Sojan Joseph MP: speeches

Speeches

• 4 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Seventeenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I fully support the amendments, but they say that the practitioner conducting the preliminary discussion should use an interpreter. Should the interpreter not also be available for all the interactions that follow on from the preliminary discussion?

• 4 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Seventeenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Does the hon. Member think that, if we bring in an agency from outside the NHS—from the private sector—this will become like a business?

• 4 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Seventeenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  As the hon. Member for Richmond Park says, we have repeatedly debated people’s mental health and how, once somebody has had a diagnosis of a terminal illness, it can have an impact on their decision making. Amendment 425, which we discussed earlier, is about having access to a multidisciplinary team. That team could have on it a social worker or a psychiatrist who would make a comprehensive assessment, which would cover amendment 271. The amendment is an opportunity for the Committee to look into this issue, to make the Bill stronger, and to bring in safeguards for vulnerable people who may feel suicidal, and may feel a burden to society or to the healthcare system, and may choose this way. Those people who are vulnerable would have a psychosocial and mental health assessment, which would make the Bill stronger and safer.

• 4 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Sixteenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I rise in support of the amendments, especially amendments 342 and 425. We have discussed various aspects of the Bill, especially capacity, coercion and medical practices, under many previous amendments. As somebody who worked as a mental health nurse for many years, and who worked as part of a multidisciplinary team, I think that amendments 342 and 425 are some of the most important. Amendment 342 talks about the preliminary conversation with the medical practitioner with whom the patient makes contact. Do we not think that the doctor who knows most about that patient is the best person to have that preliminary discussion? They will have the most information about them. When the patient, who has gone through so much difficulty, goes to their doctor or to a GP who knows them well and says, “I would like to choose the assisted dying pathway,” would that doctor then say, “I do not want to discuss this. Somebody else will.”?

• 4 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Sixteenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  There are other people who support this concept, and they are the people who will be having the conversation—we have both sides of the argument. I believe that the best person to have that preliminary discussion would be the doctor who knows about that patient the most—about their circumstances, prognosis, family situation and pain. We talk about compassionate care, but where is the compassion in here? I am not saying that another doctor would deny that—but I am talking about compassion. Someone going through the most difficult time in their life would have the confidence to talk to the person who knows the most about them, which is why I fully support that the initial discussion should happen with them. I am not saying that they should say yes or no, but they should be talking about the care provisions and options available to the patient. Amendment 342 is one of the most important amendments we will debate. I will move on to amendment 425. When I tabled amendment 1, my thinking was that a psychiatrist should be involved in these discussions, but I think amendment 425 will safeguard most of the concerns we have discussed in previous sittings. Amendment 425 talks about a “multidisciplinary team” and having a psychiatrist involved as well. Written evidence was sent to us on 29 January by the Royal College of General Practitioners, which recommended that a separate pathway that “covered every stage of the process would ensure healthcare professionals of multiple disciplines…who wanted to do so could still opt in to provide assisted dying, but this would be arranged through a different pathway.” The hon. Member for Sunderland Central spoke earlier about how patients may be going through many multidisciplinary teams already, but it could be that none of those multidisciplinary teams have talked with them about assisted dying. They could have been pharmacists or nurses talking about the patient’s care—not assisted dying. We are talking about setting up a multidisciplinary team with a mental health nurse, doctor and social worker who can look in detail at evidence of the patient’s capacity, whether they are choosing it because they feel they are a burden, and whether there is any coercion. I think that is a safeguard for most of the concerns we have discussed in previous sessions. I would love to see a psychiatrist involved, because psychiatrists deal with some of the most challenging patients, including those with suicidal thoughts, on a day-to-day basis. They are the most experienced people to carry out a capacity assessment and, if they are a part of the multidisciplinary team, it will safeguard the Bill. I strongly support amendment 425 and I urge Members to consider it. It will reassure many people who are concerned about some of the discussions. I know it also talks about giving power to the Secretary of State to formalise who should be part of the multidisciplinary team, which would be a discussion for later. I thank the Committee for giving me the opportunity to speak in support of the amendment.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Fifteenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I agree. As part of the code of practice, professionals are expected to complete the training that has been outlined already, but I am not confident that that is actually happening. Saying that there will be training does not reassure me that it will be robust enough.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Fifteenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I would be happy to see the Bill make a strong case that the people who will take part in this process have training before they do so. My larger issue is around the independent doctors. Again, I will use some examples of how the Mental Health Act 1983 has been carried out in its current format. Those cases always use a section 12-approved doctor, who is a second doctor and they may not have had any kind of contact with the patients. We may or may not end up in that sort of similar situation. That is the point I was making earlier. As the Royal College of Psychiatrists mentioned, capacity can change and decisions are opinions with margins of error. I mentioned my experience working in mental health wards earlier, and the hon. Member for East Wiltshire talked about the capacity assessments carried out when patients are standing by or threatening to jump off a bridge. I am not comparing these situations or saying that they are similar, but we have to make decisions based on capacity. In my experience of discharging people from hospital in a mental health unit, when somebody is threatening, “I’m going to kill myself if you discharge me”, the multi-disciplinary team—the doctors and the nurses—have to make a decision on whether to discharge the patient based on their capacity at that time. Capacity is assessed based on whether someone is able to understand information—can they retain, use and weigh information, and can they communicate their decision? We cannot compare that with the situation of somebody asking for assisted dying. I want to make it clear that the capacity assessment is the key. I would love to support this amendment. As I said earlier, this issue was one reason I voted against the Bill on Second Reading, but passing this amendment might change my position and I would love to support it.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Fifteenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I was talking about the training, which we have talked about many times in this Committee, for the people who may carry out capacity assessments, and about my experience of completing those trainings as part of my profession and carrying out capacity assessments for the past 22 years. We heard oral evidence from Dr Rachel Clarke, who has extensive experience in training doctors and nurses in capacity assessments. She said: “I would suggest that anybody who pretends that those assessments are easy and routinely done well in the NHS has not got enough experience of observing that happening. I teach capacity assessments to doctors and medical students, and it is often the case that they are very poorly conducted.” — [ Official Report, Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Public Bill Committee, 28 January 2025; c. 71, Q85.] That is my experience as well. We also talked about the second doctors. In the NHS, especially in the mental health sector, my experience is that many of the doctors are not in substantive roles—many locum doctors work in many areas. With my experience, I am not confident that trainings are being taken up by many of the people working in the NHS. I do not think that any of the trusts would be able to evidence that they have an 100% completion rate for their mandatory training. Especially for locum doctors, there is no monitoring system by the trusts. I am therefore not confident that this training would be robust enough to support some of the claims.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Fifteenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The amendment would add a 28-day period between the diagnosis and the start of the conversation about assisted dying. Having listened to hon. Members speak and given the evidence that we have heard, does my hon. Friend think that patients should have not only a 28-day gap, but access to a psychiatrist before the discussion of assisted suicide should start?

