Esther Rantzen urges Lords not to block bill

Dame Esther Rantzen has appealed to the House of Lords not to block a bill giving terminally ill adults in England and Wales the right to an assisted death, after it was backed by MPs on Friday.

The Terminally Ill Adults Bill was passed by 314 votes to 291 in the House of Commons – but will need to go through the Lords before becoming law.

Broadcaster Dame Esther, who joined the Swiss assisted dying clinic Dignitas after being diagnosed with terminal lung cancer in 2023, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “Their job is to scrutinise, to ask questions, but not to oppose.”

Critics of the bill, including Conservative peer Lord Shinkwin, say it could see disabled and vulnerable people being coerced into ending their lives.

This bill puts a price “on my head” and “the heads of so many disabled people” and older people, the prominent disability rights campaigner, who will get a vote in the Lords, told Today.

Some peers, including Lord Shinkwin, have indicated they will attempt to amend the legislation to introduce more safeguards.

Dame Esther, a prominent supporter of the bill, said she did not “need to teach the House of Lords how to do their job”.

“People who are adamantly opposed to this bill – and they have the perfect right to oppose it – will try and stop it going through the Lords.”

But she said the duty of peers was to make sure “law is actually created by the elected chamber, which is the House of Commons, who have voted this through”.

Even though MPs have approved the bill, peers in the Lords could stop it from becoming law by voting against it or not approving it quickly enough.

Under the proposals, mentally competent, terminally ill adults in England and Wales with a life expectancy of less than six months would be eligible for an assisted death.

They would need to make two separate declarations, signed and witnessed, about their “clear, settled and informed” wish to die, and satisfy two independent doctors that they are eligible and have not been coerced.

There would be at least a seven-day gap between each assessment.

The application would then go before a multi-disciplinary panel comprising a psychiatrist, a social worker and a lawyer.

If the panel approved the application, there would be a further 14-day “period of reflection” which could be cut to 48 hours if the patient is likely to die within a month.

Lord Shinkwin explained that, only a few months ago, he had been in intensive care and found himself in an “extremely vulnerable” state.

Had a doctor asked him at the time about assisted dying – which he said doctors would be allowed to do under the provision of the bill – he “would have felt under real pressure to do that”.

The Conservative peer said he had concerns that safeguards, such as those in the bill’s current form, could be eroded, as suggested they had been in other jurisdictions where assisted dying legislation had been enacted.

He added that some vulnerable groups – including older and disabled people – might feel they were a burden on “family, friends or society”.

“I have to say, as a disabled person, feeling you are a burden goes with the territory,” Lord Shinkwin said. “And I don’t want people to feel under pressure.”

Pressed about concerns that vulnerable people could be coerced into an assisted death, Dame Esther replied: “We have got this right.”

She said the bill set out a “rigorous” process. An assisted death would only be available to those with six months to live who chose to ask for help with ending their lives, and had that request approved by doctors and a panel of experts.

She added that that “disability will not qualify anyone for assisted dying, nor will mental disorder”.

Dame Esther said she was “deeply relieved” by Friday’s vote – though she noted it was unlikely to become law in her lifetime.

“At least I know that for future generations, if life becomes intolerable, unbearable, and they are terminally ill with six months or less to live, they will be able to ask for a pain-free, swift death.”

Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson, who will get a vote in the Lords, said that she had heard from “disabled people [who] are absolutely terrified” of the bill.

The former Paralympian told BBC Breakfast that it was the “job in the Lords” to go “line by line” to ensure all amendments were fairly debated, adding: “I do think there are a lot more safeguards that could be put in.”

The Commons vote in favour of the bill came after a debate that saw MPs tell their personal stories of seeing friends and relatives die.

It is likely, though not guaranteed, that the Lords will approve the bill later this year.

If that happens, ministers would have a maximum of four years to implement the measures, meaning assisted dying may not become available until 2029.

Conservative MP Danny Kruger, a vocal opponent of the move, said he hoped the Lords would either reject the proposed legislation or “substantially strengthen it”.

But Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who proposed the bill, said she hoped there would be “no funny games” in the Lords, “because the process has been extremely thorough”.

The “close” margin in the Commons, Lord Shinkwin argued, shows that “many MPs would appreciate the opportunity” to look at the legislation again.

“If 12 members of Parliament had voted the other way, we would not be having this conversation right now.”

Any changes made in the House of Lords would also have to be approved by MPs before the bill could become law.

The legislation was approved with a majority of 23 MPs – less than half the margin of 55 in favour when it was first debated in November.

MPs were given a free vote on the bill, meaning they did not have to follow a party policy.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer backed the legislation, while Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch and Health Secretary Wes Streeting voted against it.