That this House notes with profound concern the announcement by health ministers that they intend to make the abortifacient 'morning after' pill available over the counter, thus undermining still further respect for both human life and for the institution of marriage; observes with regret that the present Government also opposes attempts to amend the law to prevent euthanasia; deeply regrets also its lowering to 16 years of the age at which buggery is permitted for both boys and girls, and that it remains committed to removing the ban on the promotion of homosexuality in schools; observes with sadness its continuing widespread promotion of contraceptives to teenagers; further regrets the Government's active support for the creation and use of human clones for scientific research; denounces this systematic assault upon the dignity of human life, the institution of marriage, and the traditional moral ethos of our nation; and calls upon the Jewish, Christian, Muslim and other faith communities of the United Kingdom to speak now before all in which they believe is destroyed.

That this House notes with profound concern the announcement by health ministers that they intend to make the abortifacient 'morning after' pill available over the counter, thus undermining still further respect for both human life and for the institution of marriage; observes with regret that the present Government also opposes...

That this House notes that the publication by the British Medical Association Ethics Committee in April of the document Advance Statements About Medical Treatment, which accepts living wills as legally binding, has been met with feelings of anxiety and dismay in many sections of the medical profession; further notes that at the recent BMA Annual Conference a motion was passed declaring the document to have been inadequately discussed at all levels within the profession; expresses disappointment that the opportunity was not given to that conference to debate the many other motions of concern regarding euthanasia and the document including a composite motion tabled by the Agenda Committee for the Conference, which listed a number of anxieties including warnings that legislation might 'limit doctors' freedom to act in the best interests of patients' and that 'general refusal of all treatment is dangerous, open to abuse and incompatible with the ethical practice of medicine'; and trusts that the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Health will ensure that the Lord Chancellor's Committee considering the Government's response to the flawed Law Commission Report on Mental Incapacity is made aware not only of the motion passed by the BMA Conference, but also of the other motions delegates were not enabled to debate.

That this House notes that the publication by the British Medical Association Ethics Committee in April of the document Advance Statements About Medical Treatment, which accepts living wills as legally binding, has been met with feelings of anxiety and dismay in many sections of the medical profession; further notes that...

That this House notes that in evidence to the House of Lords Select Committee on Medical Ethics the British Medical Association opposed legally binding living wills/advance directives; notes that because of potential misunderstandings, unreported changes of mind and pressures from doctors, relatives and legatees this view is shared by doctors from the hospice movement and other medical disciplines caring for the aged; notes the BMA Ethics Committee nevertheless has published a document accepting living wills as legally binding, warning that doctors declining to abide by them risk charges of assault although such directives may only be signed pre-printed cards, smart cards, or notes recorded in patients' files; notes that although that document has not been discussed by its Annual Conference, a BMA adviser on medical ethics writes in the British Medical Journal of 24th June that even 'conversational oral statements', such as conversing before television, are open to debate and that medical bodies should consider the conditions under which these should be binding; notes the disingenuity of claims by the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State that the Government is opposed to legalising euthanasia whilst asserting that living wills are legally binding in common law; invites the honourable Member for Bolton West to provide the House and the Lord Chancellor's Committee considering the Government's response to the flawed Law Commission Report on Mental Incapacity, with details of the authority for that assertion by listing each court decision in which an advance directive was held to be legally binding.

That this House notes that in evidence to the House of Lords Select Committee on Medical Ethics the British Medical Association opposed legally binding living wills/advance directives; notes that because of potential misunderstandings, unreported changes of mind and pressures from doctors, relatives and legatees this view is shared by doctors...