Esther Rantzen: A handful of peers have forced terminally ill patients to suffer

Seven members of the House of Lords table more than 100 amendments. One speaks for four and a half hours, using more words than the whole of Moby Dick. They claim to be “scrutinising” the terminally ill adults (end of life) bill. They say they are “protecting vulnerable people”. Do they take us for fools?

The bill they conspired to sabotage aimed to offer terminally ill adults the choice, if their illness had made their life unbearable, to ask for help to die swiftly and pain free. By blocking this bill, the handful of peers forced terminally ill patients to suffer, however much agony their disease created, however long it lasted. Call that “protection”? For those of us who have witnessed our loved ones dying in agony, it looks more like torture.

Why have they done it? Some for personal religious reasons – some orthodox Catholics, for instance, or some Muslims. That is their choice, but they are imposing it on others. Is that really ethical?

Some believe, quite wrongly, that they are protecting disabled people or those with mental health issues from being persuaded to ask for help to die. The new bill does not apply to them. It’s simply untrue.

Kim Leadbeater, who sponsored the bill, made sure it was rigorously scrutinised by a committee and contained all the necessary precautions. Except for those invented by a handful of peers which had no relevance anyway.

Let us hope that this sabotage will inspire such rage in the House of Commons that they will invoke the Parliament Act and send the bill storming back to the Lords. Because none of them will then be empowered to block it – or the will of the people, or the right of terminally ill people to choose a pain-free death – ever again.

Photograph by Dan Kitwood/Getty Images