The topic lensIssue · 12 divisions tagged · 13 parties active
Medical Ethics.
End-of-life care, assisted dying, and medical ethics legislation
Divisions tagged
12
This parliament
Parties active
13
≥1 vote tagged
Most on-whip
Restore Britain
83% aligned
Recent activity
10
Most-recent divisions
Each row is one party. The bar shows how its MPs voted relative to a neutral midpoint — to the right = on-side with the majority position, to the left = opposed. The percentage figure is the share of that party’s MPs who took the same side: higher = more whip-disciplined, closer to 50% = a freer vote.
| Party | Stance vs neutral midpoint | Net % | Discipline | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Labour Party | Lab | -5 | 45% on-whip · 360 MPs | |
| Conservative and Unionist Party | Con | +11 | 61% on-whip · 114 MPs | |
| Liberal Democrats | LD | -4 | 46% on-whip · 71 MPs | |
| Labour and Co-operative Party | Lab | -6 | 44% on-whip · 42 MPs | |
| Independent | Ind | +9 | 59% on-whip · 14 MPs | |
| Reform UK | Ref | +11 | 61% on-whip · 8 MPs | |
| Democratic Unionist Party | DUP | +17 | 67% on-whip · 5 MPs | |
| Green Party of England and Wales | Grn | -19 | 31% on-whip · 5 MPs |
Source · Hansard · alignment is the share of party MPs who voted with the party majority on tagged divisions
| Date | Motion | Aye | No | Carried |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 23 Jun 2026 | Opposition Day: Puberty blockers Aye: Support the opposition motion on puberty blockers — likely backing tighter restrictions or a permanent ban on their use for under-18s with gender dysphoria · No: Oppose the opposition motion, reflecting either the government's resistance to opposition-set agendas or a different policy position on how puberty blocker regulation should be handled | 112 | 285 | No |
| 20 Jun 2025 | Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Amendment 94 Aye: Support requiring the government to formally assess the state of palliative and end-of-life care services early in the Act's implementation, ensuring any impact on those services is scrutinised before the main five-year review. · No: Oppose adding this specific assessment requirement to the first report, either because it duplicates the existing five-year review obligation or because it is unnecessary given other oversight mechanisms. | 272 | 223 | Yes |
| 20 Jun 2025 | Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: New Clause 16 Aye: Support adding stricter safeguards to the assisted dying bill by explicitly barring requests motivated by feeling a burden, financial hardship, disability, or inadequate care — reflecting concern that vulnerable people could be pushed toward assisted dying for the wrong reasons · No: Oppose this additional restriction, either because existing safeguards are sufficient, because the clause would be unworkable in practice, or because it would deny assisted dying to people with genuine terminal illness who also happen to have other difficulties | 209 | 260 | No |
| 20 Jun 2025 | Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Amendment 24 Aye: Support adding explicit safeguards to exclude people whose wish for assisted dying is driven by feeling a burden, mental illness, disability, financial hardship, or inadequate care — arguing current protections are insufficient · No: Oppose this amendment, arguing existing capacity and coercion safeguards already address these concerns, or that the amendment is too broad and would undermine the Bill | 212 | 266 | No |
| 20 Jun 2025 | Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Amendment 12 Aye: Support adding a procedural safeguard ensuring the assisted dying process can continue if an independent assessing doctor becomes incapacitated before reporting, keeping the Bill internally consistent · No: Oppose this amendment, either because it is unnecessary, because it weakens the process by allowing substitution of assessors, or as part of broader opposition to the Bill itself | 224 | 271 | No |
All 12 divisions on this issue →
By party, the MPs whose voting record on medical ethics is most closely tracking the party majority. A fuller “most active by speech volume + written questions” ranking is pending — needs per-issue speech aggregation.
LabLabour Party
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Julia Buckley | Shrewsbury | 91% |
| Jonathan Hinder | Pendle and Clitheroe | 89% |
| Emma Hardy | Kingston upon Hull West and Haltemprice | 83% |
ConConservative and Unionist Party
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Mel Stride | Central Devon | 100% |
| Victoria Atkins | Louth and Horncastle | 100% |
| David Davis | Goole and Pocklington | 86% |
LDLiberal Democrats
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Ed Davey | Kingston and Surbiton | 80% |
| Brian Mathew | Melksham and Devizes | 73% |
| Al Pinkerton | Surrey Heath | 73% |
LabLabour and Co-operative Party
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Steve Reed | Streatham and Croydon North | 67% |
| Meg Hillier | Hackney South and Shoreditch | 64% |
| Stephen Doughty | Cardiff South and Penarth | 64% |
IndIndependent
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Iqbal Mohamed | Dewsbury and Batley | 73% |
| Alex Easton | North Down | 67% |
| Patrick Spencer | Central Suffolk and North Ipswich | 67% |
RefReform UK
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Robert Jenrick | Newark | 78% |
| Lee Anderson | Ashfield | 73% |
| Andrew Rosindell | Romford | 64% |
Pending — issue-to-service mapping
Mapping each Westminster issue to the equivalent council service bucket (so “Medical Ethics” → the matching service line on council finance, with the ranked-spend table this section wants) is its own taxonomy job. Council service spend lives on the council pages today; cross-cut by issue here in a follow-on pass.
Sources, methods & last update
Issue taggingEach division is tagged to one or more issues by Claude classification, reviewed by topic admins.
VotingHansard division lists · Commons Votes API
AlignmentShare of party MPs voting with the party majority on tagged divisions
CohortThis parliament · 12 divisions