Two former Conservative ministers, Andrew Mitchell and Kit Malthouse, have made it clear that they want the option of assisted dying for themselves. They’ve called on Members of Parliament (MPs) to change the law surrounding assisted suicide, sharing their personal views on a sensitive and deeply emotional issue as Parliament arguedwhether to legalize assisted dying for the first time in nearly ten years. Their remarks have sparked a crucial conversation, with MPs clearly divided on the matter. The debate is even more heated because MPs have been granted a free vote on the issue, meaning they can vote according to their personal beliefs, rather than party lines. For Mitchell and Malthouse, this means they are free to back the legislation despite opposition from some of their Conservative colleagues, including Kemi Badenoch, who is firmly against the proposal.
Andrew Mitchell, who has served as the Deputy Foreign Secretary under Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, is a prime example of someone who has had a significant shift in opinion over the years. In fact, Mitchell admitted that he had “completely changed my mind on this subject” during his 33 years of service in Parliament. His decision to support assisted dying now stems from his direct experiences with constituents, who have come to him in tears, sharing heartbreaking stories of family members suffering through excruciating pain or indignity in their final days. Mitchell explained the emotional weight of these encounters, stating, “I have sat in my advice surgery and I have had tears pouring down my face listening to constituents who have set out so clearly, speaking with such emotion, about how their mother, brother, father or child has died in great pain or great indignity.”
For Mitchell, the question has become a matter of compassion and choice. He stressed that this isn’t just about his own perspective—this is about giving people a choice in their final days. He said, “I believe we should give our constituents, our fellow citizens, the option to make that decision for themselves. I want this choice for my constituents, I want it for those whom I love, and indeed, I want it perhaps one day for myself.” His words reflect a deep sense of empathy, and they speak to the powerful desire to ensure people are able to die with dignity, should they wish to do so.
Kit Malthouse, who previously served as Education Secretary, also voiced his support for the bill during the debate. He co-sponsored Kim Leadbeater’s private member’s bill, which aims to legalize assisted suicide in the UK. Malthouse is clear that the proposal is rooted in compassion. In his remarks, he argued that for terminally ill individuals nearing the end of their lives, providing them with the right to choose when and how they die is the compassionate and humane thing to do. “Surely, surely, as they’re coming towards the end of their life, their rights have to be in the forefront of our mind,” he said passionately. His belief is that in the final stages of a person’s life, they should not be subjected to suffering that they cannot control. Instead, they should have the dignity of making their own decisions about how their life ends.
Malthouse continued by suggesting that denying people this option is, in essence, condemning them to an end full of suffering. He stated, “The last best gift that we can get [for] them is control of the disease that is destroying them. If we don’t pass the Bill today, we are cornering all those people, we are trapping them with the law against their disease and consigning them to an end of torture and degradation which they do not wish to go through.” For Malthouse, the question is about protecting individuals’ rights to make a final, personal choice when they are facing a terminal illness. He urged the government to recognize the importance of personal autonomy in these deeply distressing circumstances.
He also acknowledged that this bill isn’t just about offering a choice for others—it’s also about securing that choice for himself. “I want this choice for my constituents, but profoundly I want it for myself,” Malthouse stated, underscoring the deeply personal nature of the debate. He further emphasized that this issue is not just theoretical but a real and pressing matter for many individuals and families across the country. Many people, including those who have advocated for change in recent years, have been working tirelessly to push for the law to be updated, and Malthouse expressed his desire to honor their efforts. “I want it for those people in the gallery who have been working so hard in the past decade to get us to change their minds,” he concluded.
The proposed legislation, introduced by Kim Leadbeater, would allow terminally ill adults who have less than six months to live the option to end their lives with the assistance of two doctors and the approval of a High Court judge. This measure has been supported by many advocates who argue that people should have the right to die with dignity, surrounded by their loved ones, instead of enduring prolonged suffering. Supporters believe the legislation would give individuals more control over their final days, allowing them to make a choice that aligns with their values and personal desires.
However, the proposal has also been met with considerable opposition. Critics argue that the legislation has been rushed through without sufficient safeguards in place to protect vulnerable people from potential abuse or coercion. They point to the need for more comprehensive consultations and more rigorous protections to ensure that individuals who are seeking assisted death are fully informed and making decisions free from external pressures. These concerns reflect the broader ethical debates surrounding the issue, which weigh the right to personal autonomy against the potential for abuse or exploitation of the system.
As MPs continue to debate the proposed bill, the conversation has clearly reached a pivotal point in British political and social life. The issue of assisted suicide touches on deeply held values regarding life, death, suffering, and human dignity. The decision facing Parliament is not just a matter of law—it’s a question of how society views the rights of individuals who are nearing the end of their lives. In the coming days and weeks, this debate will continue to unfold, with many MPs being forced to confront their own beliefs and the complex ethical dilemmas that arise when discussing such a personal and sensitive issue.
The voices of Andrew Mitchell and Kit Malthouse have added an important perspective to the discussion, highlighting the need for compassion, respect for individual rights, and the desire to offer terminally ill individuals a dignified option in their final days. The outcome of this debate will have a lasting impact on how assisted dying is viewed and legislated in the UK. Whether or not the bill passes, it’s clear that the conversation is far from over, and the personal stories shared by Mitchell, Malthouse, and countless others will continue to shape the way we think about death, choice, and dignity in the years to come.
Login