Lords clash over assisted-dying bill as Theresa May faces criticism over 'licence to kill' remark

LONDON — The House of Lords resumed consideration Friday of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill as former prime minister Theresa May faced renewed criticism for describing the measure as a 'licence to kill'.

During last week's opening debate, May referred to the legislation as an 'assisted suicide Bill' and said it 'effectively says suicide is OK'. Labour peer Baroness Thornton said she was saddened by the remarks and noted that constituents had written to her saying they were very distressed by the language, adding that 'we are not suicidal, we want to live, but we are dying, and we do not have the choice or ability to change that. Assisted dying is not suicide.'

Pro-assisted dying campaigners demonstrated outside Parliament as the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill returned to the Lords, with Families Against Involuntary Medical Euthanasia (F.A.I.M.E) among the groups holding signs. Supporters say the bill would allow terminally ill adults in England and Wales, with fewer than six months to live, to apply for an assisted death, subject to approval by two doctors and a panel comprising a social worker, a senior legal figure and a psychiatrist. Some peers worry opponents will try to block it or 'talk it out' so it runs out of time before the current parliamentary session ends next spring. Friday afternoon was expected to include a motion to agree the Second Reading at the end of the debate, a step that is not usually put to a vote in the Lords but can be. Assisted dying would become law in England and Wales only if both the House of Commons and the House of Lords approve the final wording; if enacted, the government would have four years to stand up an assisted-dying service, meaning the first death could occur in 2029 or 2030. Baroness Thornton and other supporters have urged careful scrutiny to improve the bill rather than block it, while critics warn that procedural moves could delay adoption. The debate underscores ongoing divisions among peers and the government about balancing safeguarding with patient choice as lawmakers prepare for further days of debate before the session ends.