MLAs to give views on assisted suicide in weeks, as DUP's Jonathan Buckley warns of 'profound consequences' of law change

​MPs will decide this week whether people will be able to legally end their lives with the assistance of the state in England and Wales.

Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who brought the legislation to parliament, says she has no doubts “whatsoever” about her proposals – arguing that it would end suffering and solve “a very clear problem”.

There are no imminent plans to bring legislation on the matter to the Assembly – but the DUP motion will be an early opportunity to assess where local politicians would stand on such a vote.

Most parties will allow a conscience vote on the matter, making it more unpredictable than most issues before the chamber. At the weekend, Alliance’s sole MP Sorcha Eastwood made clear she will vote against the legislation in the House of Commons, despite most of her party’s MLAs believed to be supportive of the principle.

The DUP’s Jonathan Buckley has warned of a nightmarish scenario if the legislation is passed – arguing that it would subtly coerce vulnerable people into ending their lives – and is not about “true autonomy”.

The Upper Bann MLA told the News Letter: “It is important that we approach this conversation with the sensitivity it deserves many people’s opinions on the matter has been shaped by deeply personal experiences which I respect. I want to outline my opposition to assisted suicide, it is my view that the practice carries profound ethical, moral, and societal consequences. While supporters argue that it offers a compassionate option for those suffering, I believe it risks undermining the value of human life, places undue pressure on vulnerable individuals, and risks being misused in ways that harm society.

"Firstly, the introduction of assisted suicide risks creating an implicit obligation for the sick, disabled, or elderly to choose death over life. In a society that increasingly emphasises cost-efficiency in healthcare, vulnerable individuals might feel they are a financial or emotional burden to their families or the system. This subtle coercion could make ‘choice’ in assisted suicide illusory, undermining the principle of true autonomy.

“There also is significant potential for abuse and pressure. Assisted suicide laws, even when intended to have safeguards, which the current Westminster bill has attempted to do, can lead to situations where individuals are subtly or overtly encouraged to end their lives prematurely. For example, patients with treatable conditions may be steered towards this option rather than being offered robust palliative care or mental health support. In such cases, a society that legalises assisted suicide risks devaluing the lives of those who need care the most.

“On a moral and ethical level, the practice of deliberately ending a life poses the risk of normalising suicide as an acceptable solution to suffering, which could have far-reaching implications for societal attitudes towards life and death.

“Instead of promoting assisted suicide, we should focus on improving access to palliative care, mental health resources, and compassionate support for those facing serious illness. This approach ensures that patients receive the dignity, comfort, and love they deserve without resorting to measures that could compromise the sanctity of life.

“Every life has intrinsic value, and our society should strive to protect and cherish that, especially during its most vulnerable moments. We must prioritise care over convenience, compassion over coercion, and life over death.”

The DUP motion which will be debated by MLAs expresses “deep alarm at the situation in Canada” – arguing that safeguards underpinning the country’s laws on assisted dying “are being rapidly eroded with the removal of the requirement that a person’s natural death be foreseeable and the planned expansion of eligibility to include grounds of mental illness alone from 2027”.

It also says introduction of the policy in the United Kingdom would “fundamentally and negatively change the relationship between doctors and patients”.

Mrs Dodds motion argues that the National Health Service “should be in the business of sustaining, not ending, life” and calls on health minister Mike Nesbitt “to bring forward plans to deliver enhanced, high-quality and compassionate palliative care provision for families affected by terminal diagnoses”.