Personal Stories

How Parliament talked itself out of assisted dying and voted instead to prolong unnecessary suffering

September 21, 2026

The following analysis was written by Hannah Slater for her ‘Gentle Roars’ Substack, and is reproduced here with her permission. If you would like to read more of Hannah’s publications and support her work, please consider becoming a free or paid subscriber, at Hannah Slater | Substack or Upgrade to paid

 

On Friday MPs voted against Lauren Edwards MP’s Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill at its second reading by a margin of just 16 votes. That was despite Kim Leadbeater’s almost identical Bill being passed by the House of Commons at its third reading in June 2025 by a margin of 23 votes, before it was blocked by the Lords. Friday’s vote has killed Lauren’s Bill — and with it, the latest chance to bring legal assisted dying to England and Wales.

It’s a devastating result for campaigners who have spent years fighting for this change, often as a result of difficult personal experiences with loved ones and many of whom travelled to Parliament Square on Friday for the vote. I wasn’t able to make it to London myself, but I am deeply disappointed in the outcome.

Let’s be clear about exactly what the House of Commons voted for last week, when it voted the Bill down:

More unnecessary suffering

Palliative care is excellent, but even the best palliative care cannot relieve pain 100% of the time. Some people are allergic to opioids. Some of us will lose the ability to communicate pain as our disease progresses. Many of us will become incontinent, and that loss of dignity is its own source of suffering. The anxieties about and fear of what the end might look like takes a toll on the mental health of people like me, living with a terminal illness, in the time we have left.

A two-tier system for the dying

People with money, and the physical strength to travel, can go to Dignitas in Switzerland for a legal assisted death — even though most of them would rather do it in this country, surrounded by family. People without the money, or too ill to travel, are left with suicide as their only route to any control over the timing of their death. That is a worse, lonelier and more traumatic death, for them and for the people left behind.

A four-hour debate, on both sides of a deeply personal issue

More than 90 MPs wanted to speak. On both sides, many brought personal accounts of losing family members. Former Health Minister Ashley Dalton — herself living with a terminal cancer diagnosis — voted against the Bill, arguing that depression and suicidal thoughts are common immediately after a terminal diagnosis, and the Bill did not adequately screen for this.

I have huge respect for Ashley Dalton. But a stage four diagnosis doesn’t automatically mean someone has less than six months to live. Stage four cancer patients are living longer than ever, for years and some for decades. To me, her argument makes the case for properly funding psychological support for people with a new diagnosis — not for blocking assisted dying altogether. And having poor mental health after a diagnosis doesn’t mean someone lacks the mental capacity to make this decision – those are two different questions.

Surgeon and MP Dr Zubir Ahmed, who also voted against, argued that “six months to live” is an increasingly unreliable clinical marker given modern treatments. I agree — I was told I had “a few months” to live in June 2025. I’ve wondered how a six-month eligibility test could work fairly given how frequently people outlive their prognosis. But surely the timeframe test would never be based on statistical averages handed out at the point of diagnosis. It would be based on that individual’s own history of diagnosis and response to treatment, reassessed by multiple professionals throughout the process. And crucially, if an individual is certified as meeting the criteria for an assisted death – there would be zero obligation on that person to go through with it if their health improved unexpectedly or they simply just changed their mind.

Timing, not principle

What’s striking is that many of the MPs who voted against weren’t rejecting assisted dying in principle — they were objecting to the timing, process and detail. A lot of them believe social and palliative care need to be properly funded first, and see that investment as the most important safeguard against coercion. Others felt a change this significant should come through a Government Bill, not a private member’s Bill.

Coercion is a real and serious concern and I don’t dismiss it. But I think the Bill’s safeguards were sufficient. Jess Phillips MP, who has real authority on domestic abuse and coercive control, made a powerful case for the Bill on Friday. She pointed out that suicide already outstrips homicide as the leading cause of death for women experiencing domestic abuse and coercive control. In other words, coercion into death is happening under the status quo — we just don’t check for it until after someone is dead. The Bill would have checked for it at every stage of the process, before anyone was certified for an assisted death.

