A crucial development has occurred in the consideration of the assisted dying bill as the requirement for a High Court judge to approve applications has been eliminated by the committee. Initially hailed as a stringent safeguard that set the legislation apart as one of the strictest in the world, concerns raised by the Ministry of Justice and senior judges prompted a reevaluation of this clause. In response, Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, the bill’s proponent, has proposed the establishment of a three-person panel comprising a senior legal figure, a psychiatrist, and a social worker to assess applications in lieu of High Court judges.
Following a vote of 15 to seven in favor of removing the High Court judge’s role, Leadbeater expressed confidence that this adjustment would enhance the law’s robustness. She emphasized the importance of providing terminally ill individuals and their families with necessary safeguards, highlighting that the current prohibition on assisted dying offers no such protections. Leadbeater also noted the positive reception of the proposal for a multidisciplinary panel among committee members, underscoring a shared commitment to ensuring the proper safeguards for terminally ill adults.
However, a group of 26 Labour MPs, including many who opposed the bill during the second reading, criticized the decision to eliminate the High Court oversight. They argued that this move deviates from the assurances initially made by proponents of the bill, raising concerns about the impact on vulnerable individuals. The group contended that replacing judicial safeguards with an unaccountable body undermines the integrity of the legislation and reflects a disjointed process. Despite the differing perspectives within the committee, the overarching goal of establishing effective protections for terminally ill individuals remains a focal point of debate and deliberation
Read the full article from The BBC here: Read More
