I know coping with terminal illness is obviously deeply upsetting and difficult both for the patient and their families. Cases such as these are truly moving and evoke the highest degree of compassion and emotion. As the Member of Parliament for North Cotswolds, I have been contacted by a number of families sharing their experiences on this matter and I am very saddened to hear their stories.

I fully accept that assisted dying is a subject on which it is entirely possible for people to hold widely different but deeply held opinions. This is why any change of the law in this area is not a matter of party politics but of conscience, and any vote should be a free one should the law in this area be altered.

I accept that there are imperfections and problems with the current law. However, a change in the law on assisted dying is one of the most difficult conscience issues that any Member of Parliament must weigh up and extremely carefully consider before casting their vote.

On the one hand there are tragic cases of patients suffering and the consequent heartbreak for close relatives; on the other hand there is enormous pressure on the medical profession, to decide when the thresholds, which would have to be included in any change of legislation, are met.

I have now read the Private Members Bill. All the time I have been a Member of Parliament, I have listened very carefully to the arguments on both sides. I do not believe that the Bill is materially different to one that came to the floor of the House in 2015 which is one I voted against. The wording of this bill does not provide sufficient details of the safeguards in place to protect those that are vulnerable and the medical profession. I also disagree that a Bill of this magnitude should be rushed through, with a maximum of five hours on floor of the house.

The more I have heard over this week, the more resolute I am that I would vote against this Bill. The pressure on the court system would be untenable with public hearings only being able to be heard at the Family Division of the High Court. The current backlog means these decisions might take longer than six months.

Furthermore, even though the bill does state that those found guilty of coercion would be sentenced up to 14 years, it fails to define what behaviour would be considered as coercion. This could include family members coercing their elderly relations to consider this option, or doctors even bringing it up to vulnerable patients who had never thought of it as an option.

I know that I will have disappointed some in my response, but I have been deeply touched by the cases of families that have written to me, and the strong view of arguments of varying opinions.

I will continue to raise the problem of funding hospices which is currently very variable, often relying on donations. Everyone deserves the best possible quality of care towards the end of their life, and more could in this area so I have raised a written question on hospice funding, and I will continue to pursue this matter in Parliament. More needs to be done to ensure that we improve the quality of our end of life care, and I will support any further work on this issue.

I regret that I will not be able to attend the Private Members Bill debate on 29 November as a close family member has been given their operation date on the Thursday and it is critical that I am home to care for them the next day.

Thank you for contacting me on this matter.