TERRIFYING New Shift In Starmer’s Assisted Dying Bill.

Right, so as fearful as many have been about the gradual weakening in apparent safeguards of the Assisted Dying Bill as it continues to progress through parliament, matters have now become all the ore terrifying as Labour now introduce a profit driven motive into the bargain as well. It is now being proposed that not only should assisted dying become law with the lack of judicial oversight and lack of safeguards that were originally being promised that have gradually been wittered away, but that it should be outsourced to private companies in order to make a profit out of ending people’s lives. What could possibly go wrong there? Well after decades of seeing services privatised and what that has caused, often rising bills and poorer service, the one thing they all have in common is maximising profits. The terrifying prospect here is that coercion in the name of making money will become the driving factor should this Bill become law, the best interests of the patient would no longer be the central issue and as such concerns have soared and an MPs wavering over their continued support for this Bill should listen to that. A profit motive on a matter like this, shows the whole idea now needs to be the only thing that gets killed off.
Right, so the UK’s Assisted Dying Bill, championed by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, has already been sparking heated debate, but now comes a massive warning about it, that this is being seen as a profit opportunity for companies already profiting massively from NHS contracts. While proponents argue that it offers a compassionate choice for those suffering from terminal illnesses, an issue and a debate I have a great deal of sympathy for, having lost both of my parents to horrendous terminal illnesses, for a long while that is not how this Labour proposal has been seen and now the cat appears to be well and truly out of the bag on that. The Bill is riddled with ethical, legal, and practical pitfalls, too many of which have gone grossly unreported. The most alarming concern that has dropped now though is this potential outsourcing of assisted dying services to private companies, a move that could see NHS profiteers capitalising on the most vulnerable in society, leading to coercion for them to end their lives in the name of making money. So we need to take a good look at the implications of this Bill for all of us, his could end up affecting any of us after all, but most especially now the troubling prospect of profit-driven coercion in assisted dying being championed by Starmer’s Labour, as well as the weakening of safeguards, the lack of scrutiny, and the secrecy surrounding the Bill, which have raised understandable concerns among the public, healthcare professionals, and other politicians as well, who ultimately have the power to end this thing if life itself is to become just another cash cow for capitalism.
So lets start with having a look at the Assisted Dying Bill in light of the potential outsourcing of these termination of life services to private companies. According to reports, the Labour government of Keir Starmer, a man with all the charisma of a corpse, so there may be a correlation there, is considering privatising assisted dying, the justification to do so being to alleviate pressure on the NHS, this new service, being another burden being placed on that overworked and understaffed service, itself still being set up for more carving up for private interests as it is, so why not just skip to the privatisation bit for this from the start? Well obviously it then introduces a profit motive doesn’t it? This move has been met with widespread criticism, quite understandably, with opponents arguing that it introduces that profit motive into a deeply sensitive and ethical issue. Outsourcing assisted dying to private companies could create a perverse incentive for these firms to maximise profits by encouraging more people to opt for assisted suicide and this then raises the chilling prospect of vulnerable individuals being coerced into ending their lives prematurely, not out of genuine desire or need, but to satisfy corporate bottom lines.
The involvement of private companies in assisted dying is particularly troubling given the Labour Party’s recent track record on healthcare, led by Wes Streeting who is hell bent on bringing in more private provision in the name of efficiency, when so many private clinics use NHS staff already and is therefore complete nonsense. This is a government that is prioritising cost-cutting and privatisation over patient welfare and our need for the NHS.
Labour’s assault on the sick and disabled plays into this picture as well, with the threats of benefit cuts, reform to disability benefits in the name of getting more people off support they need. Against this backdrop, the outsourcing of assisted dying services appears to be part of a broader agenda that prioritises financial efficiency over human dignity. Private companies, driven by profit, may pressure individuals—particularly the elderly, disabled, and long-term sick—to choose assisted dying as a way to reduce the financial burden on families and the state, which is a narrative that is constantly thrown at those demographics, that they are somehow worth less because they are seen as a drain on society rather than society being about people and measured by how they care for their elderly and their infirm and the disabled.