Palliative care: the one thing everyone agreed on

Whichever side they were on, almost every MP who spoke agreed that palliative care in this country is underfunded and inconsistent. They just disagreed about whether that should delay assisted dying, or run alongside it. I’ve written before about why I think it doesn’t need to wait. Even in defeat, two consecutive Bills — Kim Leadbeater’s and now Lauren Edwards’ — have put overdue political pressure and attention on palliative care funding. Whatever happens next, that’s a real legacy.

Why did the Commons flip?

An almost identical Bill, sponsored by Kim Leadbeater, passed the Commons in 2025, before the House of Lords blocked it earlier this year. So what changed?

Mostly, it wasn’t MPs switching sides. It was MPs who backed the Bill last time abstaining or not showing up on Friday. Why so many? I suspect at least some Labour MPs were mirroring new Prime Minister Andy Burnham’s position — which has been fairly consistent over time: not against assisted dying in principle, but not willing to legislate for it before care funding is fixed.

That’s actually a big part of why I am hopeful that assisted dying will still eventually become law in England and Wales. Burnham has committed to fixing social and palliative care, and has said on record that assisted dying is a conversation for afterwards. Despite years of governments failing to grapple with NHS and social care reform, there’s a genuine sense of drive from him on this. Once palliative care has real investment behind it, Parliament will find it much harder to say no to assisted dying. Given that most of the public already supports a change in the law, there’s a real path here to a manifesto commitment for a government Bill at the next election, if Burnham delivers on care and wants to build on it.

Finally — my thanks to John Slinger MP, who had my words ready to read out in the debate on my behalf as a patient with a terminal diagnosis. He wasn’t called to speak. But he read them out in Parliament’s Central Lobby after the vote anyway, and I’m grateful to him for that.

Read more

In Memory of Tim Wardle: A Voice of Principle in the Assisted Dying Campaign

December 2, 2025

We are deeply saddened to share that Tim Wardle, an unwavering supporter of the assisted dying campaign, died from cancer, he was 86.

Tim, who lived in Devon, campaigned not just for himself, but for all those who are incurably and intolerably suffering. Diagnosed with inoperable kidney cancer following a ten-year battle with bladder, prostate, and lung cancer, he spoke publicly about why he wanted the legal right to die on his terms – at home, in peace, and with dignity.

Tim had seen cancer devastate his family, losing his grandfather, mother and both sisters to the disease. He was present at one sister’s death in Canada, and described her pain and suffering as “prolonged and undignified,” before Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) was legalised there.

While he had explored the possibility of going abroad for an assisted death, Tim believed no one should be forced to leave home or spend thousands of pounds for the choice to die peacefully. As he put it:

“I wish to die at a time and place of my choosing, before losing control of my speech and bodily functions, and with my loved ones around me. I do not believe that any authority has the right to deny me that choice.”

He passionately believed that quality of life, not simply its duration, should be central to how we approach death.

His son, Charlie Wardle, said:

“I know this cause meant a lot to Dad, and the right to experience death on one’s terms is something he and I always agreed was humane and just. I am proud to know that his legacy lives on in such a meaningful and worthwhile campaign, and am grateful to My Death, My Decision for both the valuable work they do and the sensitivity they’ve shown us.”

At My Death, My Decision, we are proud to have worked alongside Tim and to have shared in his story. His dignity, courage and moral clarity leave a lasting legacy, and we will continue our campaign for a more compassionate law in his memory.

Graham Winyard, Board member at My Death, My Decision, said:

“Tim was a deeply principled and compassionate man who gave so much to the assisted dying movement, even while facing his own terminal diagnosis. He spoke with honesty and courage about the reality of dying in a country without choice. We are honoured to have known and worked alongside him, and we will continue campaigning in his name to ensure that others are not forced to suffer when there is a kinder, fairer alternative. Tim’s legacy is one of dignity, justice and compassion,  and it will endure.”

Notes

Members of the MDMD team, as well as individuals affected by the current law on assisted dying, are available for interview upon request.

