They are taking a moral stand.
Faith leaders, including the Bishop of London and the Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster, have jointly called on Members of Parliament to reject a proposed bill aimed at legalizing assisted suicide. The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, introduced by Kim Leadbeater, has reignited a national debate ahead of a parliamentary discussion. Leadbeater argues that her bill incorporates the “strictest safeguards in the world,” requiring approval from two doctors and a judge for any assisted suicide request.
Despite these assurances, critics remain skeptical about the effectiveness of the safeguards. In an open letter, the faith leaders expressed concerns that the so-called “right to die” could quickly evolve into a perceived “duty to die” for vulnerable individuals. They instead advocate for increased investment in palliative care, highlighting its current lack of funding. The letter emphasizes the pastoral responsibility of faith leaders to provide care and support for the sick and dying, stating that this duty informs their opposition to the bill.
The letter, published in The Observer, was signed by 29 faith leaders, including notable figures such as Dame Sarah Mullally, Cardinal Vincent Nichols, Archbishop Angaelos, Gavin Calver of the Evangelical Alliance, Ross Hendry of CARE, and Chief Rabbi Sir Ephraim Mirvis. They warn that the bill could pave the way for life-threatening coercion and abuse, particularly affecting the most vulnerable populations. Their concerns echo those of many in society, regardless of faith.
In addition, a separate open letter opposing the bill was signed by 73 experts in fields such as healthcare, end-of-life care, and law. These academics caution that legalizing assisted suicide could lead to coercion, particularly for terminally ill individuals who might feel like a burden to their families. They cite concerning statistics from U.S. states like Oregon and Washington, where a significant percentage of those seeking assisted suicide reported feeling burdensome to loved ones.
The experts also criticized the bill’s reliance on the private member’s bill process, deeming it insufficient for addressing the complex ethical and legal challenges involved. They argue that it would be overly burdensome for judges to thoroughly evaluate the mental capacity and decision-making ability of individuals seeking assisted suicide. Additionally, they highlight the strain such a law could place on the already overburdened NHS and other care providers, warning that this is not the time for such a significant shift in healthcare practices.