Demonstrating

Parliament Square, London, November 2024

Lola II and I planned a couple of days together to muck about in London, and then the date was announced for the Parliamentary Second Reading and vote on the "Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life)" Bill. So I extended my stay so I could attend the demo organised by 'Dignity in Dying' outside Parliament, and Lola II came with me. Just to be clear, I am very much in favour of Assisted Dying and was there to support the Bill, along with a whole lot of other people dressed in pink and carrying banners.

I've been to these gatherings before, and the weather plays a big part in the experience. It was gloriously sunny, and while this didn't help much with feet on the cold pavement it did at least mean that my torso was warm, aided by the six layers of thermals and jumpers and coats and hat and gloves. The crowd was occasionally addressed by speakers from Dignity in Dying and Humanists UK, one of Esther Rantzen's daughters, Rabbi Jonathan Romain, and some people sharing personal experience of death and dying. We were also encouraged to lend our voices to a number of chants, mostly for the benefit of the assembled Press and their cameras. I suspect this vocal activity was as alien to most of the crowd as it was to me, so we were a bit reticent to begin with: 

"WHAT DO WE WANT?" 

"Erm, do we really have to shout?" 

"COME ON EVERYONE, WHAT DO WE WANT?" 

"Assisted dying?" 

"COME ON, LOUDER, WHAT DO WE WANT?" 

"Oh really, must we?"

"WHEN DO WE WANT IT?"

"Now?"

But we all got into the swing of it eventually, and I realised that shouting is quite fun, it uses a fair bit of energy, and I hadn't really had a good shout for many a long year. Not something one does as a respectable middle aged woman who doesn't go to football matches. I thought I might have another shout just for the fun of it when I'm on my own in the house (but I probably won't).

The opponents' demonstration was across the road, much nearer to Parliament so I didn't see much of it, but it looked as though their crowd was significantly smaller than ours. We didn't get to see or hear any of the debate that was taking place inside but I watched a little bit afterwards and then read the transcript, and it seemed to be one of the most sincere and serious discussions that has taken place in many years, with almost no point-scoring, shouting or waving of order papers. 

The main (non-religious) objections were 

a) that vulnerable people may experience coercion, 

b) that it is more important to improve and extend palliative care, and

c) that the scope might be extended (the 'slippery slope') to people who are disabled, elderly or suffering without a terminal illness. 

The rebuttal of these points is 

a) that vulnerable people experience coercion at the moment but there is no legal framework to investigate this until after they have died, whereas this proposal allows for investigation of possible coercion while they are still alive

b) that it's not one or the other - palliative care can be improved and extended (as it has been in other jurisdictions where assisted dying has been made available), and in fact if this Bill were not before the House then all this talk of improving palliative care would probably not be happening, and

c) that the title of the Bill does not allow for anyone but terminally ill adults to take advantage of the opportunity of an assisted death, and it cannot be changed; also in other jurisdictions with similar legislation (e.g. Oregon [USA], Victoria [Australia] but not Canada or Netherlands which have very different scope) there has been no change or extension in 25 years.

There are many heart-rending examples of the suffering that has been endured by those for whom palliative care has not worked, and I can see no reason to deny them the option of an assisted death on any of the grounds given above. I have written to my MP a number of times about the issue in the past, and he has responded a couple of times in a non-committal way, but on the day he voted in favour and also published a statement on his website. When the result came through that the Bill had been passed by a significant majority, the respectful murmur that followed was very different from the usual cheering and jeering in the Chamber. 

There's a long way to go before this Bill becomes law - the Committee stage, the Report stage, a third reading, then off to the House of Lords, so I may be standing out in the cold with my placard a few more times in the next year or two. But it is clear that a majority of the public are in favour of assisted dying with the safeguards outlined in the Bill, and while it is not perfect I believe that the current legal situation is much worse.