There is a lot at stake this week for Sophie Blake, a 52-year-old mother to a young adult, who was diagnosed with stage four cancer in May 2023.

As MPs vote on whether to change the law to allow assisted dying, Sophie tells Sky News of the day her life changed.

“One night I woke up and as I turned I felt a sensation of something in my breast actually move, and it was deep,” she says, speaking from her home in Brighton.

“Something fluidy, a very odd sensation. I woke up and made a doctor’s appointment.”

Sophie underwent an ultrasound followed by a biopsy before she was taken to a room in the clinic and offered water.

“They said, ‘a hundred percent, we believe you have breast cancer’.”

But it was the phone call with her mother that made it feel real.

“My mum had been waiting at home. She phoned me and said ‘How is it darling?’ and I said ‘I’ve got breast cancer,’ and it was just that moment of having to say it out loud for the first time and that’s when that part of my life suddenly changed.”

Sophie says terminal cancers can leave patients dreading the thought of suffering at the end of their lives.

“What I don’t want to be is in pain,” she says. “If I am facing an earlier death than I wanted then I want to be able to take control at the end.”

Assisted dying, she believes, gives her control: “It’s an insurance policy to have that there.”

Read more:
Why is assisted dying so controversial and where is it legal?
UK on ‘slippery slope’ Justice Minister says ahead of vote

On Friday, the government is set to debate the issue before voting on it. Sophie hopes they’ll back the proposal.

“It should be my choice to be able to have a compassionate death,” she says.

There has been much debate about the bill since details about how it would work were published earlier this month.

On Friday, former prime minister Gordon Brown became the latest senior political figure to share his opinion on the matter, coming out as against the legalisation of assisted dying, based on his experience of his own daughter’s death.

Disability rights advocate Lucy Webster warns that for people like Sophie to have that choice, others could face pressure to die.

“All around the world, if you look at places where the bill has been introduced, they’ve been broadened and broadened and broadened,” she tells Sky News.

Lucy is referring to countries like Canada and Netherlands, where eligibility for assisted deaths have widened since laws allowing it were first passed.

Lucy, who is a wheelchair user and requires a lot of care, says society still sees disabled people as burdens which places them at particular risk.

“I don’t know a single disabled person who has not at some point had a stranger come up to us and say, ‘if I were you, I’d kill myself’,” she says.

The assisted dying bill, she says, reinforces the view that disabled lives aren’t worth living.

“I’ve definitely had doctors and healthcare professionals assume that my quality of life is inherently worse than other people’s. That’s a horrible assumption to be faced with when [for example] you’ve just gone to get antibiotics for a chest infection. There are some really deep-seated medical views on disability that are wrong.”

Under the plans, a person would need to be terminally ill and in the final six months of their life, and would have to take the fatal drugs themselves.

Among the safeguards are that two independent doctors must confirm a patient is eligible for assisted dying and that a High Court judge must give their approval. But the bill does not make clear if that is a rubber-stamping exercise or if judges will have to investigate cases including risks of coercion.

Julian Hughes, honorary professor at Bristol Medical School, says there’s a very big question about whether courts have the room to take on such a task.

“At the moment in the family division I understand there are 19 judges and they supply 19,000 hours of court hearing in a year, but you’d have to have an extra 34,000,” he explains.

“We shouldn’t fool ourselves and think that there wouldn’t be some families who would be interested in getting the inheritance rather than spending the inheritance on care for their elderly family members. We could quickly become a society in which suicide becomes normalised.”

Young people will lose their benefits if they refuse to take up work and training opportunities, a minister has said ahead of announcing measures to cut the welfare bill.

Liz Kendall, the work and pensions secretary, told Sky’s Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips that “conditions” will be attached to new skills opportunities the government intends to create.

Politics live: MP proposing assisted dying bill responds to claims it’s a ‘slippery slope’

With a record number of young people currently unemployed, Labour promised in its manifesto a “youth guarantee” for 18-21 year olds to have access to training, an apprenticeship, or support to find work.

“If people repeatedly refuse to take up the training work responsibilities, there will be sanctions on their benefits,” Ms Kendall said.

“The reason why we believe this so strongly is that we believe in our responsibility to provide those new opportunities which is what we will do. We will transform those opportunities, but young people will be required to take them up.”

The Labour government has said it will stick to a commitment under the former Tory administration to reduce the welfare bill by £3bn over five years.

Ms Kendall said her party will bring in its “own reforms” to achieve that target, though did not elaborate further.

The Conservatives had planned to change work capability rules to tighten eligibility, so around 400,000 more people signed off sick long-term would be assessed as needing to prepare for work by 2028/29 to deliver the savings.

