Response from London

Most British newspapers today characterize the result of yesterday’s vote on assisted voluntary death by the House of Commons as a “voting of historical importance” but also as a “step into the unknown”.

They are just as divided, as are the citizens of Britain and so are its MPs. This was shown by the dozens of protesters outside Westminster, divided into those who were in favor and those who were against. The polarizations within the parliament were definitely clearer, which is why the ‘Terminally Ill (End of Life) Bill’ finally passed the first stage. And according to Plato’s ancient saying “beginning is half of everything”. But what does this mean in practice for this specific – undeniably – sensitive issue?

Time consuming process until implementation

After weeks of heated debate and after a five-hour session in the House of Commons, 330 British MPs from both major parties, Labor and the Conservatives, voted in favour. 275 opposed, failing to overturn the narrow margin of 55 votes. This means that assisted dying has taken the first step to be implemented in England and Wales.

Of course, several more parliamentary steps are needed before it becomes law of the British state. A further five amendments must be approved by the House of Commons and a further five by the House of Lords. Additionally, even if it becomes UK state law, it could reportedly take up to two years to finally be implemented. Labor MP Kim Lindbeater, who brought the bill to Parliament, argues primarily that it will “give choice and dignity to terminally ill patients”.

Who is affected by the bill?

Although the details of the bill are still being made known by the dropper, so far the law under discussion will only apply to those who are in the final stage and have been diagnosed with less than six months to live. At the same time, it will only be allowed to those who are registered with the National Health System of England (NHS) and they will have to have the mental clarity to make such a decision. The patient would have to get the green light from two doctors, and the decision would have to be ratified by a higher court. According to what has been proposed so far, the doctor should prepare the prescription for the drugs, but the patient should take the ‘cocktail’ himself.

At the announcement of the result there were celebrations but also disappointment. It is reasonable, as there are many who emphasize that there are several weak points in the bill. For example, how exactly will each doctor’s conclusion about a patient’s life expectancy be judged undisputed and without margin for error, that is, how will the possibility of the patient living much longer be ruled out, but also how will mentally vulnerable patients be protected while they are at such a difficult time in their lives.

However, according to a related poll by YouGov, carried out on November 22 on assisted euthanasia, 73% of Britons believe that – in principle – it should be legal. When asked if the British would support such a thing in practice, 19% answered that, although they think it should be legal, in practice they would not support it, as they consider it impossible to create an adequate and reliable system.