For further comment or information, media should contact Nathan Stilwell at nathan.stilwell@mydeath-mydecision.org.uk or phone 07456200033. (media only)

Media can use the following press images and videos, as long as they are attributed to “My Death, My Decision”.

My Death, My Decision is a grassroots campaign group that wants the law in England and Wales to allow mentally competent adults who are terminally ill or intolerably suffering from an incurable condition the option of a legal, safe, and compassionate assisted death. With the support of over 3,000 members and supporters, we advocate for an evidence-based law that would balance individual choice alongside robust safeguards and finally give the people of England and Wales choice at the end of their lives.

Read more

Assisted Dying laws forced our mum to die without the right-to-say-goodbye, says grieving family

March 13, 2020

The family of an unnamed woman who travelled to Switzerland to die in secrecy have criticised the current ban on assisted dying for denying their family and close friends a right-to-say-goodbye. 

The family, who have asked not to be named, felt compelled to travel more than 1,000 miles by car and ferry to avoid police scrutiny and spent more than £10,000 after their relative, who had been diagnosed with motor neurone disease and who could no longer eat or speak, begged them to help her die with dignity. 

The family said they had felt anxious, that the woman’s GP, who had provided medical records, might realise what was happening and prevent their relative from traveling abroad. As a result, the family took extra precautions to maintain their secrecy, meaning the woman was unable to say goodbye to cherished friends and other family members – denying her and them closure, which would have been possible in other circumstances. 

Describing the sense of ‘constant anxiety’ and ‘fear’ that the family would be stopped at any moment, the woman’s daughter has spoken out in favour of changing the law on assisted dying, adding that the secrecy was a burden that only added to her grief. 

She said: 

‘I want to tell my manager at work, I want him to understand what we have been though, but I dare not. I am not ashamed of what we have done. It was the right thing for my mum’. 

Phil Cheatle the  Lead Campaign Commentator for My Death, My Decision said:

‘This case illustrates the tragedy of our current law.’

‘Those who merely want the right to die on their own terms are forced by our law to conceal their plans, out of fear of being discovered or prevented from exercising choice and control over how they die. The need for secrecy deprives both family and friends of saying goodbye in the manner they would wish. But the current UK alternatives of refusing treatment, refusing food and liquid, or taking one’s life unaided while you are still able, all seem far worse.’

‘The law clearly needs to change. More and more people are deciding that the compassionate assisted dying options, which are available in an increasing number of jurisdictions, such as Canada, are far preferable to ending one’s days in enforced suffering in the UK. We urge the Government to authorise an investigation into the current law, and ensure no-one else is forced to go through the anxiety of a secretive death’.

Read more

MDMD marks the death of assisted dying supporter

January 6, 2020

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Early in December, My Death, My Decision supporter Richard chose to end his life in Switzerland. 

Richard had been suffering from motor neurone disease, an incurable condition which can result in someone’s muscles wasting away and significant mobility problems. Diagnosed with the condition in 2018, Richard’s illness became progressively worse and eventually resulted in the need for a wheel rollator to move. Knowing that he would eventually become wholly dependent upon a ventilator to breathe, Richard decided to end his life before he deteriorated further. 

In a message written before his death Richard said: 

‘Probably the most common argument raised by opponents of an assisted dying law is that the vulnerable might be coerced into ending their lives… the process of applying to Switzerland is arduous and involves several discussions with doctors and others, during which the professionals would readily identify anyone acting against their will. [This may be] being used as a smokescreen to conceal opponents’ true motives, which may be more controversial and rather harder to justify’. 

‘My wife and I decided to approach Dignitas as soon as we realised what is involved in the natural final stages of MN (motor neurone disease)… We regard ourselves as very fortunate to be able to afford Switzerland. We are aware that so many who would like to go simply don’t have the means.’

Trevor Moore, Chair of the campaign group My Death, My Decision said:

‘It is shameful that Richard was denied the most basic of human rights to choose how, when, and whether he died in this country. His story serves as a stark reminder of both the impact and importance that a change in the law could bring to those who are incurably suffering or terminally ill. 

