Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill
Debate between Sarah Russell and Lizzi Collinge(6 days, 11 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lizzi Collinge
I am mindful of time, so I will continue.
Why, then, would we now choose, as a House, to hide from patients information about their options? For so many years, people have been put through that. Informed consent to treatment, including end of life care, is informed only when it includes all options. There is also the practical element of what would count as a patient raising it first. Would they have to make a specific statement? Would they have to use specific language? It would create a legal and medical minefield for doctors and patients.
Lizzi Collinge
I am very mindful of time, so I will finish with this point. Colleagues may wish to look at the NHS constitution, which says:
“You have the right to be involved in planning and making decisions about your health and care with your care provider or providers, including your end of life care, and to be given information and support to enable you to do this.”
That can be the case only if people are given the full information. All people should have access to full information on matters of care. To do otherwise is to deny people their decision—it is paternalistic, and we should move away from that model. People have fought so hard for that to happen.
We have a chance today, colleagues, to ensure that the legislation is the best it can be. It has been a pleasure to listen to the contributions of colleagues across the Chamber. I am minded to support the amended Bill on Third Reading, because the current situation for terminally ill people, with no safeguards, no protection and no choice, is absolutely unsupportable.