![](\"https:\/\/cdn.images.express.co.uk\/img\/dynamic\/139\/590x\/secondary\/5124565.jpg?r=1703079277807\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Dame Esther Rantzen has sparked a controversial political debate after revealing she is considering ending her own life if treatment for her lung cancer fails to improve her condition.<\/p>\n
Dame Esther\u2019s battle with cancer has seen widespread media coverage, with the broadcast star revealing she has now joined the infamous Swiss organisation Dignitas, which specialises in assisted suicide.<\/p>\n
Assisted suicide is currently illegal in Britain, where euthanasia could be prosecuted as murder or manslaughter.<\/p>\n
Speaking on the BBC\u2019s Today podcast, she called for a free vote in parliament on whether to legalise assisted dying.<\/p>\n
Dame Esther argued it is \u201cimportant that the law catches up with what the country wants\u201d.<\/p>\n
A free vote means MPs would not be \u2018whipped\u2019 by their parties, and would be free to make up their own mind based on their moral conscience.<\/p>\n
They are conventionally used around religious issues, such as abortion; constitutional issues, such as prisoner voting; or moral issues, such as the repeal of the anti-gay ‘Section 28\u2019.<\/p>\n
This morning, Secretary of State for Work and Pension Mel Stride signalled his support for another vote on assisted dying.<\/p>\n
The last attempt to get changes through Parliament was in 2015, however this was defeated.<\/p>\n
Mr Stride said he \u201cwould not be adverse\u201d to a new Commons debate, and was one of the 27 Tory MPs to vote for assisted dying in 2015.<\/p>\n
He added: \u201cThe government has not decided to bring forward legislation, I think I need to make that very clear, but if Parliament in some form or another decided that it wanted to have a fresh look at this, given it was some years ago that we last did so, that’s not something that I would be resistant to\u201d.<\/p>\n
Can’t see the poll below? Click here<\/strong><\/p>\n Senior Tory Alicia Kearns has also argued that national discourse has changed since the proposal\u2019s defeat eight years ago.<\/p>\n The British Medical Journal has previously set out the arguments for and against assisted dying.<\/p>\n Those in favour believe it reduces physical and emotional distress for those so ill they have no hope of recovery.<\/p>\n it is estimated that 150 million people around the world have access to the service, with eligibility criteria, safeguards and regulation in place to protect patients.<\/p>\n They also argue the current law isn\u2019t working, as UK citizens – like Dame Esther – can travel to Switzerland to access the service, but this is only available to the wealthy with funds to do so.<\/p>\n Those against the policy argue it would alter society\u2019s attitude towards the elderly, seriously ill and disabled, and send a message that assisted dying is an option they \u2018ought\u2019 to consider.<\/p>\n They also point to places like Canada, where so-called safeguards haven\u2019t worked properly, with case studies of the country euthanising the poor, mentally ill and those who are deemed too costly to treat.<\/p>\n\n