"A bill passed by the House of Commons after years of public debate is being blocked by a small group of peers under the pretence of scrutiny. Their purpose is to kill the bill by filibuster and impose their religious or moral views on the free will of others. They want to deny Britons a freedom now common in many liberal nations across the western world."
"When the bill came to the Lords, just seven peers were responsible for 630 of 1,047 amendments now attached to it. They included a requirement that no one should be helped to die if they have been abroad in the previous year, or unless five doctors have assessed the application, or if a doctor has discussed dying with the patient (a so-called gag clause)."
"A woman was questioned by the police and investigated for 10 months, before the CPS declined to prosecute her, all for accompanying her husband, terminally ill and in agony, to the Dignitas centre in more civilised Switzerland. For her dedication and compassion, the British state aided by a group of peers treats her like a suspected criminal. As for doctors who, for decades, have privately helped people through this most painful of family crises, they tell me they dare not do so,"
A Commons-passed assisted dying bill is being obstructed in the House of Lords through an excessive number of amendments and a filibuster by a small group of peers. Seven peers account for 630 of 1,047 amendments, introducing requirements such as a one-year foreign travel ban, five-doctor approval, and a gag clause where doctors discussing dying could be penalised. Many amendments contradict Commons decisions and ignore clear majority public support. The government has declined to assist because the bill is a private member's bill. Police investigations and fear of prosecution deter families and doctors from lawful end-of-life choices.
Read at www.theguardian.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]