Fundamentally, dying in a manner and timing of your own choice should not depend upon someone’s financial means. More than one person a week now travels abroad to end their life, but many others cannot afford to make such a journey. In a civilised country, such as our own, we surely should not fail to respect the rights of our citizens or simply export their suffering to other places. 

We are grateful Richard was able to find a peaceful, painless, and dignified death abroad – but will continue his fight for a compassionate choice and change in the law in this country. Our thoughts are with his loved ones during this sensitive time and to everyone else touched by his life’. 

Read more

Marking one year since assisted dying campaigner Omid T’s death

October 4, 2019

Today marks one year since the right-to-die campaigner Omid T ended his life in Switzerland. To honour the anniversary, My Death, My Decision has released the exclusive extract from the last interview of Omid T, courtesy of ‘Endgame’ director Andi Reiss and Yellow Media Entertainment.

Omid had been a vocal and active campaigner, and a prominent member of My Death, My Decision before his death. Following a diagnosis of the rare neurological condition Multiple Systems Atrophy in 2014, the father of three launched the UK’s first assisted dying case, since Paul Lamb and Tony Nicklinson’s Widow Jane challenged the law in 2014. 

Raising more than £34,000 to support his challenge, Omid sought to convince the courts that the UK’s prohibitive law breached the human rights of those living with unbearable and incurable illnesses, by denying them a right to a private and family life. However, fearing that his condition would progress and leave him physically incapable of travelling to Switzerland, Omid was forced by the UK’s law to go to Switzerland before he would otherwise have wished, and 2 days before the High Court delivered its judgment – ultimately leaving Omid’s case unresolved. 

Omid recognised the importance of an inclusive law on assisted dying, believing that just as compassion has motivated people to support assisted dying for those who are terminally ill, compassion for others should also underscore support for a change in the law for adults of sound mind, facing constant and unbearable suffering. 

“In my view, there is no moral or legal justification for drawing the line at terminal illness or 6 months or fewer to live.  This would not have helped Debbie Purdy, Tony Nicklinson or me or many others who are begging for help to end our lives at a time of our choosing without pain in a dignified way.”

Acknowledging the one year anniversary of Omid’s death, My Death, My Decision’s Chair, Trevor Moore commented: 

‘Omid’s story cut through the debate on assisted dying, to provide a strong and poignant reminder that, unless the law respects the rights of both those facing terminal and incurable illnesses, a balanced and compassionate change in the law, will discriminate against hundreds that deserve compassion. It was and remains a tragedy that Omid was forced to die abroad.

Nearly 90% of the public now agrees that Omid should have had the right to choose how he died, prominent medical opinion (such as the Royal College of Physicians) has shifted, and an increasing global consensus now points towards changing the law both for those who are terminally ill and those facing incurable suffering. Isn’t it time that our politicians take stock, and act to reflect this reality?

Omid has now passed the baton onto Paul Lamb and Phil Newby to change the law in the UK, and we will continue to support them both.’ 

Read more

‘Endgame’ Documentary on Assisted Dying Available Online

April 28, 2019

Endgame is a documentary made over 18 months in 2017/8 by independent film maker Andi Reiss. It has been shown, with much praise, at many film festivals and at independent venues. He has now made it available to view on his Vimeo site. A link is embedded at the bottom of this page.

The film, which lasts 65 minutes, follows the stories of Marie, Omid and Alex: three people contemplating a medically assisted suicide in Switzerland. At points the viewing is harrowing and highly emotional – please take that as a warning and have tissues to hand if you watch it!

The documentary asks hard questions and interviews people central to the debate including: Saimo Chahal, (Lawyer for Omid and previously Tony Nicklinson); Richard Huxtable, (Professor of Medical Ethics and Law, Bristol University); Dr Erika Preisig, (Lifecircle) and Rt Rev Lee Rayfield (Bishop of Swindon).

