THE Archbishop of Wales, the Most Revd Andrew John, and the Bench of Bishops have joined other religious leaders in Wales to oppose a forthcoming Private Member’s Bill to legalise assisted dying.
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, from the Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, is to be debated next Friday. MPs will likely be given a free vote. The Bill, which was published last week, seeks to permit life-ending medical help for terminally ailing adults who haven’t any greater than six months to live, in England and Wales (News, 18 October, 25 October; Leader comment and Press, 11 October).
In a joint statement, published on Tuesday, 16 religious leaders write: “As people of religion, we share a standard heritage of caring for the vulnerable, the sick and dying. This is why we feel we must speak together against the proposed laws. Compassion is at the center of all of the Great World Religions. Life is sacred.”
They urge “all people of goodwill” to write down to their MP in opposition, “since the proposals for physician-assisted suicide will not be just contrary to the dignity and sanctity of life, they pose grave dangers to vulnerable people”.
The statement can also be signed by the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Cardiff-Menevia, the Rt Revd Mark O’Toole, and representatives of Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, and Sikh communities.
It warns: “If the Bill becomes law . . . essentially the most vulnerable can not presume on the balance of healthcare being of their favour. The criteria for assisted suicide [has] develop into widened to incorporate groups of people that need society’s help slightly than assistance in ending their lives.”
The debate marked “a really serious moment for our country” and raised “serious questions on what form of society we would like to be. Especially of concern is whether or not we’ll proceed to advertise a correct care of the dying, and of those that are vulnerable through disability or age.”
The same statement was issued last Friday by the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales. “We consider that real compassion is under threat due to attempts in Parliament to legalise assisted suicide,” it said.
“We appeal to those that share our Catholic belief in human dignity and sanctity of life, including fellow Christians, other religious people, and folks of reason and good will, to affix with us in defending the weakest and most vulnerable who’re in danger through this proposed laws.”
The statement, like others in opposition, calls, first, for “more adequate funding and resources for hospices and palliative-care teams. . . They [the terminally ill] need compassionate care, not assistance to finish their lives.”
Furthermore, it argues, the Bill would “fundamentally damage the connection between medical practitioners and their patients. It will potentially result in pressure on medical staff to recommend or facilitate such procedures.”
In a press release also published on Tuesday, the Territorial Leader of the Salvation Army, Commissioner Paul Main, said that the Bill, as published, contained “fundamental flaws”.
“Everyone must have the possibility of a dignified death. We are gravely concerned that the Bill is weighted in favour of those with higher access to care, health resources, and support networks.”
The Bill didn’t, he said, “properly protect vulnerable people from coercion, and there are not any proper safeguards to envision one’s capability to make informed decisions about their final days”.
An accompanying statement says that coercion or pressure will not be defined within the Bill, which deals only with “individual” coercion or pressure. Social coercion, for reasons akin to limited resources, must be considered, the statement says. Establishing mental capability is a “costly and time-consuming process for statutory bodies that are already under pressure”, and “It is a mockery of human dignity to discuss giving people selections in dying while they’re denied selections in living.”
There can also be the “slippery slope” of extending the scope of assisted dying further once the Bill is legalised, the statement argues.
On Wednesday, the 2 longest-serving MPs, Diane Abbott (Labour) and Sir Edward Leigh (Conservative), in a joint statement, urged the Commons to reject Bill.
Writing in The Guardian, they agreed with others that the Bill was being rushed through, and that the main target should as an alternative be on improving health- and palliative-care services. The gap of 18 days between the Bill’s publication and the controversy was too short, they wrote.
“There is greater than a suspicion that the pressure groups behind this proposed change have sought to benefit from an inexperienced latest parliament.”
The General Synod has declared the Church of England’s opposition to assisted dying (News, 15 July 2022), and lots of bishops have publicly expressed this view because the Bill was first proposed (News, 15 November).
Writing on the community website Network Norwich this week, the Bishop of Norwich, the Rt Revd Graham Usher, said that the Bill “asks us deep questions on death. It must be a serious and sensitive debate. It is a hugely emotive topic and never all of us will agree on this matter.”
He expresses 4 primary concerns: the experience of nations which have legalised assisted dying, the affect on essentially the most vulnerable, “the dearth of time the Bill has had for scrutiny, and what a change within the law would say concerning the value of human life”.
Bishop Usher encourages everyone to speak, read, and pray about these issues.
The Church Times and Modern Church will likely be hosting a webinar on assisted dying on Thursday 28 November at 6 p.m. Tickets are £10, or £5 for subscribers.
