Government's Concession over "Back Door" Euthanasia Bill Stirs up Fury

Last night, the controversial drafted Mental Capacity Bill passed through its Third Reading in the House of Commons. Pro-lifers and Christians, who have warned the bill would leave a loophole for the practice of Euthanasia in the UK, are outraged by the Government's concession over the bill.

The drafted bill will allow people to create "living wills" saying they want medical treatment withheld if they become severely incapacitated. Some Christian groups and churches say it could mean doctors withholding food and fluids even if they think the decision to be entirely inappropriate.

An amendment tabled by Conservative Iain Duncan Smith which would have prevented doctors from taking any action that would hasten the end to a person's life was defeated by 297 votes to 203, a majority of 94.

In advance of the vote, the Archbishop of Cardiff Peter Smith, Chairman of the Department for Christian Responsibility and Citizenship of the Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, has in fact issued a statement, saying that "there remains a real danger of the Bill permitting proxy decision makers to act with a purpose of deliberately bringing about a person's death by refusing treatment in circumstances when otherwise the life of that person could and should be properly sustained."

In response to the protest from Christians, Lord Falconer has written a letter to the Archbishop of Cardiff, Peter Smith, offering reassurances that the bill would not legalise euthanasia. He also argued that the bill is aimed at relieving suffering or ending treatment when a patient is in an irreversible coma.

It was reported by the Guardian newspaper that Prime Minister Tony Blair also personally intervened yesterday. Blair held telephone conversations with the Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor promising that the bill will not allow euthanasia by the back door.

However, Archbishop Smith was not fully satisfied with the response, "In principle, I think they have conceded the point... I want to see the details of any changes."

Paul Tully, General Secretary of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC) echoed, "The Lord Chancellor's letter to Archbishop Smith gives no indication of the text of any proposed amendments. It's all smoke and mirrors. The Lord Chancellor's ambiguous proposal crucially refers to excluding decisions only 'where the motive is to kill' rather than intention to kill. What matters in the eyes of the law is the intention to kill - motive is simply what moved the person to kill, which might be a misguided notion of compassion."

Some MPs complained that they had not seen the letter as they prepared to vote. The letter was only disclosed just 30 minutes before they made their decision.

Tully further condemned the Government and said they had "refused to reverse the euthanasia nature" of the Bill and had used the whipping system to force it through "a sceptical House of Commons".

Tully concluded, "In the light of today's farcical proceedings in the Commons, we urge the House of Lords to give the Bill and any new amendments by the Government strict scrutiny, with a view to rejecting the Bill unless the euthanasia nature of the Bill is reversed."