Asked whether these people would ultimately be denied their current benefits under Labour’s plans, Ms Kendall told the BBC’s Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg: “I’m saying we will bring forward our own reforms. You wouldn’t expect me to announce this on your programme.

“But my objective is that disabled people should have the same chances and rights to work as everybody else.”

The latest official forecasts published by the government show the number of people claiming incapacity benefits is expected to climb from around 2.5 million in 2019 to 4.2 million in 2029.

Last year there were just over three million claimants.

Ms Kendall will launch proposals on Tuesday designed to “get Britain working” amid concerns about the soaring unemployment rate.

Read More:
The 800,000 people who have fallen into ‘economic inactivity
Surprise fall in retail sales a sign economy is slowing
Thousands of jobs to go at Bosch

The white paper is expected to include the placement of work coaches in mental health clinics and a “youth guarantee” aimed at ensuring those aged 18-21 are working or studying.

Ministers are also looking at a subsidised jobs scheme, Sky News revealed last week.

The UK remains the only G7 country that has higher levels of economic inactivity now than before the pandemic.

Ms Kendall said the reasons are “complex” and include the fact that the UK is an older and sicker nation.

Asked whether she believes “normal feelings” are being “over-medicalised”, she said that while some people may be “self-diagnosing” themselves with mental health issues it is a “genuine problem”.

“There’s not one simple thing. You know, the last government said people were too bluesy to work.

“I mean, I don’t know who they were speaking to. There is a genuine problem with mental health in this country.”

Ms Kendall’s language was softer than Sir Keir Starmer, who this weekend promised a crackdown on “criminals” who “game the system” .

Writing in the Mail on Sunday, he said: “Make no mistake, we will get to grips with the bulging benefits bill blighting our society.”

The UK is on a “slippery slope towards death on demand”, according to the justice secretary ahead of a historic Commons vote on assisted dying.

In a letter to her constituents, Shabana Mahmood said she was “profoundly concerned” about the legislation.

“Sadly, recent scandals – such as Hillsborough, infected blood and the Post Office Horizon – have reminded us that the state and those acting on its behalf are not always benign,” she wrote.

“I have always held the view that, for this reason, the state should serve a clear role. It should protect and preserve life, not take it away.

“The state should never offer death as a service.”

Analysis: Justice secretary’s intervention is potentially embarrassing for the PM

On 29 November, MPs will be asked to consider whether to legalise assisted dying, through Kim Leadbeater’s Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill.

Details of the legislation were published last week, including confirmation the medicine that will end a patient’s life will need to be self-administered and people must be terminally ill and expected to die within six months.

Ms Mahmood, however, said “predictions about life expectancy are often inaccurate”.

“Doctors can only predict a date of death, with any real certainty, in the final days of life,” she said. “The judgment as to who can and cannot be considered for assisted suicide will therefore be subjective and imprecise.”

Read more: Gordon Brown says assisted dying should not be legalised

Under the Labour MP’s proposals, two independent doctors must confirm a patient is eligible for assisted dying and a High Court judge must give their approval.

The bill will also include punishments of up to 14 years in prison for those who break the law, including coercing someone into ending their own life.

Read more: Where does the cabinet stand on assisted dying?

However, Ms Mahmood said she was concerned the legislation could “pressure” some into ending their lives.

“It cannot be overstated what a profound shift in our culture assisted suicide will herald,” she wrote.

“In my view, the greatest risk of all is the pressure the elderly, vulnerable, sick or disabled may place upon themselves.”

Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who put forward the bill, said some of the points Ms Mahmood raised have been answered “in the the thorough drafting and presentation of the bill”.

“The strict eligibility criteria make it very clear that we are only talking about people who are already dying,” she said.

“That is why the bill is called the ‘Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill’; its scope cannot be changed and clearly does not include any other group of people.

“The bill would give dying people the autonomy, dignity and choice to shorten their death if they wish.”

In response to concerns Ms Mahmood raised about patients being coerced into choosing assisted death, Ms Leadbeater said she has consulted widely with doctors and judges.

“Those I have spoken to tell me that they are well equipped to ask the right questions to detect coercion and to ascertain a person’s genuine wishes. It is an integral part of their work,” she said.

In an increasingly fractious debate around the topic, multiple Labour MPs have voiced their concerns.

In a letter to ministers on 3 October, the Cabinet Secretary Simon Case confirmed “the prime minister has decided to set aside collective responsibility on the merits of this bill” and that the government would “therefore remain neutral on the passage of the bill and on the matter of assisted dying”.