House of Lords seeks to protect pregnant women from assisted suicide

Peers have warned that Kim Leadbeater’s assisted suicide Bill endangers pregnant women and their unborn children.

During the House of Lords’ fourth day of scrutinising amendments to Kim Leadbeater’s assisted suicide Bill, Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson highlighted the vulnerability of pregnant women, prisoners and the homeless.

The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) would allow patients deemed to be terminally ill and with less than six months to receive help to kill themselves, without testing if they are carrying an unborn baby.

Mental health

Baroness Grey-Thompson emphasised that suicide is the “leading cause of maternal death during pregnancy in industrialised countries, and the leading cause of maternal mortality in the first twelve months after childbirth”.

The Paralympian, who tabled an amendment to require applicants for assisted suicide to take a pregnancy test, also raised concern about the Bill’s impact on “pregnant women who have recently given birth, particularly given the risk of post-natal depression and other pregnancy and maternity-related mental health conditions”.

Speaking in agreement, Baroness O’Loan noted that “maternal deaths due to mental health problems are increasing”, while up to 30 per cent of domestic abuse cases begin during pregnancy.

‘Saving money’

Addressing concerns surrounding homelessness, Baroness O’Loan emphasised: “Solutions to things like poverty and homelessness should not involve offering people assisted death, rather a home, possibly in sheltered accommodation, in which they may be able to flourish.”

Considering the issue of prison overcrowding, Lord Deben added: “The moments in this Bill that most concern me are when you get nearest to saving money.”

He noted that “particularly when you are talking about people for whom many have no sympathy at all”, “do we really believe that there won’t be many prisoners for whom the whole issue will be presented as ‘You’ll be better off and we’ll be better off if you make this decision?'”

‘Poorly drafted’

The Peers debated 23 amendments today, still leaving over a thousand to be considered across the ten days scheduled for the new year.

Despite activists’ accusations that the unprecedented number of amendments is a delaying tactic, the Bill’s critics insist that debating amendments is necessary due to the lack of “due diligence and proper pre-legislative scrutiny”.

According to Right to Life UK’s analysis of last week’s session, the 47 amendments that were debated received less than six minutes of scrutiny each.

Spokeswoman Catherine Robinson stated: “It is simply not the case that Peers are wasting time, deliberately or not. If anything, these amendments are being rushed. The large number of amendments indicates just how poorly drafted the Bill was when it left the Commons.”