Tag: Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill 2025

Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Bishop of Newcastle speaks on issue of coercion

During a debate on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill on 20th March 2026, the Bishop of Newcastle spoke in support of amendments to the bill aimed at providing protection to those vulnerable to coercion:

The Lord Bishop of Newcastle: My Lords, I am grateful to my right reverend friend the Bishop of Southwark for preparing the way for some of the comments that I wish to make briefly now. Broadly, this group seeks to address issues around communication, language barriers and interpreters and I support the amendments laid before your Lordships’ House in that regard.

Continue reading “Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Bishop of Newcastle speaks on issue of coercion”

Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Bishop of Southwark supports amendments on protection of those with communication difficulties

On 20th March 2026, during a debate on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, the Bishop of Southwark spoke in support of amendments to the bill focused on providing protection for those with speech, language, and communication difficulties:

The Lord Bishop of Southwark: My Lords, I support the amendments in this group, particularly Amendment 171 in the names of the noble Baronesses, Lady Nicholson of Winterbourne and Lady O’Loan.

Clause 5, as we have heard, introduces a key element in the infrastructure of assisted dying in this Bill by providing what is intended to be a safe, but not mandatory, introduction to the subject of death with the assistance of another human being. For proponents of the Bill, the advantages of such an introduction are obvious. In their minds, it will remove a good deal of unnecessary distress on the part of those who wish to proceed with such an option and on the part of those who do not. However, as we have heard from those of us who have long experience of pastoral encounters, the experience is likely to be rife with pitfalls.

Continue reading “Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Bishop of Southwark supports amendments on protection of those with communication difficulties”

Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Archbishop of York raises potential adverse impact on vulnerable groups

The Archbishop of York asked a question during a debate on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, querying the impact the bill would have on coercion of vulnerable people, particularly those struggling to access palliative care, on 27th February 2026:

The Lord Archbishop of York: I entirely accept that those who are proposing the Bill do not propose it for the reason of trying to save money. I also entirely accept the desire from everyone in this House for better-funded palliative care. However, I need something to be explained. Taken that palliative care is inadequate and underfunded, and taken that there are huge regional variations, what I do not understand is the noble and learned Lord’s confidence that this will not lead to coercion of vulnerable people in places where palliative care is not available and cannot be afforded, which will lead to unintended consequences. I entirely accept that he does not want those consequences either, but I ask him to give me some confidence, if he can, that this will not follow.

Continue reading “Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Archbishop of York raises potential adverse impact on vulnerable groups”

Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Bishop of Newcastle speaks to amendment on protection for those with learning disabilities

The Bishop of Newcastle spoke in support of an amendment aimed at providing additional protection for those with learning disabilities during a committee debate on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill on 6th February 2026:

The Lord Bishop of Newcastle: My Lords, I will speak to Amendment 108, to which the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Lincoln has added his name. He regrets that he cannot be in his place today, as he is interested in this amendment as lead bishop for the L’Arche community in the UK. With the Church of England, L’Arche strives to provide a positive and inclusive residential community in which adults with and without learning disabilities can live and grow together.

Continue reading “Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Bishop of Newcastle speaks to amendment on protection for those with learning disabilities”

Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Bishop of Hereford highlights importance of nuanced understanding of artificial intelligence

The Bishop of Hereford spoke during a committee debate on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill on 30th January 2026, pointing out a distinction between AI tools and artificial intelligence generally in regards to an amendment proposed by Baroness Coffey, which would stipulate that “(4) Artificial intelligence must not be used to carry out any functions in any section or schedule of this Act.”

The Lord Bishop of Hereford: I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Coffey, for raising a very important issue in this amendment. However, I am concerned that, as it stands, as the noble Baroness said, this amendment is too blunt an instrument. It is important that we distinguish between AI tools and the more dangerous artificial general intelligence, or superintelligence. The use of AI in medical diagnostics in patient care is already commonplace. AI tools are currently used to read scans and X-rays and will frequently perform as well as, if not better than, clinicians. To exclude the use of AI altogether might deprive patients who are considering assisted dying of valuable diagnostic assistance and care at a very vulnerable time.

