Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Danny Kruger (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Friday, 29 November 2024. It occurred during Debate on bill on Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill.


Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

I entirely agree with the right hon. Gentleman; he is absolutely right. I am afraid that the definition of terminal illness is in a sense the essential flaw in the Bill, but I will come on to that.

Going back to the conversation that the patient has with the medical practitioner, the crucial point is that the conversation does not need to be started by the patient, according to the Bill. It could be started by the medic—any medic—perhaps in hospital, who could make the suggestion of an assisted death to a patient who has never raised the issue themselves, whose family have never suggested it and whose own doctor does not think it is the right thing to do. And so the idea is planted.

Then, for whatever reason—and, by the way, there is no need ever to give a reason—the patient says that they want to proceed with an assisted death. They sign a declaration, or rather somebody else can sign it for

them. It could be any professional, someone they do not know—maybe a new medical practitioner. A total stranger can do all the paperwork on their behalf. That is what the clause about the proxy entails. Then these two medical practitioners make their assessment.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
757 cc1023-4 
Session
2024-26
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Disability Death Consent to medical treatment Doctors Equality Health services Liability Ethics Ethnic groups Euthanasia Hospices Patients Protection Prosecutions Older people Mental capacity Palliative care Safety Vulnerable adults Training Religion Suicide Pain High Court Terminal illnesses
Legislation
Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill 2024-26
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on hansard.parliament.uk