An extremely difficult debate was held in the Senedd last week on assisted dying. I voted against the motion. I recognise that many people feel strongly in favour of the principle, and that most will approach the debate through the lens of the last moments of someone they love.

My contention, though, is that we must also look at this through the lens of those not surrounded by people they love – people who could be placed under pressure to end their lives, because the necessary palliative care is not available, or because they fear being a burden.

My concern with the bill being presented in Westminster is not as much with how it will begin, as with how it will end. There are safeguards in what is being proposed – but the experience of Canada, the Netherlands, Belgium and some states in the USA shows what can so easily happen.

Laws were introduced for people who were terminally ill, but the safeguards were eroded, so that now people with depression, anorexia and many other non-terminal disorders can qualify. Disorders, that is, from which people can recover – and lives ended that might have got better.

I fear such changes will be inevitable, if the bill in Westminster passes. Because courts in those places have felt obliged to extend the rights given to some citizens to others.

The debate around assisted dying is often presented as a way of offering people a choice. But for many disabled people, or people who are worried and anxious and lonely, it would lead to them feeling they have no choice but to end their life. That is what Tanni Grey Thompson has warned about: a future where some lives will matter less, or that, because of the high costs of care, people would feel it selfish to stay on.

I voted against the motion – though I empathise with those who proposed it. My fear is of a future where few safeguards remain, where investment in palliative care is lessened, and where desperate people feel obliged to take a step they can never take back.