Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Baroness Stroud Excerpts

2nd reading
Friday 19th September 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Stroud (Con)]

My Lords, it is a privilege to speak today and to contribute to a debate that has been characterised by such thoughtful, considered and respectful speeches from all points of view. I will speak on the dangers of the Bill and add my voice to those who believe that it should not proceed.

This nation was founded on the principle that every human being is not just of value but of infinite value. It is what led this nation to be a world leader in our care for the poor, refugees, children, the elderly and those with disabilities.

It is all too easy to make laws that are well motivated, but that have unintended consequences. All of us are moved when we hear stories of people who are experiencing significant suffering and who feel that they cannot go on, but the Bill does not address that issue. There is a danger that the Bill will put the vulnerable, the elderly, the poor, the lonely and people with disabilities particularly at risk.

I know that many in this House are sympathetic to the Bill. We are people who are used to being in control; we are used to being listened to and to being heard. It is why many here do not fear this legislation—in fact, they quite like it. The idea of being in control, right to the end of our days, is appealing, but life is not like that for most people. This ought to be a particular concern to us, as we face a future with increasing pressure on social care and the NHS, as more people live for longer and the cost of care increases.

It is not hard to see how assisted suicide could, over time, be portrayed to the elderly or people with disabilities as a way not to be a burden to loved ones. We need to listen to the voices not just of celebrity endorsers of the Bill but of the vulnerable. There is a reason why over 350 disability groups oppose the Bill.

I am also concerned about people feeling they are a burden on the state. As we have heard this morning, a Canadian report projected savings of nearly 150 million Canadian dollars each year as a result of the country’s medical assistance in dying programme. In a context where there are often not enough hospital beds and a shortage of hospital and care staff, it is not impossible to imagine vulnerable people feeling a duty to choose assisted suicide or being subtly coerced by a misguided or even sinister word from a frustrated family member or medical professional. In fact, a professional colleague recently said to me that, in Canada, the common recommendation has become not go to hospital on your own if you are over 60. That is a pretty drastic state of affairs.

Where good palliative and social care are lacking, demand for assisted suicide will grow and the danger is that it will fill a gap in places where palliative care services are inadequate. Last week, as we have heard, there was an Oral Question on the suicide prevention strategy. I listened to the concerns from all corners of the House, and the determination from the Government Front Benches to ensure that everyone had the appropriate support, so that no one would ever be tempted to choose a suicide pathway. Yet in the same Chamber we are debating a Bill that seeks to legalise this pathway.

Before the summer, the Bill passed the Commons with a small and decreasing majority. Over the summer, we were given a moment to pause, stop and examine ourselves as a nation. Is this the sort of nation we want to be, where protection is removed for the vulnerable, the poorest, the elderly and those with disabilities; where budgets for health provision can be cut because the vulnerable are being encouraged to choose death? I can just hear the Department of Health working through the budgetary reductions with the OBR, based on the percentage increase of those expected to choose assisted dying. I believe that this country can be better than this, that we should be having a different conversation and that the palliative care we provide for those who are terminally ill could be developed so that we become a world leader. Now that would be an ambitious vision that would be worth voting for.