• 26 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Fifteenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Does the Minister agree that when it comes to withdrawing treatment, especially switching off a ventilator, the decision is often made between the medical professionals and the families, and most of the time the patient has no say in it?

• 26 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Fourteenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I rise to speak in support of the amendments. Having worked as a mental health nurse for 22 years, I completed mental capacity training many times in my career, and I carried out capacity assessments as part of my day-to-day job. I think that the capacity assessment proposed in the Bill is not safe enough. That was one of the main reasons I voted against the Bill on Second Reading. I have spoken to many people who oppose the Bill, and one of their concerns is about the capacity assessment. We have talked about capacity assessments every day in this Committee. It is one of the key issues that we will need to resolve to strengthen the Bill if it goes through. One of the Royal College of Psychiatrists’ concerns is that capacity decisions are “opinions with a margin of error and are time specific. A person’s capacity can change”. I will talk about my experience with those margins of error. A person’s capacity can be influenced by various factors, including their life circumstances, the medication they are taking or severe pain. Suicidal thoughts due to their mental state or depression can also influence their capacity. I have worked in acute mental health units. Every day, we carried out capacity assessments, including before we let someone out of the ward, whether they were admitted under the Mental Health Act or were receiving treatment as a voluntary patient. If somebody wanted to leave the ward, before the member of staff opened the door, they had to assess that person’s capacity. Sometimes a person might have said, “I am going to kill myself,” and the nurse would have had to decide whether or not they had capacity before opening the door. My hon. Friend the Member for Bradford West has talked about unconscious bias. The initial capacity assessment when a person comes to a hospital is very important. If a doctor has assessed at the beginning that the person has capacity, the following assessment can be influenced by that initial assessment. I totally agree with my hon. Friend’s argument about unconscious bias in capacity assessments. As Members have mentioned, the Bill proposes many occasions in the process when capacity will be assessed, but I am still not confident that each capacity assessment will not be influenced by the initial assessment. The amendments would strengthen that area of concern.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Fourteenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I agree that when an independent doctor comes to assess a patient’s capacity and sees them for the very first time, they are more likely to be influenced by the assessment made at the beginning by the doctor who has known them for many days, weeks or months. I agree with my hon. Friend’s argument.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Fourteenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  But it could be the other way around. The Bill does not clarify that the second doctor would know the patient at all.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Fourteenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is not guaranteed. I am grateful for that intervention. We have talked about training for all registered professionals who will be involved in the capacity assessments. As someone who has carried out that training many times, I draw the attention of the Committee to Dr Rachel—

