Assisted dying bill: How MPs for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket, South Suffolk, Waveney Valley, Suffolk Coastal, Lowestoft, Ipswich, Central Suffolk and North Ipswich, and West Suffolk voted

MPs have decided to support the assisted dying bill — here's how your representatives voted.

Constituents from across the country have tuned into the debate on the assisted dying bill, which sought to enter it into UK law.

The bill was backed with 330 votes for and 275 against.

Like other MPs, Suffolk's representatives were equally as divided.

Supporting the bill were the MPs for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket, South Suffolk, Waveney Valley, and Suffolk Coastal — Dr Peter Prinsley, James Cartlidge, Adrian Ramsay, and Jenny Riddell-Carpenter respectively.

Speaking in the House of Commons, Dr Prinsley said he saw patients going through uncontrollable pain and witnessed the 'terrifying loss of dignity and control in the last days of life'.

He added: "When I was a young doctor, I thought it unconscionable, but now I'm an old doctor and I feel sure it's the right change.

"We're talking here of people at the end of their lives, wishing to choose the time and place to die, this is not some slippery slope, we are shortening death, not life, for our patients."

Although he didn't get the chance to speak during the meeting, Mr Cartlidge said his decision to support the bill was bolstered by the number of his constituents who took part in a public meeting he held.

He added: "I found it particularly moving that people turned up – who themselves had but weeks to live – a very brave undertaking, and one which has genuinely affected how I will be voting.

"I have taken my time, but following the public meeting and after much reflection, I will be voting in favour."

Mr Ramsay said although the bill raised profound ethical and complex questions, he would still support it provided proper safeguards were in place and promised to follow its development.

He added: "For those facing the pain and inevitability of terminal illness, I believe a compassionate choice should be available for those who wish to avoid a prolonged and painful decline.

"This debate also highlights the urgent need to improve palliative and social care — we must ensure that no one feels forced into such a decision due to a lack of adequate care and support."

Ms Jenny-Riddell Carpenter was approached for comment.

Arguing to turn down assisted dying were the MPs for Lowestoft, West Suffolk, Central Suffolk and North Ipswich, and Ipswich — Jess Asato, Nick Timothy, Patrick Spencer, and Jack Abbott respectively.

Ms Asato was the only local MP to speak during the meeting against the bill, using her time to explain how she had her mind changed.

She said: "Whilst I would have once been supportive of the principle of assisted dying, and might wish this option for myself, I have increasingly found myself unable to reconcile my desire to safeguard the most vulnerable by putting that principle into practice.

"My focus with any piece of legislation is the potential it creates for abuse and coercion — I am concerned that if this bill passes we will see people coerced either by an abuser or by societal expectation into ending their own life."

Other local MPs also submitted statements.

Mr Timothy said he was sceptical about the ability to design a system which couldn't be abused.

He added "If we look at experiences where euthanasia has been legalised - like the Netherlands, Canada and even Switzerland, which is where my wife is from - there have been some terrible examples of such situations.

"And I do believe, when it comes to human life, we need to be incredibly respectful and cautious. As such, I will not be voting in favour of this legislation."

In Central Suffolk and North Ipswich, Mr Spencer highlighted the work done by healthcare professionals in not only providing compassionate palliative care, but also providing support to grieving families.

He added: "I am concerned the bill has not been given nearly enough time for scrutiny in Parliament, nor has there been any wider cross-Government consultation.

"And I am nervous that the safeguards are not comprehensive enough."

Mr Abbott said although he supports the principle of assisted dying, he was not convinced by the bill and argued that approving it in its proposed state presented too many risks.

He added: "Alongside the principle, we have to ensure that the scrutiny, necessary protections and wider healthcare system are rigorous, robust and supportive enough to eliminate unintended consequences of any new legislation.

"I have come to the conclusion that, for the moment, the current bill does not meet this threshold."