By Carole Dennett
Today (Friday) the Island’s two MPs will be voting on their first issue of conscience since they started their new jobs in July. Such matters are not ‘whipped’ by the political parties – the decision about how they vote is entirely a matter for them.
Assisted dying is against the law in most of the world, but has been legalised in some countries. Some governments demand a terminal diagnosis – others, such as Switzerland, do not. Switzerland was the first country in the world to allow any form of medically-aided dying, which was introduced in 1941. Children over the age of 12 can request help to die, although the lethal dose must be self-administered.
We asked both MPs how they will vote and their views on the subject.
Richard Quigley (IW West) will be voting against and some of the feedback he has had from Islanders helped him to make up his mind. He said: “There’s no escaping it, this is an incredibly emotive issue. I’ve probably received more emails, letters, and been stopped in the street to talk about this than anything else since being elected. It’s got people talking. And that’s what politics is about.
“Constituents have shared incredibly personal stories with me. Some of whom are terminally ill and still oppose it. That’s part of the reason I’m voting against this bill.
“I have real concerns over the potential for people to feel pressured, guilty, or even coerced into ending their life. There are also the practicalities of this proposed bill, and I have to consider what it might lead to – so I can’t support it as it is. But I am respectful of those and the MPs who do.
“What this bill has done is start the conversation on what a good death looks like, and the need to ensure palliative care is the best it can be.”
His counterpart in IW East, Joe Robertson, is still undecided on how he will vote. He explained: “I am open to the case for change, and I approach this as a matter of conscience, but I have reservations about this bill. I think the debate and discourse around assisted dying should continue whatever the result on Friday.
“The testimonies from those advocating for assisted dying — highlighting the importance of personal autonomy and the need to alleviate unnecessary suffering — are both powerful and deeply moving.
“However, I also have significant concerns about the potential unintended consequences of this bill. Questions around safeguards, implementation, and the long-term societal impact weigh heavily on my mind. While these debates are important, they must not overshadow the critical need for high-quality end-of-life services — a priority for me, shaped by my time working with Dementia UK.”
See Vectis View, to read the views of Paul Martin, the IW representative of Dignity in Dying – who has campaigned for a change in the law.
What is the Assisted Dying Bill?
The Assisted Dying Bill is a private member’s proposal put forward by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater. It aims to amend the Suicide Act 1961, which currently makes it illegal to assist another person in ending their life, a crime punishable by up to 14 years in prison.
The Bill seeks to allow terminally ill adults with six months or less to live, who are mentally capable, to opt for an assisted death. Drugs could be provided that would kill them, but they must administer the lethal dose themselves. To proceed, the individual would need the approval of two independent doctors and a High Court judge.
Safeguards are built into the Bill to ensure that the decision is voluntary, fully informed, and subject to two mandatory reflection periods. The first period is seven days after initial approval by a doctor, while the second is 14 days after authorisation from the High Court. If the co-ordinating doctor (the first doctor seen) believes the patient is likely to die naturally within a month, this second period can be waived.
The bill will not make any changes to the law on euthanasia – where a lethal dose is administered by somebody else. That will remain illegal under the Homicide Act 1957. Depending on the circumstances, euthanasia is regarded as either manslaughter or murder. The maximum penalty is life imprisonment.