The final section of the film shows Marie and Omid ending their lives at Lifecircle in Switzerland. The in-depth interviews with them immediately prior to them ending their lives are particularly striking. The footage starkly contrasts, on the one hand the joy and gratitude of two people able to peacefully end their suffering after a long period of careful consideration, but on the other hand, the inevitable sadness at loss of life. Omid clearly found happiness in his final interview, the day before he ended his life. The cries of those he left behind speak for themselves.

Another important aspect of the film is that it shows the speed and ease of the intravenous method of medically assisted suicide used at Lifecircle. By controlling a valve, the patient knowingly takes the final step themselves, clearly making this an act of assisted suicide rather than voluntary euthanasia, but because there is no oral ingestion the death is quick and predictable. Dr Preisig has previously told MDMD that using this method the time taken to die is “always the same, 30 seconds to fall asleep, and 4 minutes to die. No coughing, no vomiting, no pain at all”. This contrasts with the possibility of many hours with oral methods, as demonstrated in a recent BBC2 documentary which showed a case in California which took 7.5 hrs.

The tragedy of Omid’s death, which movingly ends the film, is not that Omid chose to end his life. Instead, the tragedy is that Omid’s legal challenge failed and that his eventual medically assisted suicide in Switzerland was so difficult for him to arrange, causing him prolonged suffering he wanted to avoid. It also put his grieving friends and family at risk of prosecution under the UK’s assisted suicide law.

Marie and Omid considered all their alternative options carefully. MDMD strongly advocates good palliative care but recognises that the option of assisted dying is essential for some people for whom even the best palliative alternatives are inadequate.

MDMD’s work will not be complete until this type of peaceful “good death” is integrated into improved palliative care in the UK. Currently the option is only available in the UK to a fortunate and determined few who manage to arrange it in Switzerland. Outsourcing medically assisted dying to another country should only be be seen as a temporary stopgap, pending a compassionate, safe law to permit medically assisted dying for people like Marie, Omid and Alex in the UK, after full and open discussion with their UK doctors. Many of the problems with the current UK arrangement are discussed here and in this study.



Endgame 65 min Oct 2018 from Andi Reiss & Yellow Media Group on Vimeo.

Read more
bbc news logo

‘Five to Midnight’ Before Dementia Takes Over

January 30, 2019

A BBC story discusses the assisted death of dementia sufferers, in particular the case of Annie Zwijnenberg in the Netherlands. Annie was never in any doubt that she wanted euthanasia, once she had her Alzheimer diagnosis. She delayed as long as she felt she could but she knew that if she waited for too long she would lose the mental capacity to confirm her decision at the time. This would make it much harder for her doctor to help her. In the Netherlands, with an appropriate Advance Decision, euthanasia for someone who has requested it but has subsequently lost mental capacity is legal – though it is controversial.

Dementia is the leading cause of death in England and Wales, with 1 in 8 deaths being caused by dementia, rising to 1 in 4 for women over 80. Many of us would wish to avoid the final stages of dementia where the quality of life is below the level we could accept – or at least, below the level our former-selves, before we lose mental capacity, could accept.

In the UK our options for avoiding end stage dementia are bleak, which is why MDMD campaigns for a change in the law on assisted dying. In Switzerland, those with early stage dementia can have an assisted suicide, but only if they have the mental capacity to make a life ending decision at the time. MDMD supporter Alex Pandolfo is choosing this route and has talked publicly about the difficulties of deciding when to make his final journey there.

Phil Cheatle, MDMD’s Director of Campaign Policy, recently asked Baroness Finlay, a professor of palliative medicine at Cardiff University and a strong opponent of a change in the assisted suicide law, how he could avoid late stage dementia. Her answer, sourcing drugs from the internet, was both astonishing and illegal. MDMD regard this as unsafe and uncaring. There has to be a more compassionate solution instead of people taking their own lives, often too soon, and often in a risky, unpleasant, traumatic way.

MDMD agrees with the Swiss approach that those seeking an assisted death need to have mental capacity at the time of their assisted death. This is a strong safeguard. It also makes a difficult situation easier for those who would otherwise have to decide when to give euthanasia to another person – a responsibility that few would wish to accept.

