Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Debate between Baroness Berger and Baroness Levitt
Friday 9th January 2026

(2 days, 18 hours ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Levitt Portrait Baroness Levitt (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am not going to take any interventions, I am sorry. I am simply giving the Government’s view. We are very short of time. I apologise to the noble Baroness.

Baroness Berger Portrait Baroness Berger (Lab)
- Hansard - -

Would my noble friend—

Baroness Levitt Portrait Baroness Levitt (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am not taking any interventions.

These amendments create a further risk of incentivising the use of palliative care when it is not in line with the wishes of the individual. If a patient has relevant and available palliative care options, as with all treatment options, it remains their decision whether to pursue them.

Lastly, I turn to Amendment 832 in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Hollins. The Government have workability concerns in relation to the amendment, which states that no person may access an assisted death unless a consultant from palliative medicine has

“confirmed in writing that all appropriate specialist palliative and end-of-life care options … have been discussed and, so far as reasonably practicable, tried or considered”.

This appears contrary to usual clinical practice, whereby the involvement of specialist services depends upon an assessment of need and on the wishes and preferences of the patient. As Amendment 832 excludes people from eligibility unless they have tried or considered particular options for care, this could give rise to legal challenge on the basis that it is not justified under Article 2 or 8 or may amount to unjustified discrimination under Article 14.