Lords split over right to die

Clashes over an attempt to allow the terminally ill to end their lives flared today as a bill to legalise assisted dying began its second reading in the House of Lords.

Crossbencher Lord Joffe told peers that patients should not be forced to endure unbearable pain “for the good of society as a whole” as he opened the debate on his right-to-die legislation.

But the former human rights lawyer faces a long day of hostility both outside and inside the chamber - including from the archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, who is due to speak in the marathon debate expected in the Lords today.

Opponents say the bill does not include safeguards to protect people suffering from depression, and could put pressure on the terminally ill to end their lives prematurely. Supporters of the bill say that an amendment being tabled today by the Liberal Democrat peer Lord Carlile to delay the measures for six months is in effect a wreaking amendment.
Disabled opponents gathered in a nearby room to launch the Not Dead Yet campaign in protest at the proposals, while supporters of the Catholic church-backed Care Not Killing organisation began a day of protests.

The group, which represents more than 30 charities and healthcare groups, warned that the Joffe bill would put the old and sick under intolerable pressure to end their lives, not least because of severe pressures on health and long-term care services.

It will later hand in a petition at 10 Downing Street signed by more than 100,000 people demanding an end to attempts to change the law.

Despite the vocal protests, a new poll has found three-quarters of people in favour of the controversial right-to-die bill.

The government refused to say at this stage whether it would support the bill in the commons, citing a position of “neutrality” over the issue. A Department of Health spokeswoman said it would “wait and see” what happens in the Lords first.

“Issues around assisted suicide and euthanasia have been dealt with as a matter of conscience and it is appropriate that parliament should lead on debates of this nature and provide the forum where all shades of opinion can be heard.

“It is a controversial area and one that raises difficult ethical questions. The government recognises the complexity of the issues involved and that people hold strong and deeply divided views.”

If passed, the bill would allow doctors to prescribe drugs that a terminally ill patient suffering terrible pain could take to end his or her own life, Lord Joffe told peers.

“As a caring society we cannot sit back and complacently accept that terminally ill patients who are suffering unbearably should just continue to suffer for the good of society as a whole,” he said.

“We must find a solution to the unbearable suffering of patients whose needs cannot be met by palliative care. This bill provides that solution in the absence of any other.” Although peers do not by convention vote on the second reading of a bill Lord Carlile is expected to ask the House to back his “sunset clause” amendment.

All the political parties are allowing a free vote on the issue and, if passed, the amendment would delay the measure by six months.

The archbishop of Canterbury, Catholic cardinal Cormac Murphy O’Connor and chief rabbi Sir Jonathan Sacks have written a letter to the Times in which they claim the “right to die” would become a “duty to die” if the bill becomes law.

In the letter, they say: “We urge legislators to withhold support for this bill so as to ensure that British law continues to safeguard the principle that the intention to kill, or to assist in the killing, of an innocent human being is wrong.”

“Such a bill cannot guarantee that a right to die would not, for society’s most vulnerable, become a duty to die. Were such a law enacted, the elderly, lonely, sick or distressed would find themselves under pressure, real or imagined, to ask for an early death.”

The three religious leaders also warned that economic pressures might come into play, and that the delicate relationship between patient and doctor would be irrevocably changed.

The archbishop denied that opponents of the bill were trying to impose their religious beliefs on the general population, many of whom did not share their faith.

He told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that a “diverse range of groups” was opposed to the bill and not just those “enslaved by so-called clerical superstition”, including the Royal College of Psychiatrists and the Disability Rights Commission.

“[Opposition] comes from a number of people who are very close to the hardest of practical decisions who still say the costs of voting this through is disproportionately high to the benefit for certain individuals.”

The Right Rev Kenneth Stevenson, bishop of Portsmouth, who was diagnosed with leukaemia last September, is also opposed to the bill.

He is set to tell the Lords today how his own experience of serious illness has convinced him that the bill will not protect vulnerable people suffering from depression.

“Having had to face up to my own mortality when I was diagnosed with leukaemia last autumn, I can identify with the mental trauma that comes with life-threatening illness, a trauma which can so easily slip over into depression,” he says.

“Hence, my particular concern is that the current version of this bill has weakened the safeguard against assisted dying for people who are depressed.”

The bishop believes that the current bill, unlike the 2004 version of the proposed legislation, lacks a stringent test of mental capacity, with a referral to a psychiatrist or psychologist.

“It no longer makes an explicit connection between a lack of mental capacity and impaired judgment, which may exist in someone who is depressed but whose mind and brain are working properly,” he said. “The bill is not safe.”

The Care Not Killing campaign director, Dr Peter Saunders, said: “We believe that this is a very bad bill and one that would create great problems for old and sick patients and the medical and nursing professions.

“Over the past few days, as the public has become aware of the issues at stake, people have been signing our petition opposing the bill at the rate of 10,000 a day.”

Earlier this week, the Royal College of Physicians amended its stance of neutrality to outright opposition to a change in the law following a survey of members which found 73% against Lord Joffe’s bill.

A YouGov survey for the Dignity In Dying group found that most people were in favour of the terminally ill being allowed to die.

More than half (59%) said there was good care for people in the later stages of a terminal illness, yet 76% were in favour of assisted dying as long as there were safeguards in place.

Of the 1,770 people questioned, 13% were opposed to the idea, while 11% said they did not know, and 39% said they had experienced hospice or palliative care either directly or though a loved one.

Deborah Annetts, chief executive of Dignity In Dying, said: “It is clear that the public truly appreciates the scope of the problem. Even with the high quality of our palliative care, some people will still want this option.”

© Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006