The BBC story highlights another issue of assisted suicide – an oral method can take a long time. In Annie’s case her doctors eventually decided to give her a lethal injection, which is legal in the Netherlands. A similar issue was illustrated in a recent documentary by Louis Theroux, but in this case, in California, a lethal injection would have been illegal. A better alternative method for assisted suicide seems to be that used at Lifecircle in Switzerland by Dr. Erika Preisig. Whenever possible she uses an intravenous method where the patient controls a valve to start the flow of the medication which will end their life. (It is required by Swiss law that the patient self-administers the lethal medication.) Dr Preisig told MDMD that using this method the time taken to die is “always the same, 30 seconds to fall asleep, and 4 minutes to die. No coughing, no vomiting, no pain at all”.

MDMD campaigns for a safe, peaceful method like this to be available in the UK for those who (amongst others) are dying of dementia and who choose an assisted death as their form of a good death. Currently this choice is denied to people. People like Joan Cheatle, who feel that due to incurable medical conditions, (and typically in old age), their life is complete and they just want to go to sleep peacefully and not wake up. Instead, despite the best care available, they have to suffer for months or years longer than they wish, until they are dependent on life sustaining medication which they can refuse. In comparison, Annie Zwijnenberg in the Netherlands was lucky. She had her wish of ending her life ‘five before midnight’. Something that Joan Cheatle, in the UK, asked for, but was denied.

Read more
bbc news logo

Video Evidence helps in Rational Suicide Inquest

October 24, 2018

The BBC reported the inquest into the death of Beryl Taylor(70) who died in Rattlesden, Suffolk, in July 2016. The case is also reported in more detail in the East Anglian Daily Times.

Mrs Taylor’s husband had been arrested on suspicion of assisted suicide, and later murder. He was subsequently released. The coroner made a legal conclusion of suicide and that she had made the decision of her own free will.

The court heard that after police investigation and consideration by the Crown Prosecution Service, it was decided it would not be in the public interest to proceed further. This appears to be in line with the Director of Public Prosecutions guidelines on assisted suicide. It is not clear why the possible murder charge was considered and later dropped. The DPP guidelines apply to assisted suicide but not to the even more serious offence of murder.

The case is interesting as the couple clearly researched and discussed the situation carefully before Mrs Taylor took her life and even agreed to take the unusual step of making a video recording of a statement by Mrs Taylor, and her suicide.  Mr Taylor cooperated fully with the police, having anticipated their investigation. This behaviour, accompanied by the video evidence, no doubt helped the police immensely in their investigation, and perhaps helped ensure that charges were not pressed.

Detective Sergeant Michael Gwyn told the court that when police officers arrived at the Taylor’s house they were given a ‘do not resuscitate’ notice by Mr Taylor.

“He described the incident had been recorded on camera and provided police with the camera,” DS Gwyn went on to say 
“Because of the evidence that was seen on the camera, Mr Taylor made it clear he knew his wife intended to take her life and had to some extent facilitated that.”

It is interesting that DS Gwyn told the court that “… on reviewing the camera evidence he was arrested on suspicion of murder”, yet this charge was later dropped.

The inquest heard Mrs Taylor had read a statement to the camera before taking her own life. Assistant coroner, Kevin McCarthy said: “It makes clear to me that she has reached the decision to end her life and because of her disabilities, which were quite profound, … This is a woman who has reached the state in her existence where her quality of life is non-existent and she had decided life was not worth living.”

The court was told Mrs Taylor suffered from a range of medical conditions including fibromyalgia, allergies, chronic fatigue syndrome and multiple chemical sensitivities. None of these are terminal illnesses so we can be confident that her life expectancy was longer than 6 months. This means that she would not have been helped by the type of law proposed by Rob Marris in 2015, and argued for in the Noel Conway case. (Should such a law eventually be passed in the UK, it would however be a very welcome first step.)

The case seems to show that it was a combination of incurable medical conditions which reduced Mrs Taylor’s quality of life below the level she could accept. The NHS website says “although there’s currently no cure for fibromyalgia, there are treatments to help relieve some of the symptoms and make the condition easier to live with.” However, when coupled with other conditions, Mrs Taylor found her condition impossible to live with.