Another major concern surrounding this Bill has of course been the weakening of safeguards and the lack of parliamentary scrutiny. The Bill, as it stands, removes the requirement for High Court oversight in assisted dying cases. This is a significant departure from previous proposals, which emphasised the need for judicial approval in all cases to ensure that decisions are made voluntarily and without coercion. The removal of High Court oversight is a grave mistake that will leave individuals at heightened risk of abuse. The High Court would provide a crucial safeguard by ensuring that each case is thoroughly reviewed and that all legal and ethical criteria are met. This was in fact the lynch-pin condition that many MPs backed the Bill and with that removed and a profit motive put in, many should be very worried about this.
Like all public services though, the High Court is already struggling to cope with its existing workload, again overworked and underfunded and the addition of the assisted dying cases could overwhelm the system. That should mean we simply can’t afford to progress with this Bill in which case without the obviously necessary judicial oversight. This raises serious questions about the feasibility of the Bill and the potential for errors or oversights in the decision-making process, especially with a profit motive introduced. There has to be robust oversight of this in law. Without that robust oversight, there is a real risk that individuals could be pressured into assisted dying without fully understanding all of their options all in the name of profit for not so much private health companies, but merchants of death as they’d be without that judicial supervision.
Then there is the lack of scrutiny surrounding this Bill has been a source of frustration for many, making people wonder what is being hidden and the sudden prospect of a profit motive should be ringing massive alarm bells for those who have still been supporting this Bill in Parliament. Kim Leadbeater, the Bill’s primary advocate, has been accused of shielding it from proper parliamentary debate, with Leadbeater having resisted calls for a more thorough examination of the Bill’s provisions, leading to accusations of secrecy and a lack of transparency and saddling her with a not underserved reputation for wanting assisted dying at any cost. This has added to already grave concerns that the government is rushing the Bill through Parliament without adequately addressing the ethical and practical challenges it poses and are in fact adding more fuel to that fire, by mooting the prospect of outsourcing it all.
A notable intervention on the consequences of this Bill as it now stands has actually come from the former Director of Legislative Affairs at Number 10, Nikki da Costa, who summed it all up quite well in a single tweet, saying:
‘Under this bill they’d be exempt from any civil liability (clause 25), deaths would be exempt from investigation by a coroner (clause 29), there’ll be a code of practice but it’s only something you have to “have regard to” and failure to follow the code is “not itself” a problem, and the only monitoring will be by a Commissioner (the independent scrutiny by the CMO is to be removed). There is no regulator, no licensing requirement, no duties private providers would have to comply with. The bill is utterly silent on absolutely essential issues - so if this is what the sponsor and govt are comfortable with they need to work through this rapidly’
In this context, the introduction of assisted dying raises the spectre of profit-driven coercion without any consequences on the face of it for abusing the service. Private companies, incentivised by financial gain, will exploit the vulnerabilities of affected individuals, encouraging them to choose assisted dying as a way to reduce costs and increase efficiency for their own benefit, but sold to the people in question as a way to avoid being a burden, psychological abuse as that would be motivated by profit. Already there are reports of NHS workers voicing their fears about the potential for abuse, so this isn’t just theoretical mud-raking here. Healthcare professionals have expressed concern that the Bill could lead to a slippery slope, where the criteria for assisted dying are gradually expanded to include non-terminal conditions and individuals who are deemed to be a financial burden on the state and certainly Kim Leadbeater having opined that those with mental health issues could access this system is another flashing red warning over this Bill.
The secrecy and lack of scrutiny surrounding the Assisted Dying Bill have caused widespread concern from members of the public, disability rights organisations, healthcare professionals, members of the judiciary and politicians alike. So many people from all walks of life feel that the government is rushing this Bill through Parliament without adequately addressing the ethical and practical challenges it poses and now adds even more concern to that with the prospect that they privatise the whole thing. There has to be a more thorough and transparent debate, with input from healthcare professionals, ethicists, and the wider public, because without that, the only place this Bill is fit for is the dustbin.
For more on how people with mental health issues could now be offered assisted dying, presumably to save cash on already underfunded mental health services, check out this video recommendation here as your suggested next watch, Please do also hit like, share and subscribe before you do so though, so as to ensure you don’t miss out on all new content published daily, as well as helping to support the channel which is very much appreciated and I will hopefully catch you on the next vid. Cheers folks.