Continue reading “Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Bishop of Hereford highlights importance of nuanced understanding of artificial intelligence”

Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Bishop of Newcastle points out lack of safeguards in online processes

The Bishop of Newcastle spoke during the committee debate on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill on 30th January 2026, highlighting the lack of adequate safeguards in any online-only process for facilitating assisted dying:

The Lord Bishop of Newcastle: My Lords, taken together, the amendments in this group highlight the importance of contact with people at the hardest time in their lives—a time when we must be most vulnerable, clinically and personally. This must not be a process in which anyone is made to feel rushed or that can be completed entirely online.

Continue reading “Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Bishop of Newcastle points out lack of safeguards in online processes”

Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Bishop of Southwark calls for royal commission on dying well

The Bishop of Southwark spoke following a government statement preceding the committee debate on the bill, asking that, should the bill fall, a royal commission on dying well be considered:

The Lord Bishop of Southwark: My Lords, I too wish to speak in good faith. That is what all our Committee consideration has been about, in almost every speech I have heard and listened to—and I have made an effort to attend a good number of sittings. I am very grateful to the Government Chief Whip for what he has said. I am also very grateful to the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer, for saying on the “Today” programme that he now anticipates that the Bill will fall. So my question is: if and when it does, please will the need for a royal commission on dying well be factored into consideration?

Hansard

Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Bishop of Newcastle raises issue of eligibility criteria comparisons

The Bishop of Newcastle spoke during a debate on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill on 23rd January 2026, pointing out the differences between the proposed eligibility criteria in the bill and the criteria used in Australia, in response to an earlier comparison of the two:

The Lord Bishop of Newcastle: My Lords, in his opening remarks, the noble Lord, Lord Birt, cited Australia. I am sure that he is aware that no Australian jurisdiction is recognised as one of the 10 comparable jurisdictions in the Bill’s eligibility criteria and the Government’s impact assessment. The most comparable are New Zealand and the United States. This discussion was resolved in our Select Committee by receiving evidence from New Zealand. We need to be consistent and mindful of the Government’s impact assessment and ensure that our comments align with it.

Hansard

Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Bishop of Chester raises duty of care towards families

The Bishop of Chester spoke during a debate on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill on 16th January 2026, noting the responsibility of care towards families of the deceased affected by the bill:

The Lord Bishop of Chester: My Lords, this is an important and moving debate. It is an honour to speak in it and to follow some of the previous contributions. These amendments highlight the fact that eligibility is not the same as motivation. I agree with almost everything that has been said before me; I will not delay the Committee by repeating those points.

There are two things that I want to bring to your Lordships’ attention. First, I remind noble Lords of points made by my right reverend friend the Bishop of Gloucester. The Bill, if passed, will apply to those in our prison system, for whom there will be very particular motivations, which we need to make sure can be fairly applied to them.

Continue reading “Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Bishop of Chester raises duty of care towards families”

Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Bishop of Gloucester supports amendments on prisons and prisoners

The Bishop of Gloucester spoke in support of amendments to the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill focusing on healthcare for those in prison and safeguarding of prisoners under the bill on 12th December 2025:

The Lord Bishop of Gloucester: My Lords, I will speak to these amendments because I want to make a new point. A very vulnerable population that we must continue to remember is the prison population. Although we will deal with the prison population more fully in the group coming up, we must remember that this Bill currently does not exclude prisoners from being eligible. That means we must consider how each issue is likely to play out in a prison setting.

As we have heard extensively, these amendments deal with two main issues: first, access to primary care; and, secondly, how well that primary care physician knows the details of your medical history. The first is very closely related to inequalities and making sure that those who have worse access to care are not more likely to choose assisted dying. The prison population are therefore a key group that must be considered, since their health and access to healthcare are worse than that of the general population. That is evidenced by the recently published report by the Chief Medical Officer.

Continue reading “Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Bishop of Gloucester supports amendments on prisons and prisoners”