You are suffering from an illness that cannot be cured. Each day your body becomes weaker and the pain grows worse. Then a family member approaches your bed, takes hold of your hand and asks whether you would like to die. How do you reply?

The UK parliament is about to start debating a new bill on assisted dying. A LabourBritain's main left-of-centre political party. MPMember of Parliament. There are 650 MPs representing people in different areas of the UK., Kim Leadbeater, has proposed a law that would allow terminally illSuffering from an incurable illness. adults the right to end their life. She aims to stop people from experiencing "horrible, harrowing" deaths.¹

At the moment, the law prevents people from asking for medical help to die. But MPs will be free to vote on the new bill however they wish, given this is such a personal and painful topic.

This weekend, Britain's religious leaders united to oppose the law. An open letter representing Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu and Sikh faith leaders declared that changing the law would turn a "right to die" into people thinking they have a "duty to die" to avoid burdening their families or the NHSThe National Health Service, the publicly funded healthcare system in the UK. The NHS was founded in 1948..

There are complex questions involved. But here are three essential arguments from both sides of the debate.

The case FOR assisted dying:

Shorten suffering. Even with the best palliative careMedical care that focuses on making the quality of someone's life better when they have a very serious, and often terminal, illness. It often involves methods to relieve pain and suffering. in the world, "people can suffer horribly in their final illness," says lawyer and campaigner Charles Falconer. Letting them end their lives is an act of kindness.²

Popular policy. The largest ever poll on assisted dying in the UK shows that 75% of people support making it lawful, with just 14% against. This includes 78% of disabled people and 66% of those with religious beliefs.³ Campaigners also argue that assisted dying is legal in several European countries and US states.

Safety first. Kim Leadbeater claims the law has "the strictest safeguards anywhere in the world". Those who wish to end their life must be over 18, expected to die within six months, clear of mind, well-informed and free from outside pressure. Two independent doctors must also assess the patient and approve their decision.⁴

The case AGAINST assisted dying:

Do no harm. The first duty of any doctor is to preserve life. But, this bill means their relationship with patients "would change forever",⁵ argues journalist Melanie McDonagh. She thinks the law should encourage doctors to protect terminally ill patients - some of the most vulnerable people in society - rather than decide on their deaths.

Slippery slope. Critics of the bill worry that, if the law were changed, more and more people would demand the right to die. This was the case in Canada, where a similar law was introduced in 2016. One health minister thought it would lead to "perhaps a hundred" deaths, but in 2022 the figure was 4,800.⁶ In some countries, people with mental health problems can request euthanasiaThe deliberate and painless ending of a life. .

Rush job. Several MPs have argued that the bill is being rushed through parliament, with only 18 days between publication and the first vote. Dr Gordon Macdonald, another campaigner, criticised the "indecent haste" for such an important issue.⁷ Even Liberty, a respected campaigning organisation that supports assisted dying, thinks there are "significant shortcomings" with the legislation.⁸

Many MPs are undecided. Those in favour of the bill want the terminally ill to be able to choose when and how they die. Those against want to protect the desperately sick from being pressured into suicide. And both sides say they are making the compassionateShowing understanding and sympathy to people who are suffering. choice.

Is assisted dying wrong?

Yes: Doctors are meant to preserve life, not assist death. Changing the law could pressurise vulnerable people into killing themselves, and the current bill is too rushed to reassure critics.

No: The new bill is not intended to end life, but to shorten death. Letting the sickest people decide when they die is popular with a majority of the public, including with religious and disabled people.

Or... Both those in favour of assisted dying and those against are motivated by compassion. That is why MPs must be given enough time to debate this law and make up their minds.