I am pushing it.

I tried to intervene on the hon. Member for Spen Valley (Kim Leadbeater) to ask what she thinks about that. She is welcome to intervene on me now if she has further points to add. Otherwise, I ask the Minister to address those points.

[Marsha De Cordova (Battersea) (Lab)]

I rise to speak to amendment 27, which would require the doses and types of lethal drugs to be properly licensed by the MHRA. It is important that I put it on the record that I do not think the Bill is safe. It does not provide adequate safeguards. Most importantly, it will deepen and exacerbate inequalities. On that, I know that I speak for tens of thousands of disabled people who rightly say, “We need assistance to live, not to die.”

Throughout the passage of the Bill, hon. Members across the House have received many letters and briefings from leading experts, including this week a letter from over 1,000 doctors across all areas of medical practice expressing their clear view that the Bill does not provide answers on how we can improve management of the end of people’s lives. They said that the drugs expected to be used in assisted deaths should undergo rigorous testing and approval, as would be required for any other prescribed medication. Those requirements are missing from the Bill. Indeed, there is nothing in the Bill requiring lethal drugs to be regulated by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. That is contrary to good medical practice.

Many of us will have heard that in Oregon, complications with drugs used for assisted dying occurred in about 7% of deaths and included vomiting, seizures and prolonged deaths of up to 137 hours. Where is the requirement in the Bill to inform patients about how those risks, including prolonged dying, might be managed? Where is the plan to identify the most acceptable medications? If they have not already done so, I urge hon. Members to consider this letter, signed by many leading experts. If we do not listen to them—the very people who would have to implement the Bill—who will we listen to?

[Sam Rushworth (Bishop Auckland) (Lab)]

On that point, will my hon. Friend give way?

[Marsha De Cordova]

I will not take any interventions.

It is clear that the Bill does not protect vulnerable patients from coercion. In 2021, the UN’s human rights experts raised concerns that, even if assisted dying is restricted to those with terminal illness, disabled and older people may feel subtly pressured to end their lives due to social attitudes and lack of appropriate services and support. Across the House, we know that support for disabled and older people is inadequate. We know that disabled people continue to face disproportionate levels of poverty, isolation and hardship. Until that changes, I urge every Member to think and not vote for the Bill.