Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Debate between Lord Gove and Lord Goddard of Stockport
Lord Gove Portrait Lord Gove (Con)
- Hansard - -

My Lords—

Lord Goddard of Stockport Portrait Lord Goddard of Stockport (LD)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I have moved my seat. I wish to speak briefly as a member of the Select Committee who has not spoken.

--- Later in debate ---
Lord Goddard of Stockport Portrait Lord Goddard of Stockport (LD)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I accept the noble Baroness’s position. Perhaps a High Court judge might resolve the issue, then.

Lord Gove Portrait Lord Gove (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

My Lords, I support Amendment 52, in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Grey-Thompson. I do so as the Government Chief Whip who helped ensure that the Serious Crime Act 2015 was placed on the statute book, and as the Justice Secretary who was responsible for some of its provisions thereafter.

I am hugely grateful to the noble Baroness for raising the vital question of domestic abuse and violence in the context of coercion. I do not believe that this has been suitably explored, canvassed or analysed before. I would be grateful for the reflections of the Bill’s sponsor on how we might protect some of the most vulnerable in our society.

I will respond very briefly to the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Pannick, who pointed out that there may well be inadequate protections for those people who are coerced or persuaded into declining treatment that might prolong their life at the end of their life. There may well be inadequate protection and a case for stronger protection but, as has been pointed out before, there is a world of difference between declining treatment that might preserve your life and having a lethal injection that will end your life. It is a point that the medical profession fully understands and one that should be firmly borne in mind.