Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Lord Kennedy of Southwark Excerpts

Friday 20th March 2026 Lords Chamber

Can the Minister say whether an explanation of the differences between the two prognoses I have described will be given to the patient? How will that be required of doctors? Will it be set down in guidance, for example? How will we know that something of such materiality, yet potential ambiguity, will be communicated correctly? I hope the Minister will take that away if it has not already been considered by officials as part of their assessment. Did the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer, consider using any other prognosis-based eligibility test when the Bill was being drafted? This is clearly an issue that would merit further discussion, given the implications.

[Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms and Chief Whip (Lord Kennedy of Southwark) (Lab Co-op)]

My Lords, I have noticed that the time now is 5.18 pm. We have no intention of moving on to another group. When this group is finished, I will seek to adjourn the House. I say to any colleagues waiting for another debate that it will not be happening this week.

[Baroness Merron (Lab)]

My Lords, The Government do not have major workability concerns with Amendments 175 and 384, tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Moylan, whom we are very pleased to see in his place; long may he continue to be there.

I will say a few words about clinical practice, which may be helpful in addressing some of the points raised, including those just now by the noble Earl, Lord Effingham. Most of the questions were really about the Bill and are therefore matters for the sponsor, but I will make a couple of points about clinical practice. It is rare for a clinician to base prognosis on a median life expectancy. In addition, explaining the data used is not common clinical practice. I hope that is helpful to noble Lords.

The issues raised are rightly for noble Lords to consider and decide. Of course, that means that the way the amendments are currently drafted may require further consideration to be fully workable, effective or enforceable.