Peers have been criticized for suggesting amendments to the assisted dying bill that have been deemed as unnecessary and cruel in an attempt to obstruct the proposed law change.
Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, a leading advocate for legalizing assisted dying, expressed concerns that opponents in the House of Lords are deliberately trying to sabotage the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill.
The bill aims to permit terminally ill adults in England and Wales, with a life expectancy of less than six months, to request assisted death, subject to approval by two doctors and a panel comprising a social worker, senior legal figure, and psychiatrist.
There is apprehension among supporters that time is running out to pass the bill before the parliamentary session concludes in the Spring, potentially jeopardizing its chances of enactment. Conversely, critics argue that such significant legislation requires thorough examination.
Leadbeater highlighted the excessive number of amendments, over 1,000, many of which she deemed unnecessary and some outright cruel. She expressed dismay that opponents of the law change are resorting to tactics to block its progress.
Among the amendments criticized by Leadbeater was one mandating the filming of a dying person’s final moments, which she described as intrusive and heartless. Another amendment stipulated that a dying person must not have left the country in the past 12 months, potentially preventing them from bidding farewell to loved ones overseas.
Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson, a former Paralympic champion who opposes assisted dying, defended the amendments as necessary safeguards to address perceived deficiencies in the legislation. She emphasized the importance of exploring coercion and ensuring the safety of individuals under the proposed law.
Although the bill was endorsed by MPs in June, its journey through the House of Lords has been protracted, with only 80 out of more than 1,150 amendments discussed so far. Concerns have been raised that peers may be deliberately prolonging the process to impede the bill’s progression into law.
Peers are generally expected not to obstruct legislation that forms part of the Government’s election manifesto. However, as the assisted dying bill was not part of Labour’s manifesto but brought forward by backbencher Leadbeater as a private member’s bill, it may face additional hurdles in the legislative process.