Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Baroness Ramsay of Cartvale Excerpts

Friday 19th September 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Ramsay of Cartvale (Lab)]

My Lords, like all of us in this House, I have been inundated by a flood of mail, by post and online, on this Bill: more than I have ever experienced in my almost 30 years in your Lordships’ House. Unfortunately, it is not possible to answer them all individually, but I put on record my appreciation to all who sent their opinions and shared personal details, which were often emotional to read and certainly must have been very emotional to write.

I lived for three years in the Netherlands. Recently, my closest Dutch friend of many years, an intelligent, attractive, brilliant linguist and professional interpreter, became ill with terminal cancer. After undergoing treatment for some time, she decided to end her suffering and her life. Her wishes were granted after she had fulfilled the required procedures. I spoke with her brother, a retired doctor in the Netherlands, by telephone on the afternoon of the day she died. He told me that that morning he had brought his sister home from the hospital. He said, “All the decisions were completely hers. She was in her own bed and in her own house”. He added, movingly, “And she was still a beautiful woman”. I was, of course, very sad to lose my friend, but I felt contentment for her having the end that she wanted.

I would like to make it clear that my support for this Bill does not in any way affect my admiration and respect for our excellent hospices for those who wish for and need hospice care. A shining example with which I am familiar is St Christopher’s in south London, which was founded in 1967 as the first UK hospice. Its purpose was and is to link pain control with compassionate care.

We all know that legislation on the choice of ending life and on dignity in dying has been debated in Parliament over a number of years. The dates and details are clearly set out in the briefing papers. Many changes were made in another place’s exceptionally long consideration of this Bill, and changes will no doubt be made here, but the fundamental decision that we are trying to make here is whether to give individuals the choice of ending their life, with whatever safeguarding requirements Parliament decides.

No one can disagree with the statement that, in the interests of good legislation, this House should have the opportunity to scrutinise and make decisions. If this can indeed be done in the timescale of the amendment from the noble Baroness, Lady Berger, to report by 7 November, and the dates of the parliamentary Session allow time for the Bill to go through all its stages, it warrants support. But let us not forget that the time has come to answer the fundamental question.