Bill 12

A Bill to allow adults who are terminally ill, subject to safeguards and protections, to request and be provided with assistance to end their own life; and for connected purposes.

At long last, Kim Leadbeater released the text of Bill 12 the evening of 11 November 2024. She had introduced her Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill to the British parliament on 16 October 2024. It applies to adult residents of England & Wales.

To read the full text of Bill 12, please click HERE.

It has been over a month since the introduction of Bill 12 in the House of Commons. It is slated to have a vote on the Second Reading on 29 November 2024…in a little over 2-weeks time.

It is egregious that Leadbeater has delayed the release of the Bill while she has been touting it in the media. Now, MP’s and the public have only 18 days in which to review this complex 38-page Bill dealing with the life and death of British citizens and residents of England & Wales.

Euphemism

Note how Leadbeater is still using soft terms such as the “end of life” ; “assistance to end their own life” ; “assisted dying” and “approved substance” instead of Assisted Suicide, Voluntary Euthanasia and poison.

Sections

Below are comparisons between the Leadbeater’s Bill with the 2024 Falconer Bill and the 2021 Meacher Bill. Leadbeater’s Bill has 13 main headings, but curiously her numbers are for the 43 sub-divisions. Falconer & Meacher’s numbering starts on the main sections.

“Assisted dying” a.k.a. Assisted Suicide [AS]

Leadbeater has expanded the involvement of the High Court so it has gone beyond being a simple “rubber-stamp” ensuring the paperwork requirements have been met. Her Bill allows for in-person hearings in the High Court:

This means the court could hear from family and friends if it so chooses…but this still is not a guaranteed appeal process for concerned family and friends.

Residents & Citizens

Bill 12 allow for AS to be provided to a competent adult who is “ordinarily resident in England and Wales and has been so resident for at least 12 months ending with the date of the first declaration…” This means that the UK could have the temerity to assist the suicide of a foreign citizen!

I wonder when an aggressive country like the People’s Republic of China or the Russian Federation (et al.) will take a dim view of their citizens being killed in the UK? In stressful times, such an action could be portrayed as an offense against the citizens of a foreign state.

The Bill also specifies the requirement for the resident to be “registered as a patient with a general medical practice in England or Wales.” This obviously has some additional relevance which currently is lost on me. (Anyone who knows please DM me on X.) Also, it means that no-one can receive ‘assistance’ if they do not have a GP: a rather curious bias.

Terminal illness

Again, there is a pivotal issue in the lack of a proper definition about what can “be reversed by treatment.” Many cancers and other serious illnesses do have a certain cure rate. This Bill should specify to what level this cure-rate must reach to be an exclusion under the Bill.

The original work-around in Canada was for people to refuse curative treatment so they would be deemed to be terminally ill. (Now there is Track II which does not require death to be “forseeable.”)

Also, there is the issue of prognosis being a rough guess at best. Assessing doctors in Canada are frequently pessimistic about the prognosis…which ‘helps’ their clients meet criteria.

Declaration

Doctors are not trained in the identification of coercion and duress. Nor do doctors report societal coercion, such as the lack of ER services; the lack of proper palliative care or poverty / reduced financial assistance.

The support for AS — such as repeatedly telling them that they are “so brave” — is a form of duress because it makes it harder for them to withdraw their consent. Also organ donation is used as leverage on the applicant: “But you will save so many lives...”

Proof of Identity

An excellent addition is the requirement for the applicant to provide 2 forms of ID to the coordinating doctor and witness.

Assistance in dying

Technically, Bill 12 excludes the direct administration of the poison by the attending doctor — so it excludes Voluntary Euthanasia.

18 (8) “Subsection (6) does not authorise the coordinating doctor to administer an approved substance to another person with the intention of causing that person’s death.”

There is a gray-zone with a clause which allows the coordinating doctor to:

18 (6) (c) “assist that person to ingest or otherwise self-administer the substance.”

though the following clause seems very clear:

18 (7) “But the decision to self-administer the approved substance and the final act of doing so must be taken by the person to whom the substance has been provided.

So, 18 (6) (c) needs further clarification as to what is acceptable assistance “to ingest or otherwise self-administer…” Does that stretch to what Harry Potter did when he fed Dumbledore the poisoned water in The Half-Blood Prince? Does it include holding an arm down when a person is resisting after they have initiated a drip or NG tube?