My Death, My Decision coordinator Phil Cheatle said:

“This is a tragedy which shows how some deaths are extremely bad, not only for the dying person, but for those they leave behind. Losing a wife is bad enough in itself, but going through a police investigation and risking a lengthy jail sentence is intolerably cruel for a grieving partner.”

Mrs Taylor clearly felt as though she had no other option than to end her life. She did so in the knowledge that her decision could result in her loving husband serving a prison sentence. Her decision raises a number of unanswered questions: Would Mrs Taylor have delayed her death if a medically assisted option existed? Would an open-minded counselling session have dissuaded Mrs Taylor from ending her life? Would better care, (despite her husband’s best efforts), have made her condition tolerable.

In Mrs Taylor’s case these questions will remain unanswered. The primary witness is now dead. The opportunity has been lost. Doctors currently fear any conversation about assisted dying may open criminal liability, thus counselling is not currently a realistic option. Nor, as a recent report found, are doctors given sufficient training to confidently engage in difficult conversations about death.

Our current system is demonstrably unsafe and lacks sufficient compassion. This case echoes concerns expressed about other cases where people have ended their lives themselves or with the help of others, cases like pharmacist Bipin Desai, Ian Gordon and Sir Nicholas Wall for example. The law needs to change to prevent more tragedies like these.

Read more

Exclusive Interview with Andi Reiss, Film Director, and personal friend of Omid

October 5, 2018

MDMD’s Campaigns and Communications Manager, Keiron McCabe, spoke exclusively with “Endgame” director Andi Reiss about Omid’s journey. Andi was present at Omid’s medically assisted suicide in Switzerland.

Photo: Omid and Andi, shortly before Omid’s death at Lifecircle Switzerland. Photo credit: Andi Reiss

How did you first become interested in the issues around Assisted Dying?

My mother died in 2010 whilst in the UK. Although she had been on a clinical trial and lived for over 19 additional good years, I eventually witnessed the indignity of her death first hand. That’s when I first started to think and examine the process of Assisted Dying in this country. It’s also why I wanted to direct a documentary examining these issues in more depth than anyone had done before.

And how did you find out about Omid’s case?

About two years ago I approached My Death, My Decision’s coordinator Phil Cheatle about the Endgame film and the issues surrounding Assisted Dying. Phil and everyone at MDMD were great and that’s how I first found out about Omid. I got to know Omid over the filming of Endgame. But it was more than that, I spent a lot of time with Omid and Omid wasn’t just someone I was following for a documentary, Omid was my friend.

I realise you were with Omid and spent some time with him when he went to Lifecircle for medically assisted Suicide. What was Omid’s mood and atmosphere when he decided to end his life?

It’s hard to emphasise enough, just how much anguish and pain Omid was in before he visited Lifecircle. I’ve known Omid for over two years now and words simply can’t describe it. It’s quite an extraordinary thing. No one can fully comprehend that the day you are going to die could be one of the best days of your life.

The mood at Lifecircle was joyous! I’d never seen Omid so excited, happy and calm. He looked incredibly relaxed and was very peaceful. It was extraordinary. It might be hard to understand, but when someone becomes incurably sick and life becomes totally hopeless, making that choice is empowering. Omid’s life had become at the behest of everyone. He couldn’t do anything for himself anymore. So knowing that you can lean over and switch the valve and go to sleep within one minute is pure empowerment.

