The Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, has raised significant concerns regarding the proposed assisted dying bill, calling the idea “dangerous” and suggesting that it could create a “slippery slope” where vulnerable individuals might feel pressured to end their lives. Speaking with the BBC, the head of the Church of England expressed his apprehension ahead of the first reading in Parliament of the bill that aims to grant terminally ill patients in England and Wales the right to choose medically assisted death.
The bill was introduced on Wednesday by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who firmly disagrees with the Archbishop’s “slippery slope” argument. Leadbeater emphasized that the legislation is intended solely for terminally ill patients who are suffering at the end of their lives, and she believes it is essential to focus on the specifics of the bill to ensure proper safeguards.
Recent polling data indicates that public support for assisted dying laws in the UK remains robust, with surveys showing that between 60% and 75% of the population is in favor of such legislation. Advocates for assisted dying point to the experiences of several countries where similar laws are in place, arguing that the UK could benefit from examining successful systems abroad.
However, Archbishop Welby voiced his concerns regarding the potential for the law to extend beyond its intended scope. He argued that legalizing assisted dying could pressure individuals who are not terminally ill to request assistance in ending their lives. “I’ve sat with people at their bedside for over 30 years as a priest,” Welby stated. “They’ve expressed their wishes for their loved ones to be relieved of suffering, but I worry that this might lead to individuals feeling guilty or pressured into making such requests.”
Reflecting on personal experiences, Archbishop Welby shared that he grappled with similar thoughts regarding his father’s terminal illness and recounted the passing of his mother, Jane, who at 93 expressed feelings of being a “burden.” He highlighted that it is essential for society to ensure that all individuals, regardless of their circumstances, feel valued and respected.
The Archbishop criticized a perceived decline in the understanding of the equal worth of all individuals in society. He warned that the vulnerable—such as the disabled, ill, and elderly—are often overlooked, potentially affecting their decisions regarding assisted dying.
In contrast, MP Kim Leadbeater, who is advocating for the bill, insists that it is narrowly focused on terminally ill individuals. “There must be a change in the law,” she stated during an interview on BBC Newsnight. “The current status quo is inadequate, and I have encountered numerous families who have endured traumatic end-of-life experiences. This is why I introduced this legislation.”
Public sentiment appears to reflect a desire for legislative action regarding assisted dying. One woman shared her heartbreaking story about her husband, who suffered from Huntington’s disease and attempted to take his own life multiple times, wishing to avoid the indignity of the disease’s progression. Jane Vervoorts detailed how her husband, Dick, ultimately passed away surrounded by police and paramedics, leading to an investigation that left her feeling like a criminal despite their struggles.
Advocacy groups such as Dignity in Dying are framing the bill as a “historic opportunity.” Sarah Wootton, the group’s chief executive, emphasized that the current ban on assisted dying forces terminally ill individuals to suffer unnecessarily, often leading them to spend their life savings traveling to countries like Switzerland for assisted dying, or resorting to desperate measures at home, leaving families traumatized.
Conversely, Dr. Gordon Macdonald, chief executive of the organization Care Not Killing, condemned the latest push for legalizing assisted dying as “dangerous” and “ideological.” He urged politicians and the government to prioritize improving the nation’s palliative care system instead. “Those who promote the idea that legalizing assisted suicide is progressive are misguided,” he stated.
The discussion surrounding assisted dying has reignited debates regarding the role of religious figures in Parliament. Secular advocacy groups have long argued for a separation of religion from the legislative process, calling for the removal of bishops’ rights to vote in the House of Lords on such matters. Notably, during the Church of England’s General Synod in 2022, only 7% of the assembly expressed support for changing the law, contrasting sharply with public polling favoring assisted dying.
In light of these divisions, Archbishop Welby acknowledged that many may view the Church as out of touch with public sentiment. “While there will be those who believe we are disconnected from societal views and choose to distance themselves from the Church, we cannot base our decisions on opinion polls,” he asserted.
Adding to the discourse, Cardinal Vincent Nichols, the head of the Catholic Church in England and Wales, also encouraged Catholics to reach out to their MPs to voice opposition to assisted dying. The Church of England, as the established Church, maintains significant influence, with 26 bishops and archbishops automatically receiving seats in the House of Lords, allowing them to participate in critical legislative discussions.
As the bill moves forward, the debate over assisted dying in the UK continues to evolve, revealing the complex interplay between ethical considerations, personal stories, and legislative action. As the conversation unfolds, it remains clear that the subject will impact countless lives and provoke passionate responses from advocates on all sides of the issue.
