Last Friday, I cast what I believe is the most momentous vote I have had to make since being elected as your Member of Parliament.
The House of Commons was once again asked to consider legislation to introduce assisted dying for terminally ill adults. MPs voted against allowing the Bill to proceed.
This is an intensely personal subject. There are deeply held and sincerely expressed views on both sides, often shaped by experiences of illness, loss and watching someone we love approach the end of their life. I respect those who reached a different conclusion to me. But on an issue of this magnitude, I also believe that constituents deserve to know why I voted as I did.
I voted against the Bill because I remain unconvinced that it can adequately protect vulnerable people. That was my concern when the previous Bill came before Parliament, and despite the extensive debate that has taken place since, it remains my concern. At the heart of this issue is a difficult balance between individual choice and our responsibility to protect people who may be vulnerable to pressure or coercion. Coercion does not always arrive as an explicit threat. Someone who is elderly, seriously ill, disabled or dependent on others for care may feel that they have become a burden on their family. Financial worries, pressure on carers, loneliness, or fear about what lies ahead can all influence decisions at an extraordinarily vulnerable moment.
For me, the consequences of getting those safeguards wrong are simply too serious.
There is another part of this debate that I believe deserves much greater attention: the quality and availability of palliative and end-of-life care. I have previously raised concerns about the financial pressures facing hospices and called for better support. Hospices provide extraordinary care to people and their families at one of the most difficult points in their lives. The choice available to someone approaching the end of their life is only meaningful if excellent palliative care is genuinely available to them. Nobody should feel that ending their life is their best option because the care, pain relief or support they need isn't there.
I know there are people in Bognor Regis, Littlehampton and our surrounding villages who will strongly disagree with my decision. Others will be relieved by the outcome. I understand both reactions.
This was a free vote, and I approached it as a matter of conscience and responsibility. I listened to the arguments, considered the proposed safeguards and thought very carefully about the people whose voices can sometimes be hardest to hear.
Ultimately, I could not support a change in the law when I was not satisfied that those people would be sufficiently protected. That does not mean accepting the status quo when it comes to end-of-life care. We should be structuring our hospice and palliative care system to ensure that people can approach the end of their lives with dignity, compassion and the best possible care.
This was an extraordinarily difficult decision. But when Parliament considers a change as profound and irreversible as this, the test must be exceptionally high. For me, that test was not met.
You can read my original article for SussexWorld here.
