Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Young of Norwood Green (Labour) in the House of Lords on Friday, 20 March 2026. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HL) on Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill.


Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

My Lords, I only want to challenge the point that was made that the Bill suggests that six months is inevitable. It does not do that at all. In fact, all Clause 7 says is that if you go to the doctor, there will be a record of a preliminary discussion. It does not say anything else. Clause 8 refers to the initial request for assistance and first declaration. Where does the idea come from that the Bill somehow inevitably leads to a six-month progression? There is no such thing in it, other than the fact that the doctor is required by law to produce a written record of the preliminary discussion. In that preliminary discussion, he or she could raise a whole range of things, as we have heard from noble Baroness, Lady Cass, and a number of others.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
854 c1230 
Session
2024-26
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disability Advertising Devolution Autism Advocacy Doctors Hearing impairment Eligibility Ethnic groups Euthanasia Learning disability Mental illness Wales Scotland Young people Interpreters Speech and language disorders Henry VIII clauses Terminal illnesses
Legislation
Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill 2024-26
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on hansard.parliament.uk