The House of Lords debate on assisted suicide has sparked outrage on social media, as poverty was offered up as a valid reason for someone to get help to kill themselves.
At the most recent day of Committee on Friday, Lord Falconer, the Bill’s sponsor in the Lords, left one of his colleagues “incredulous” by accepting that financial motivations could play a valid role in someone’s decision to seek medical support to commit suicide.
The Peers were debating an amendment to the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, opposed by Lord Falconer, to “ensure the person is not pursuing the request because they are in financial difficulty”.
‘Horrified’
Lord Harper responded: “If you are in a financial position where you feel you are unable to live properly because you have no money, and as a result of that you decide you want to end your life, that is not a freely reached decision; that is being done because of your circumstances.
“Is he really saying that he is okay with poor people ending their lives, with the assistance of others, because they are poor? That is what it sounds like.”
“Is he really saying that he’s ok with poor people ending their lives with the assistance of others because they are poor?
Because that’s what it sounds like.” pic.twitter.com/9xIrpfTXfx— The Christian Institute (@christianorguk) January 16, 2026
He added: “I think people would be horrified that he is suggesting that someone, because of their financial circumstances, should be more likely to end their life than someone else.”
Lord Falconer reiterated: “It is their choice.”
Backlash
Podcaster Fraser Myers commented on X: “So it’s taken about 15 years for ‘have you tried killing the poor?’ to go from a dark Mitchell and Webb comedy sketch to government policy”.
Kevin Yuill, CEO of Humanists Against Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia, posted satirically: “‘If they would rather die,’ said Falconer, ‘they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population.’ From A Post Christmas Carol.”
Baroness Foster, on X, called Lord Falconer “terrifying to listen to”, adding: “The safeguards have been watered down and it’s a shambles”.
Journalist Dan Hitchens posed a question to Kim Leadbeater on social media, asking: “Now it’s confirmed there will be assisted deaths due to poverty, could you comment on how frequent this is likely to be? Do you think in the hundreds or the thousands?”
Unable to contribute
Government whips confirmed last week that they would look to extend Friday debates from 3pm to 6pm in subsequent weeks. The extension is the Government’s response to Lord Falconer’s ‘extra time motion’ which passed earlier this month.
Northern Irish Peer Lord Empey objected to the change during Friday’s debate, noting that “If we are leaving here at or around 6 pm, it is impossible for us to get home”. He explained that this “discriminates against anybody who has to travel a significant distance” and excludes them from part of the debate.
Disabled Peer Lord Shinkwin likewise stated that he is “deeply disappointed” in the decision, which means “as a severely disabled Member who has to leave the House by 3 pm on a Friday in order to catch my flight home, I should not be enabled to contribute on an equal and non-discriminatory basis to scrutiny of a Bill that would have a devastating impact on disabled people if it became law.”
🚨DISABLED PEER SLAMS KEIR STARMER – WATCH TO THE END!
Lord Shinkwin tells Peers that the Prime Minister didn’t even bother to reply to a letter he sent him & criticises the decision to extend Friday sittings to try to force through “the Prime Minister’s” assisted suicide Bill. pic.twitter.com/kjcu0Dj2bA— Right To Life UK (@RightToLifeUK) January 16, 2026
The Government confirmed that it will not give up time on other days, which are normally used for Government legislation or other important House matters.
Language matters
An amendment from Lord Frost to leave out “assistance to end their own life” and insert “medical help to commit suicide by provision of lethal drugs” into the text of the Bill was also debated.
Lord Gove highlighted a study that showed that 43 per cent of the public misunderstood the term ‘assisted dying’, adding “if so many of the public have the wrong view of this legislation, how can it possibly not be of assistance for us to use plain language”.
💥WORDS MATTER! Lord @michaelgove tells Peers that the term “assisted dying” creates confusion. Polling shows the public don’t understand it. We should use “plain language” instead – this is an assisted ‘suicide’ Bill! pic.twitter.com/0yHuoy2BGB
— Right To Life UK (@RightToLifeUK) January 16, 2026
Baroness Claire Fox said this amendment would make the Bill more “transparent”, adding “there is a danger that the Bill’s terminology creates ambiguity rather than clarity”.
Lord Harper also spoke in support of it, saying: “If people find us being clear and speaking plainly about what we are doing either uncomfortable or distressing, that should make us pause and ask ourselves whether what we are doing is the right thing.
“We should not change the language to make the thing that we are doing more palatable. We should speak plainly about it, then judge accordingly.”
IF PEOPLE DON’T LIKE THE LANGUAGE, PERHAPS WE’RE DOING THE WRONG THING!
🎯As so often, @Mark_J_Harper hits the nail on the head: the assisted suicide Bill is about legalising help to kill yourself. “We shouldn’t change the language to make the thing we’re doing more palatable!” pic.twitter.com/OWC3yKLr4r— Right To Life UK (@RightToLifeUK) January 16, 2026
Lords debate judge role in assisted suicide process
House of Lords seeks to protect pregnant women from assisted suicide