The Archbishop
of Canterbury, Lord Indarjit and Lord Adonis Oppose the Assisted
Dying Bill in the House of Lords
Dr. Mozammel Haque
Cross Party Peers and All faith Groups of the House of Lords Oppose the
Assisted Dying Bill in the House of Lords on 22 October 2021.
The Archbishop
of Canterbury on Assisted Dying Bill in the House of Lords
The Archbishop of Canterbury’s contribution on Assisted Dying Bill in
the House of Lords on 22 October 2021.
The Archbishop of Canterbury said, “My Lords, I am grateful to the noble
Baroness, Lady Meacher, and listened with great attention to her extremely
powerful speech. This is an issue on which many of us have personal
experiences, often painful and difficult. There is unanimity on these Benches
that our current law does not need to be changed, but I know that people of
faith hold differing views. No doubt we will hear those today and I look
forward to them.”
The Archbishop of Canterbury mentioned, “Everyone here shares the best
of intentions. We should recognise that in how we listen and respond to each
other. I hope no one will seek to divide the House today, but I welcome the
amendment from the noble Lord, Lord Winston, because it draws our focus towards
our use of language. We need clarity and precision in our terms.”
The Archbishop of Canterbury said, “Christ calls his followers to
compassion, but compassion must not be drawn too narrowly—a point made indirectly
and powerfully by the noble Baroness, Lady Meacher. It must extend beyond those
who want the law to provide help to end their lives to the whole of society,
especially those who might be put at risk. Our choices affect other people. The
common good demands that our choices, rights and freedoms must be balanced with
those of others, especially those who may not be so easily heard.”
The Archbishop of Canterbury lamented, “Sadly, I believe this Bill to be
unsafe. As a curate and parish priest, I spent time with the dying, the sick
and the bereaved. I still do. All of us have personal experience; I have as
well. We know that the sad truth is that not all people are perfect, not all
families are happy, not everyone is kind and compassionate. No amount of
safeguards can perfect the human heart. No amount of regulation can make a
relative kinder or a doctor infallible. No amount of reassurance can make a
vulnerable or disabled person feel equally safe and equally valued if the law
is changed in this way.”
The Archbishop of Canterbury said, “All of us here are united in wanting
compassion and dignity for those coming to the end of their lives, but it does
not serve compassion if, by granting the wishes of one closest to me, I
expose others to danger, and it does not serve dignity if, in granting the
wishes of one closest to me, I devalue the status and safety of others. I hope
your Lordships will reflect and, while recognising the good intentions we all
share, resist the change the Bill seeks to make.”
Lord Indarjit Singh
of Wimbledon Opposes
The Assisted Dying Bill in the House of Lords
Cross Bench Life Peer Lord Indarjit Singh of Wimbledon opposed the
Assisted Dying Bill in the House of Lords on 22 October 2021. He said, “True
compassion not only makes life meaningful for both giver and recipient but,
importantly, also nudges society as a whole in a more positive ethical direction.
It is for these reasons that I oppose the Bill.”
Lord Indarjit Singh of Wimbledon, said, “My Lords, today we live in an
increasingly selfish and uncaring society, in which euphemisms such as
“assisted dying” for “assisted suicide” and, unbelievably, “compassion” have
all been used to justify a Bill that I believe demeans society and pressurises
the vulnerable to take their own lives.”
Lord Indarjit Singh said, “The moral slide ahead is clearly visible. In
the Netherlands, assisted death is routinely extended to include the disabled,
those with chronic, non-terminal conditions and those with mental health
problems such as dementia and depression. The suffering of the vulnerable is
made worse by those close, making it obvious that their care is an unwanted
chore, particularly by some who stand to inherit property or assets. That was
highlighted by the noble Lord, Lord Tebbit, who has shown years of loving care
and compassion to his injured and disabled wife. During the debate on the 2013
Bill of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer, the noble Lord, Lord Tebbit,
said that legislating for assisted suicide “creates too much financial
incentive for the taking of life.”[Official Report, 18/7/14; col. 789.]
Such pressures are difficult to pick up by doctors and judges.
Lord Indarjit Singh mentioned, “We are all aware of the problem of
climate change, but much less aware of a deteriorating moral climate—a growing
selfishness seen in daily news of violence against the weak and vulnerable.”
Lord Indarjit Singh of Wimbledon said, “Assisting in the killing of our
fellow human beings has been condemned by leaders of all our major faiths,
including, as we have heard, the most reverend Primate, the Archbishop of
Canterbury. Statistics remind us that it is not physical pain but a feeling of
being unwanted and a burden on others that leads to mental suffering and a wish
to die. We have heard conflicting stories about the different views of
religions. In the story of the good Samaritan, Jesus Christ reminds us of our
common responsibility to help in alleviating the suffering of our fellow
beings. In Sikhism, the young Guru Nanak spent money given by his father for
investment on food for the starving. Loving care for others, even to the enemy
in battle, is central to Sikh teaching.
Lord Indarjit Singh of Wimbledon concluded, “Finally, I mention the
misuse of the word compassion —unbelievably, used to advance the Bill. The
literal meaning of “compassion” is to show in loving care that we understand
and share in another’s suffering. True compassion not only makes life
meaningful for both giver and recipient but, importantly, also nudges society
as a whole in a more positive ethical direction. It is for these reasons that I
oppose the Bill.”
Assisted Dying Bill In the House of Lords
Labour Peer Lord Adonis opposed the Assisted Dying Bill. He said, “My
Lords, I am opposed to this Bill, although I accept that it is a desperately
difficult issue; like other noble Lords, I have heart-rending experiences of
the long, drawn-out deaths of friends and relatives.”
Labour Peer Lord Adonis said, “The problem with the Bill is that it is
simply not possibly to guard adequately against the abuse of the very elderly
and the very ill by greedy and manipulative relations and friends. The idea
that brief consultations with two doctors are adequate is simply not credible.
I accept that it does extend autonomy—autonomy which I might personally
value—to those of sound mind who are unpressurised about ending their life. Of
course I accept that, which is why this is such a desperately difficult issue.
But the supreme duty of the state and the community is to protect the
vulnerable and their human rights. There is no greater human right than the
right to life. Therefore, very reluctantly, I come to the conclusion that this
Bill—or indeed any Bill seeking to achieve this objective—is not one to which
Parliament should give assent.”
No comments:
Post a Comment