Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Third sitting) Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateSojan Joseph
Main Page: Sojan Joseph (Labour - Ashford)Department Debates - View all Sojan Joseph's debates with the Ministry of Justice
(2 days, 23 hours ago)
Public Bill CommitteesI will move on to Sojan Joseph, but perhaps you can pick this up. We have eight people wanting to ask questions and half an hour, tops.
Q
Alex Ruck Keene: I think for many reasons it can. On the pure capacity side, this is, at one level, an existential question. This is not a healthcare decision but an existential decision. The more people we have who are able to bring their different perspectives—the social work perspective on the person’s social circumstances or the medical perspective on their medical condition—the better, so that we have as many eyes on the person and insights into the person as possible.
It is about trying to make sure that the decision goes back to whether we are really satisfied that the criteria set out at the beginning of the Bill are met. I personally think we should have MDTs, for instance, as you would have in a Mental Health Act detention, so that we have more than one pair of eyes on it from more than one discipline.
Q
Sir Nicholas Mostyn: I was sort of taken by surprise when she asked the me the question in the pub, and I would not have phrased it like that in court 50.