"Sarah Wootton, chief executive of Dignity in Dying, said a handful of peers, whom she described as implacable opponents of assisted dying, had dominated debates in the Lords and rained down amendments in order to talk out the bill. It's absolutely shameless what a tiny group, less than 1% of the unelected, the upper house, has done, she added. Their role is to scrutinise, not to block."
"Hannah Slater, 38, who has terminal breast cancer, described the bill's failure as not democratic. It's devastating for people who want to be able to choose how to die when we've got a terminal illness. It's just very, very frustrating that this choice is being taken away at the last moment. It feels really cruel and unfair."
"Tanni Grey-Thompson, a cross-bench peer and former Paralympian, who raised concerns including the efficacy of life-ending drugs and their administration during pregnancy, said: The bill fell because it's badly written. It needs to be much, much tighter than what we've got."
The proposed legislation for assisted dying for terminally ill individuals failed amid significant opposition. Supporters blamed unelected peers for sabotaging the bill, while opponents cited poor drafting and practical concerns. Sarah Wootton criticized the peers for blocking rather than scrutinizing the bill. Terminally ill individuals expressed frustration over losing the choice of how to die. Tanni Grey-Thompson, a peer, defended the amendments made, stating the bill was poorly written and needed more clarity to address complex issues surrounding assisted dying.
Read at www.theguardian.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]