Faith
Lords Challenge Assisted Suicide Bill Amid Concerns
Faith Facts
- The House of Lords voted to send the assisted suicide bill to a select committee for deeper examination.
- Most speeches by peers during the debate opposed legalising assisted suicide for terminally ill adults.
- Christian leaders and advocates express strong concerns about pressures on vulnerable people if the bill passes.
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill faces serious opposition in the House of Lords, where a dedicated committee will now scrutinise its contents. Many parliamentarians voiced unease, emphasizing that legalising assisted suicide could threaten the sanctity of life and protection for the vulnerable.
Alisdair Hungerford-Morgan of Right To Life UK noted, “The large majority of peers speaking in opposition to the bill across the two days of Second Reading suggests the House of Lords is currently significantly more opposed than supportive of the bill.”
He warned that current strains on hospices and the NHS would make assisted suicide dangerous, stating, “Vulnerable people in our society need our unwavering protection and the best quality care, not a pathway to assisted suicide.” He also cited evidence that similar laws elsewhere have pressured many nearing the end of life into ending their lives.
Baroness Finlay argued that the proposal “does not improve patient choice or control.”
Baroness Berger raised concerns that some individuals might feel compelled to die, burdened by a sense of being unwanted.
Lord Frost cautioned that such legislation would erode the nation’s Christian ethical foundations and introduce a cold utilitarian worldview.
Baroness Foster emphasized, “The two days of debate at Second Reading have shown just how strongly this Bill is opposed across the House. Peer after peer spoke about the dangers it poses and the harm it would inflict on the most vulnerable.” She predicted ongoing resistance throughout the committee process.
Baroness Grey-Thompson added, “The message from the two days of Second Reading is unequivocal: we must protect the most disadvantaged in society.”
Caroline Ansell of Christian charity CARE described the bill as fundamentally flawed and dangerous, arguing that it undermines critical suicide prevention work.
Dr Gordon Macdonald of Care Not Killing declared, “We fully support peers being given the time and space they need to properly scrutinise this legislation, without Government interference or pressure from the whips.” He insisted that rejecting the bill is necessary to focus on compassionate palliative care.
As people of faith, we must defend the preciousness of every human life and stand firm for the dignity and protection of those who are most at risk. Let us stay vigilant and lift our voices in support of policies that uphold God-given life and compassionate care for all.