Euthanasia proponents are having another go at assisted suicide legislation in the UK parliament after the last attempt died in the House of Lords earlier this year.
In June, Labour MP Lauren Edwards reintroduced an assisted suicide bill to the UK parliament, which will have its second reading on Sept. 11.
The bill has nearly the exact same wording as Kim Leadbeater’s bill, which recently fell after narrowly passing the House of Commons before running out of time in the House of Lords.
In the second reading of Leadbeater’s original bill in November 2024, the measure passed the Commons by 55. In the third reading, however, that majority fell to 23. As the bill made its way through the Lords, there was fierce debate and over 1200 amendments were tabled.
Archbishop John Sherrington, the point man for life issues for the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, recently said “it is wholly unsatisfactory that this divisive and flawed bill is being put to parliament again as a Private Members’ Bill without the key issues being addressed.”
“The reduced majority at third reading in the Commons and the debate in the Lords showed how flawed the bill is,” Sherrington said.
Why have lawmakers reintroduced a bill nearly identical to the one that failed only a few months ago?
The Parliament Act
The House of Lords used to have the power to veto legislation that had passed the House of Commons. However, this power came under increased scrutiny when the Lords didn’t pass David Lloyd-George’s 1909 “people’s budget.”
Eventually, there was a general election in 1910 and the bill passed, and there was a second general election on the topic of reforming the Lords. In 1911, the Parliament Act passed, which removed the ability of the Lords to veto a bill – except one to extend the lifetime of a parliament.
The Lords could now only delay a bill by up to two years. In 1949, another Parliament Act passed, which reduced the delaying time to a year. Although these powers are rarely used, there is precedent, such as the Hunting Act of 2004 which banned the hunting of foxes, and a host of other mammals.
And the Acts can be used concerning a Private Members’ Bill, which Edwards’, like Leadbeater’s, is.
This means is the Lords can delay a bill, as was the case in Leadbetter’s bill. But if the Commons reintroduces it in the next session, the Lords can’t block it.
Therefore, if Edwards’ second bill passes the Commons, the Lords won’t be able to prevent the UK joining the ever-growing list of European countries that have legalised assisted suicide.
In a statement sent to Crux Now, Alisdair Hungerford-Morgan, CEO of the charity Right To Life UK, which campaigns against assisted suicide and in support of better access to palliative care, highlighted the controversial aspect of using the Parliament Acts in such a piece of legislation.
“The near-identical bill makes it clear that assisted suicide campaigners are paving the way for the highly controversial use of the Parliament Acts to bypass the House of Lords to force it into law.
Utilising the Parliament Acts route would mean it would be impossible for MPs to amend the bill in the House of Commons to fix the dozens of serious flaws in the bill,” he said.
“Using the Parliament Acts to force through a controversial Private Members’ Bill that was not in the government’s election manifesto would be unprecedented and unacceptable. It is striking that a number of MPs who previously supported the assisted suicide bill have already recognised this, and it is highly likely they are not alone,” he added.
Unresolved issues
Leaving aside the Church’s principled objection to assisted suicide, Sherrington also highlighted a number of issues in the bill that haven’t been addressed. He said “the legislation is likely to lead to pressure on the most vulnerable to end their lives through assisted suicide.”
“The safeguards against coercion, pressure and abuse are wholly inadequate,” he added.
“Moreover, the bill fails to provide sufficient protection for freedom of conscience for doctors. In addition, health and social care staff could find themselves under pressure to participate in assisted suicide,” he said.
Sherrington emphasised that these concerns were shared by professional bodies, including the British Medical Association and the Royal College of Psychiatrists.
Hungerford-Morgan made a similar point. “The bill retains dozens of serious flaws identified by Royal Colleges, professional bodies, the Equality and Human Rights Commission, and disability, mental health and domestic abuse charities,” he said.
Hungerford-Morgan is hoping that the sizable reduction in majority between second and third reading for Leadbeater’s bill is a sign that this new bill will fall.
“Given the slim majority with which Kim Leadbeater’s bill passed the House of Commons last year, this opposition, combined with the many flaws in the bill exposed by experts in the House of Lords, means the bill is on course to fail decisively at second reading on 11 September,” he said.
Similarities with France
If Edwards’ bill is to pass, it will involve a process similar to what happened with France’s assisted suicide bill. Earlier this month, for the fourth time, France’s National Assembly – the lower house – passed a bill making assisted suicide and euthanasia legal.
The other three times they had passed it, it was rejected by France’s Senate. Given the stalemate, on this final occasion, the government allowed the National Assembly to pass the law without the Senate’s approval, a mechanism which the constitution allows.
It is now pending review by the Constitutional Council before it can officially become law.
In France, the law would mean that a patient first needs to “freely manifest his or her intention” to a doctor, who then decides within 15 days.
If approved, after a further two days of reflection, the patient would administer the lethal substance themselves, although if they are unable to do so a healthcare professional would do it. The decision to go ahead would have to be approved on the day by a physician.
Edwards’ proposed bill is similar. To apply for assisted suicide, the person must be a UK resident, 18 years old, dying from a terminal illness that will end their life in six months or less and have full mental capacity and “a clear, settled and informed wish to end their own life.”
Opponents of both bills have raised the alarm about insufficient safeguards, arguing they are ripe for coercion and that doctors who don’t wish to partake are unprotected.
Regardless, if the UK MPs do pass Edwards’ bill, because it has been reintroduced the very next parliamentary session after it fell, the Parliament Acts make the Lords powerless to stop it. Thus, for opponents of the bill, their best hope is that MPs reject it at the second reading.
“This matter is urgent. I urge people to contact their member of parliament and ask them to vote against this deeply flawed bill at second reading,” Sherrington.
The bishops of England and Wales called for people to contact their MPs for Leadbeater’s bill. This time, they will be hoping their arguments are more persuasive. If not, it seems the slow, macabre march of assisted suicide across the Western world will continue unabated.
