Peers debate Assisted Dying Bill

Many hundreds of campaigners, disabled people in wheelchairs, and their supporters gathered outside Parliament all day Friday, while the House of Lords debated Lord Falconer's Assisted Dying Bill. There was no vote, but the Bill now moves to Committee Stage.

The bill's opponents focused on the bill's many dangers and problems. Those who favoured the bill pointed to the ultimatum in the Supreme Court's recent Nicklinson judgment. The Supreme Court threatened that if Parliament did not debate assisted suicide, the courts might declare the current law incompatible with human rights, thereby forcing the government to introduce legislation.

Many speeches rehearsed issues which had been raised in Lord Joffe's assisted suicide bills (2004-2006) and Lord Falconer's previous attempts to change the law.

Lord Tebbit argued forcefully that weakening the protection of terminally-ill people would leave them at the mercy of 'vultures - money-grasping relatives.'

Baroness Kennedy said that, while the bill offer 'choice' to those in terminal illness, the modern popular notion of 'choice' was both a lure and a snare.

The Anglican Bishop of Bristol and others pointed to the change of mind of Dr Theo Boer of the Netherlands, previously a supporter of euthanasia, who now wishes it were possible to 'put the genie back in the bottle.'

Viscount Colville noted how the bill failed to provide any adequate check that people supposedly choosing freely to die were of sound mind.

The slippery slope argument - that the bill will lead to much more extensive killing - was widely canvassed by both sides. Some rejected this argument outright, but others, such as disabled peer Baroness Campbell asserted it forcefully. Baroness Cumberledge said the bill was not so much a slippery slope as an ice-cliff.

Many peers on both sides of the debate mentioned the many letters they had received from members of the public and how these had influenced their thinking. A number of peers quoted personal stories from letters, and several indicated that correspondence had helped to shape their thinking on the bill.

Reacting to the news that Lord Falconer's 'Assisted Dying' Bill will move to Committee Stage, Andrea Minichiello Williams, Chief Executive of Christian Concern, said: “Widespread media coverage in recent days, coming on top of comments by Supreme Court Judges, has raised the profile of the issues Assisted Suicide. So it perhaps unsurprising that the House of Lords has decided to give further time to scrutinise the Bill, especially since the high number of Peers who wished to speak meant that contributions had to be so short.

“We urge the Lords to ensure that proper scrutiny does now take place. This is a matter of life and death. It cannot be decided on the basis of sound-bites nor simply on the basis of sentiment, however much we all wish to see an end to suffering. The underlying principles and inevitable consequences of this Bill need to be teased out. When the arguments against are carefully examined, support for Assisted Suicide plummets. We look forward to the Committee Stage exposing the many flaws in this Bill.

“Whatever the intention, this Bill would not promote compassion but would create a climate of fear and even cruelty. The major disabled groups recognise the immense pressure that this Bill would place on people to consider ending their life prematurely. People’s lives are made no less valuable because of illness and it would be a sad day if our law stopped recognising this fact. If this Bill were voted through, it would be a disaster for terminally and severely ill people across the country. We must maintain proper protections for those who are vulnerable.

“True compassion demands that we re-double our efforts to care for those who are in need not offer or even encourage them to kill themselves. There is all the difference in the world between withdrawing treatment by consent and actively facilitating killing. If we allow doctors to be moved from being protectors or life to catalysts of death we will shatter the bond of trust between doctor and patient.

"Hospice and palliative care in this country is the best in the world, yet it is still patchy and sadly under-resourced. A truly compassionate and humane response to those in their latter days would be to provide more palliative care resources across the UK and not to give vulnerable people - who may feel they are a burden to loved ones - the resources through doctors to kill themselves.

“The cases of individuals like Tony Nicklinson and others are heart-breaking but the Assisted Suicide Bill does not deal with such cases. In fact it would only make things worse, not better. For people with severe or terminal illness, the way to make their lives better is just that: to make their life better, not to end it.”

"Life is a precious gift from God. Once we decide that we can take his place we open the door to fear and oppression. This Bill reflects an outlook on life that enthrones personal autonomy above public safety; that sees no meaning or purpose in suffering; that appears profoundly naïve about the abuse of elderly and disabled people, and that looks forward to no future beyond the grave. It is a counsel of despair that contrasts starkly with the faith, hope and love of the Christian gospel."