Bill 12 gives no direction as to what is to happen when an AS attempt fails or is excessively prolonged or has becomes complicated. I expect the difficult cases will make the tabloid headlines and be used to promote Voluntary Euthanasia at a later date.

An excellent clause is that the coordinating doctor (or substitute) must stay till the person has died, or the procedure has failed or the person has changed their mind.

Conscientious Objection

Ethical doctors be warned: Bill 12 does NOT have a specific section on Conscientious Objection.

Clause 23 sounds good (no obligation to provide assistance) but that is contradicted by Clause 4 (5) (which is posted under Clause 23 below.)

Clearly, conscientious objectors will be forced to make a referral for assisted suicide.

The practice in Canada on the issue of mandated referral is mixed. I worked in Alberta which has no such requirement. A doctor can advise the patient (or their designate) to call a specific phone-line to start the process with one call. Ontario mandates doctors to make “an effective referral.”

Doctor Shopping!

Bill 12 allows for “doctor shopping” if the independent doctor does not/cannot sign off on the need for Assisted Suicide!

Court shopping!
Not only can the applicant seek a third doctor to sign off on their suicide, but if the High Court refuses to sign off, the applicant may appeal to the Court of Appeal (though the family or concerned friends may not!)

Criminal & Civil liability

Bill 12 almost fully indemnifies the doctors against ALL possible criminal and civil charges.

Offenses

A scary issue is that Leadbeater’s Bill actually allows a doctor to be a financial beneficiary IF:

In other words, when the UK gets Dr. Shipman II, he or she will simply claim that they ‘did not know’ or ‘believed’ that they were not a beneficiary in the dying person’s will.

Scary.

Provision by the NHS

Bill 12 does not specify provision by the NHS but does allow the Secretary of State to provide assisted suicide through the NHS.

Conclusion

The pro-death brigade have pushed the talking point that there has been ‘no debate’ on assisted suicide since 2015. They keep using this line despite the fact that the Leadbeater Bill is the third Bill on assisted suicide to be tabled in the British parliament in the last 4 years!

The government is putting a“Fix” into the House of Lords. They are planning to “remove the right of the remaining 92 hereditary peers to sit and vote in the House of Lords” through the House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill 2024-25. If enacted, this will remove a major Christian influence by excluding 25 voting Anglican bishops.

The Leadbeater Bill 12 is patently better than the Falconer & Meacher iterations. Still, it has significant weaknesses, including:

Limited time for review by the public and MP’s.
The use of euphemism over frank language.
There is no guaranteed High Court appeal process for concerned family & friends.
Most of the assessment will be done by only 2 doctors (who are usually advocates for AS.)
There is no requirement for any “suffering”’ — just a wish for death with a terminal illness which has a 6-month prognosis.
Pro-Life High Court judges are likely to recuse themselves from the approval process.
The UK might assist the suicide of the citizen of another country.
Doctors have limited ability to prognosticate with accuracy.
Doctors may initiate “the conversation” (persuasion?) about assisted suicide.
There is no exact definition of what is an effective treatment.
There is no statement about an applicant refusing potentially effective treatment.
Doctors are NOT trained to identify coercion & duress.
There needs to be clarification as to what physical assistance can be provided by the doctor.
Ethical doctors will be mandated to refer a patient against their conscience.
The applicant can doctor-shop AND court-shop till they get approval for suicide!
The doctors involved can even be a financial beneficiary of the person applying for suicide!!
The Secretary of State gets to decide many regulations later.
The Secretary of State MUST provide AS — but does not have to provide universal palliative care!
There is no guidance about what should happen after a failed or complicated suicide attempt.

Globalist & death-advocate Kier Starmer, Prime Minister of Britain, has supported assisted suicide for years. (He backed the 2015 Assisted Dying Bill which was voted down 330 to 118.)

Starmer has promised a parliamentary vote on the Second Reading of Bill 12 by Christmas 2024. He claims to be allowing a free vote, but one must wonder about the political future of any minion who opposes his stance.

Dr. Kevin Hay
You can follow Kevin on 𝕏 ( Twitter / Twi𝕏 ) @ kevinhay77

(NB small edits are being made to this article as the issues come to light.)

Britain's Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Bill 12

Copyright: Catholic Arena