Assisted Dying Debate Landscape in England & Wales

Currently, the House of Lords is considering legalising assisted dying (AD) in England and Wales. In the past 10 years, Bills have been brought to Parliament in 2015, 2016, 2017, 2021 and 2022 all of which have been unsuccessful. Therefore, the debate surrounding this decision is complex and this article aims to highlight some historical and current considerations by the House of Lords, media or associated groups / bodies.

Firstly, what is assisted dying? Assisted dying, as defined by HL Bill 112 (the current Bill before Parliament), would

‘allow adults who are terminally ill, subject to safeguards and protections, to request and be provided with assistance to end their own life; and for connected purposes’

Arguments in support of allowing assisted dying:

• Personal autonomy

  • House of Lords Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill Committee 2005 summarised that supporters of assisted dying ‘believe that terminally ill people should have the right, subject to prescribed safeguards, to have medical assistance to die in the same way that patients, whether or not terminally ill, already have the right to refuse life-prolonging treatment’

• Dignity and self-determination

  • Supporters of the proposed legislation ‘argue that people who are dying deserve the right to die with dignity’, which includes controlling the timing of their death and being ‘allowed to end their suffering’

• In line with what people in England and Wales want

  • Research by King's College London has shown that approximately ‘two-thirds (63%) of people in England and Wales say they want the current Parliament to make assisted dying legal for terminally ill adults in the next five years’

Arguments against allowing assisted dying:

• Sanctity of life

  • Following a previous Assisted Dying Bill introduced by Lord Falconer in 2014, multiple faith leaders published a joint statement to Members of the House of Lords in opposition of the Bill; the statement emphasised the intrinsic value of human life and that only God should be able to give and take life away

• Loss of dignity

  • In some cases, assisted dying causes complication resulting in a prolonged time to die which means AD may not result in a death as dignified as initially believed

• Paradox of control

  • AD makes individuals ‘dependent on another person […] to bring about their death’, therefore only offering an illusion of control which is ultimately fettered by doctor approval and state regulation of eligibility

• Slippery slope

  • Legalising AD may lead to cases of involuntary euthanasia

    • Counter argument: it seems strange to suggest that allowing for voluntary AD creates a slope towards involuntary AD as they are independent concepts separated by consent. A lack of consent in AD would constitute intentional killing which wholly falls outside the scope of assisted dying.