Disabled peer warns assisted suicide would 'put a price on my head' as bill advances in Lords

The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill moved to its next stage in the House of Lords on Friday as peers debated the safeguards around assisted dying, with the legislation passing its Second Reading, the furthest it has progressed in Parliament to date.

A disabled Conservative peer, Lord Shinkwin, told peers that legalising assisted suicide would “put a price on my head” and warned the measure could be “the stuff of nightmares” because it would give “the State a license to kill the wrong type of people.” “I am the wrong type,” he added, framing the debate around the risks he and others say such laws pose to vulnerable people. The debate underscored how split the Lords are over the policy, even as supporters argue the plan creates strong safeguards for terminally ill adults.

The Lords accepted a motion to establish a select committee to scrutinise the bill more closely, delaying its progress. The move was described by peers and aides as unprecedented, marking a notable shift in how the legislation will be reviewed before it can proceed to further stages. The committee is tasked with examining how the bill would be funded, how it would affect the NHS, and how assisted dying would take place in practice. It will begin on 20 October, with Health Secretary Wes Streeting and Justice Secretary David Lammy among those expected to be called to give evidence.

In the debate, two-thirds of peers spoke out against the bill. Lord Shinkwin argued that there are potential savings that could be achieved elsewhere, but said the bill effectively places a price on his head and risks normalising state-permitted death for some of the most vulnerable. Another speaker, described in broader media coverage as the so-called ‘bionic peer,’ Lord Mackinlay, the first quadruple amputee in the Lords, warned that the NHS could be incentivised to promote assisted deaths as a cost-cutting measure if the legislation passes, stating that embedding death as an option within the health service is dangerous and contrary to medicine’s purpose of preserving life.

The bill’s supporters faced heavy opposition in the chamber, with senior peers pressing for greater safeguards and clearer oversight. Baroness Falkner, chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, urged the Lords to reject the flawed version of the assisted dying bill, though she acknowledged longstanding support for the principle. She warned that, even if the bill were to become law, the resulting precedents could, for a severely disabled person, open the door to being killed under future policies. Her remarks underscored the tension between principled support for end-of-life choice and concerns about rights, protections, and the social impact on disabled people.

The legislative path remains uncertain. Although the bill was nodded through at this stage, meaning no vote was taken, peers approved a motion to establish a select committee that will scrutinise the proposals in depth before the bill can proceed to further stages. The committee will produce a report that peers will consider before the bill can move to Committee of the Whole House. In practice, this could stretch the timetable, with a four-Friday-session window planned before Christmas and additional time likely to be allocated depending on the committee’s findings.

Baroness Luciana Berger, speaking after the motion’s passage, framed the select committee as a victory for those who want proper scrutiny of how new laws could operate, especially regarding NHS funding and the treatment of people at the end of life. Lord Falconer, the bill’s sponsor, had argued previously for a fast yet safeguarded process, but in the wake of the new arrangement he urged peers to back what he described as the “most safeguarded assisted dying measure in the world” and to respect the will of MPs who previously backed legalization.

If the bill clears the select committee stage, it would move to a Committee of the Whole House for four Friday sessions before Christmas, followed by Report and Third Reading. MPs would then have the chance to consider amendments. The final hurdle would be Royal assent. The measure must pass all stages by the end of the current parliamentary session next spring or it would fall, derailing the effort for the foreseeable future.

Sponsored provisions would allow terminally ill adults in England and Wales with fewer than six months to live to apply for an assisted death, subject to the approval of two doctors and an expert panel. There is a four-year implementation timeline after Royal assent, meaning the first assisted death could potentially occur by 2029 if the remaining stages are navigated successfully this year and next.

The ongoing debate in the Lords reflects broader international tensions around end-of-life care, patient autonomy, and safeguards against abuse. Supporters insist the measure would provide a compassionate option for those facing unbearable suffering, while opponents warn of the risk of coercion, misdiagnosis, and the chilling prospect of state involvement in decisions about life and death. As the select committee begins its work, stakeholders on all sides will watch closely how the process unfolds, including how witnesses are heard, how funding is allocated, and whether the eventual framework satisfies both the ethical concerns and the rights of individuals facing terminal illness.