Today I voted in favour of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, which has also been commonly referred to as the Assisted Dying Bill. It wasn’t a decision I took lightly. I know from speaking to many constituents and reading your messages that this is an issue people feel deeply and passionately about – on both sides.

Let me be clear: this bill does not allow just anyone to end their life, nor does it open the door to coercion. It is tightly focused on people with a medically confirmed terminal illness and a prognosis of less than 6 months to live. This is not about choosing between life and death – it’s about having some choice in how we die. Death is something we will all face. This bill is about giving people facing the end a chance to meet it with dignity, on their terms.

We’ve all heard painful stories of people enduring prolonged, agonising deaths – stories where even the best palliative care couldn’t prevent immense suffering. For many, palliative care is enough. But for some, it isn’t. This bill is for them.

One of the most important reasons I supported this legislation is because, at present, only a privileged few have real options. If you have the money to travel to Switzerland, or the right connections to a willing medical professional, or a GP prepared – at personal legal risk – to quietly help ease your suffering, you may be able to exert some control over how you die. But most people don’t have those resources or those relationships. That’s not fair. Dignity at the end of life should not be a luxury. This bill, for the first time, aims to level the playing field – ensuring that everyone, regardless of wealth or circumstance, has the same chance to die with dignity, within a safe, regulated system.

Of course, this bill includes important safeguards to prevent abuse. They may evolve over time – as all laws do – but I believe the protections in this legislation are robust and proportionate. I understand the concerns, especially from disabled people who fear a shift in how society values their lives. Those concerns deserve to be heard and respected. But this bill is not about disability, nor about despair or pressure to die. It is about clearly defined medical situations – terminal illness only – with strong oversight and consent procedures.

I was particularly concerned about amendment 12 – which was voted down. It would have paved the way for the private sector to take over delivery. That would have undermined the entire principle of fairness by entrenching inequality in access. This cannot be a service for the wealthy alone. If we are to offer choice at the end of life, it must be through the NHS – a publicly accountable system, not a market-based one.

Ultimately, I supported this bill because it offers dignity, compassion, and fairness. It gives those at the end of life – not the state, not clinicians, not families – the ability to make an informed choice about how they die. I know that many will disagree with my decision. I hope, at the very least, you understand the values and reasoning that led me to it.