The House of Lords is under criticism for attempting to transform the assisted dying bill into a law that favors the wealthy by excluding legal aid. Currently, members of the House of Lords are engaged in discussions on an unprecedented 1,100 amendments to the contentious bill. Proponents argue that this is a tactic to delay the process and insist that unelected peers should respect the decision of the House of Commons, which approved the bill last year.
However, some members reject accusations of intentionally stalling the bill, asserting that the legislation is flawed and requires substantial revisions before enactment. Former Conservative MP, now Baroness Therese Coffey, proposed an amendment to prohibit the use of legal aid for individuals seeking assisted death in court. She emphasized that taxpayer funds should not be utilized for such purposes and suggested that alternative sources, such as charities, could provide financial assistance if needed.
In response to Baroness Coffey’s amendment, critics, including Louise Shackleton, who accompanied her husband Antony to Dignitas for an assisted death due to terminal illness, expressed outrage. They argued that the proposed restrictions on legal aid would create barriers for individuals seeking an assisted death, particularly affecting those from lower and middle-class backgrounds.
During the recent debate, a prominent barrister advocated for courts to determine the eligibility for assisted death. The original draft of the bill featured a High Court judge oversight, but this was replaced with a three-member panel comprising social workers, psychiatrists, and legal experts. Lord Alexander Carlile of Berriew KC endorsed a court-based process, stating that it would offer authoritative decisions in this complex legal domain.
The bill, known as the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, requires approval from both the House of Commons and the Lords before the end of the current parliamentary session in May. If passed, it would enable individuals with terminal illnesses in England and Wales, with a prognosis of less than six months, to request an assisted death. The proposed legislation received support in the Commons last year and advanced to the committee stage in the Lords. Lord Carlile suggested that designated family judges could be tasked with making crucial decisions regarding assisted deaths, emphasizing the need for judicial involvement to ensure legal compliance and ethical considerations.
Conservative peer Lord Shinkwin raised concerns about the potential strain on the judicial system caused by the proposed changes to the bill. Supporters of the legislation have accused some opponents in the Lords of obstructing progress through filibustering tactics. Conversely, opponents defend their role in scrutinizing the bill, asserting that it requires enhancements to ensure safety and effectiveness. Labour former minister Lord Falconer of Thoroton, overseeing the bill in the Lords, urged peers to expedite the discussions, highlighting the upcoming sessions scheduled for thorough deliberation on the legislation.