Endgame is scheduled for a screening on Tuesday 9th October 2018 in Jersey. Further information can be found at: www.endgamemovie.uk

Read more

Omid Ends his life at Lifecircle in Switzerland

October 5, 2018

Omid T: A Legacy of Bravery, Compassion and Empowerment

Photo: Omid and Dr Erika Preisig at Lifecircle, shortly before his medically assisted death. Photo Credit – Andi Reiss

I’m glad you’re here; thank you, thank you for everyone’s support – Omid (1964 – 2018)

On October 4th 2018, assisted dying campaigner, Omid T chose to end his life by a medically assisted suicide at Lifecircle near Basle, Switzerland. Although Omid was still awaiting the outcome of his landmark legal case, Omid’s suffering prevented him from waiting any longer. His death was reported in the Sun and the Daily Mail, among others. Omid’s lawyer has updated his CrowdJustice webpage accordingly. His lawyer Saimo Chahal said “I saw him shortly before he went to Switzerland and he told me that he could not bear living any longer and wanted nothing to get in the way of him having a peaceful and dignified death.” MDMD’s exclusive interview with documentary film maker Andi Reiss who was present when Omid ended his life is available here.

Unlike Noel Conway, who has launched a separate legal case to permit assisted dying for those terminally ill, Omid’s case sought to secure the right to a dignified death for all mentally competent adults, facing years of unbearable and incurable suffering.

Omid would not have benefited from Noel Conway’s appeal or the assisted dying bill put forward by Rob Marris in 2015. Living with Multiple Systems Atrophy (MSA) since 2014, Omid did not have six or fewer months left to live.

Over 18 months MSA increasingly robbed Omid of the dignity he deserved. First he lost his independence and then his motor functions. Omid’s life became increasingly intolerable for him and eventually he became virtually unable to move and had very limited ability to communicate. Yet Omid retained his mental capacity and was still able to persistently communicate his desire for a medically assisted death, something denied by UK law. Unfortunately palliative care was inadequate for Omid and his life became unbearable, despite being in a high quality care home. On a previous occasion he attempted and failed to end his life unaided. He needed medical assistance. The circumstances which Omid was forced to search for his peaceful end in Switzerland, is a tragedy. Although he was eventually able to obtain a medically assisted death abroad, it took a lot of time to arrange, and put his family through a lot of additional trauma – hardly the good death he wished for.

Debilitating medical conditions like Omid’s do not have to mean that someone cannot live a life they feel is worthwhile. It is up to the person themselves to form their own view. With the right support some can and do live fulfilling lives, despite the medical situations they have to endure. However this is not always possible. Omid is one clear example. It is not the medical condition alone which makes a life intolerable, it is in part also the way the individual is able to react to it. Some people, quite understandably, decide that for them their life is complete or cut short, and they wish to have a peaceful death rather than continue to suffer. Nobody, especially not those considered to be vulnerable, should be pressured or coerced into requesting an assisted death, but equally, nobody should be pressured or coerced into having to suffer against their will, nor be forced to continue to suffer by law, when that suffering is unacceptable to them, incurable, and they simply wish for a peaceful medically assisted death.

Without a change in the law to legalise assisted dying for people like Omid, the doctor patient relationship is badly broken at a time when it is most needed. Suffers like Omid deserve better. They need independent professionals to discuss their wish for an assisted death with; to ensure they have carefully considered every alternative; and, if no acceptable alternative is available, to provide medical help to die.

Omid’s legal case follows on from Debbie Purdy, Tony Nicklinson and others. In his summing up of the Nicklinson case, Lord Neuberger, then President of the Supreme Court said “There seems to me to be significantly more justification in assisting people to die if they have the prospect of living for many years a life that they regarded as valueless, miserable and often painful, than if they have only a few months left to live”.  This exactly sums up Omid’s situation. The UK medical, legal and political systems all failed him. We hope his efforts to change the UK system will eventually bear fruit.

MDMD offers sympathy to Omid’s family for their loss; gratitude to Omid for his efforts to challenge the law; and thanks, on Omid’s behalf, to his family and friends who showed the compassion necessary to help him end his life as peacefully as possible under very difficult circumstances.

The outcome of Omid’s case is expected soon. How the case will progress now depends on this ruling and on whether another person in a similar position is willing to carry the case forward. Omid’s lawyer would like to hear from anyone who might want to continue the case.

Read more
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Press Office
campaign in parliament
champion legal cases
broaden the debate

My Death, My Decision is a company limited by guarantee, registered in England company number 11758121 and located at 61 Bridge Street, Kington, Herefordshire, HR5 3DJ.