• 25 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twelfth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Does my hon. Friend think that giving everyone access to palliative care would resolve some of the concerns about coercion and consent?

• 24 Feb 2025 · Breakfast Clubs: Early Adopters · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome this announcement, under which my constituents in Ashford will benefit from free breakfast clubs in three schools: Downs View infants school, Kingsnorth primary school and Chilmington primary school. Giving children a chance to settle down and start their day at a club with friends will have a positive long-term impact on their mental health. Does my right hon. Friend agree that this needs to be rolled out to every primary school as soon as possible?

• 13 Feb 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the announcement that there will be a public inquiry into what led to the tragic killing of three people in Nottingham in 2023. This follows the publication of the independent mental health homicide review into the case last week. Will the Leader of the House find time for a debate or statement to consider the findings of the review to ensure that, while the public inquiry takes place, important lessons are learned immediately in every part of the mental health system to prevent similar cases?

• 12 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Eleventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Would inserting the line in the amendment not also give us another opportunity to assess the patient’s capacity? Under the Mental Capacity Act 2005, a person should be able to “understand” and “weigh” the information, so does having this line not also help us to assess a person’s capacity?

• 12 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Tenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend mentioned domestic violence and vulnerable people. Do we not also need to think about the many people in hospital beds and nursing homes who may not have any relatives? They might get influenced or encouraged to choose this route by professionals because of the pressure on the NHS and hospices. Amendment 23 would strengthen the Bill in that respect as well.

• 11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Will my hon. Friend give way?

• 11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Further to those points of order, Ms McVey. I also assume that we are expecting more written evidence to come through. We Committee members are here for the whole day. I hear you say, Ms McVey, that this is normal practice, but considering the importance of the Bill, I assume there will be a lot more written evidence by the end of today. It would be good to consider how Committee members are able to go through that written evidence before we come back here tomorrow morning.

• 11 Feb 2025 · Nursing: Career Progression Inequalities · Hansard source

  More

  I must disclose that I worked as a mental health nurse in the NHS for the past 22 years, and that in my career, I progressed from nurse to head of nursing. Recruitment and retention of nursing staff across the health and social care sector is key to delivering an NHS that is fit for the future, but the most recent NHS staff workforce survey showed that just 56% of staff felt that the health service acted fairly when it came to career progression. What steps will this Government take to address this issue, and to ensure that our nursing workforce feel valued and feel a sense of purpose in their wider work?

• 11 Feb 2025 · Nursing: Career Progression Inequalities · Hansard source

  More

  13. What steps he is taking to help tackle career progression inequalities in nursing.

• 11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  We heard many pieces of oral evidence from expert psychiatrists, including from the Royal College of Psychiatrists, saying that the Mental Capacity Act is not fit for the Bill. Even if we use the Act, many conditions such as depression or delirium —or the effects of some medication—can impact on people’s decision making. It is worrying when someone like Dr Rachel Clarke, who has extensive experience in the Mental Capacity Act and has been training medical students and nurses, says of those mental capacity assessments that “it is often the case that they are…poorly conducted.” –– [ Official Report, Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Public Bill Committee, 28 January 2025; c. 71, Q85.] Would my hon. Friend agree that rather than use the Mental Capacity Act, the “ability” amendment tabled by the hon. Member for Richmond Park would be more suitable and make the Bill safer?

• 11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the right hon. Member for that intervention. To clarify, not all patients who are diagnosed as terminally ill are necessarily bedridden. They may be capable of carrying out their day-to-day activities as normal, even though they have been diagnosed with a terminal illness and have been given a prognosis of six months. They may still be walking around. Not everybody needs palliative care, in fact. My question was: if somebody who is a rough sleeper is diagnosed with a terminal illness and they want help with assisted dying, will we make provision to bring them back into an NHS bed to facilitate their dying? It would be great to have that clarification. I support the amendment, as I have seen many highly vulnerable people who would be more likely to choose the path to end their life if they were given the option.