Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate

Lord Carter of Haslemere

Main Page: Lord Carter of Haslemere (Crossbench - Life peer)

Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Lord Carter of Haslemere Excerpts
Friday 23rd January 2026

(1 day, 13 hours ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Lord Carter of Haslemere Portrait Lord Carter of Haslemere (CB)
- Hansard - -

I am very grateful to the noble and learned Lord for his explanation of informed consent. There is a little doubt as to whether giving people lots of information, leading to an informed wish, actually encapsulates them fully understanding it. I was wondering: is the answer to this not to put in a definition of informed consent? Would that not be sensible? Then it is there in black and white. I have it here—AI is very helpful sometimes, is it not? “Informed consent is a process where a person voluntarily agrees to medical treatment, research, or a procedure after receiving and understanding all relevant information, including risks, benefits, alternatives and consequences, and they have a capacity to decide and are free from pressure”. There is a beautiful little definition that you could put straight into the definition section, and everyone would be happy.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton Portrait Lord Falconer of Thoroton (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thought carefully about that. The language concerns whether it is the person’s clear, settled and informed wish. Interestingly, the law—the Supreme Court—over a period of years constantly changes what in individual cases informed consent, or informed wish, as it is in the Bill, might be. The essence of the word “informed” is that you have enough material to make the decision. I hear what the noble Lord, Lord Carter, says, and I see what AI says about it, but I think it is better just to say, “informed wish”.