Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Baroness Blackstone Excerpts

Friday 19th September 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Blackstone (Lab)]

My Lords, I have spoken in favour of assisted dying in previous debates in this House, and that is still my position. Therefore, I am grateful to Kim Leadbeater MP for her work in steering the Bill through the Commons. We must not forget that the elected House has supported it; our task is to scrutinise, not reject it.

Like my noble friend Lady Thornton, I was concerned at proposals last week for a Select Committee, which might undermine the agreed timetable for such scrutiny in Committee. After so many years considering assisted dying, whether in Select Committees or Private Members’ Bills, it is now important that we complete the process. Therefore, I am grateful that my noble friend Lady Berger has agreed to a committee that is limited in scope and time, allowing the Bill to go through all stages before this Session ends.

With a view to improving the Bill, I welcome the opportunity to look into procedures and safeguards, calling evidence from experts. I am impressed by many of the contributions made so far, including some speeches from those not in support of the Bill. However, I regret the language used sometimes, such as references to the “killing Bill” or the “assisted suicide Bill”. Because of my personal experience, I am affronted by this.

When my former husband, in hospice care, was dying of stomach cancer at the age of 44, in agonising pain, with terrible nausea, too, he desperately wanted it to “come to an end”, as he put it, and asked for my help. I tried to persuade his carers to speed up his death, but failed. Is this “killing”? Was his wish to die “suicide”? Surely not. He loved life and had not wanted to die, but he was dying and, when life became truly unbearable, he longed for death. Because of the law, I could not help him end his torture.

As legislators, we have a duty to consider public opinion. Rigorous surveys all report high support for the Bill, ranging from 73% to 80%. The Nuffield Council on Bioethics set up a citizens’ jury on assisted dying earlier this year. Support for law change actually grew over the eight weeks of deliberations, when participants heard views from all sides. There are also large majorities in favour of assisted dying among Christians and those of other faiths, as well as disabled people.

Some speeches have referred rightly to the inadequacies of the status quo. Prosecutions of people who admit to helping a close relative die usually end in juries refusing to convict. Laws should not remain on the statute books where this is the case. Currently, there is no safeguarding when people end their lives at Dignitas, nor when unregulated and drastic ways of ending life, such as starvation, take place. Those who oppose the Bill need to address the problems of the status quo. We need more palliative care, yes, but it cannot always end the horrors of agonising deaths.

I end with two pleas. First, allow our fellow human beings greater autonomy over how they die; it is for them to decide and not for others, whether for faith or other reasons, to impose their views. Secondly, be truly compassionate in sparing terrible suffering as death approaches, allowing those who choose to die sooner to do so.