The House of Lords faces mounting criticism and public condemnation over its handling of the assisted dying legislation, with campaigners accusing peers of employing delaying tactics to sabotage the bill.
Public Opinion Turns Against Lords
A recent YouGov poll commissioned by Dignity in Dying reveals significant public discontent with the upper chamber's approach. The survey shows that 58% of respondents believe it is unacceptable for the Lords to "talk out" a bill that has already passed through the House of Commons.
Only 17% of those surveyed considered such action acceptable, while just one in four Britons (24%) thought it appropriate for the Lords to make what campaigners describe as "wrecking amendments". The findings highlight growing frustration with the unelected chamber's ability to block legislation supported by elected MPs.
Record-Breaking Amendments Spark Outrage
The controversy centres on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, which has been flooded with a record-breaking 942 amendments from members of the House of Lords. Critics argue this represents a deliberate attempt to overwhelm the legislative process and prevent the bill from progressing.
The Committee Stage began in the Lords on November 14, 2025, with the substantial number of amendments threatening to derail the legislation through procedural delays. Campaign groups have described the tactics as "sabotage" and "parliamentary fun and games" that disregard the suffering of terminally ill people.
Terminally Ill Speak Out
Among those directly affected is Nathaniel Dye, a 39-year-old music teacher from east London living with incurable bowel cancer. Diagnosed with stage 4 cancer that has spread to his liver, lungs and brain, Mr Dye is currently living with approximately 50 tumours and has only months to live.
"I fear my family seeing me die in unbearable pain," he told The Mirror. "Twenty people a day die in unmanaged pain. I fear this law will come too late for me and my family. I'd rather die peacefully for everyone's sake."
The MBE recipient, recognised for his campaigning work, issued a stark warning about the potential consequences for the Lords if they block the legislation. "Given that the bill has been voted through the Commons with a substantial majority... to go against this could signal an existential crisis for the House of Lords as we know it."
Mr Dye is one of more than 100 terminally ill individuals and their families who have signed a letter urging peers to respect their voices. "Decisions about how we die must not be made without hearing from those who live with dying every day," the signatories wrote.
Personal Stories Highlight Human Cost
Jenny Carruthers, a 57-year-old mother of three from Bath, shared her harrowing experience of watching her partner die in agony from liver cancer in 2013. Now facing her own terminal breast cancer diagnosis, she described the Lords' tactics as "vicious".
"My partner was on a ketamine drip and it didn't touch the sides," she recalled. "At that point, even the hospice had given up. There really isn't anything you can do. Nerve pain and bone pain, nothing touches it."
Ms Carruthers expressed her desire for a peaceful death surrounded by family. "Ultimately what I'd like is to be able to have a last night in my own bed, hold their hands, have a glass of champagne and say 'night night' and to be peaceful. What I'm headed to isn't that."
She urged peers to "set aside their personal feelings and understand that everybody has their own view, but until you actually are terminally ill, until you're actually in pain, you cannot appreciate the fear that the possibilities bring."
Controversial Amendments Under Scrutiny
Among the nearly 1,000 amendments proposed, several have drawn particular criticism from campaigners:
- Lord Frost's amendment requiring "unbearable suffering which cannot be relieved by treatment"
- Baronesses O'Loan and Grey-Thompson's amendments mandating negative pregnancy tests
- Baroness Coffey's amendment preventing those who have travelled abroad in the last twelve months from accessing assisted dying
Dignity in Dying argues that the latter amendment would effectively prevent terminally ill people from fulfilling bucket list travel wishes in their final months.
Campaigners Warn of Democratic Consequences
Sarah Wootton, Chief Executive of Dignity in Dying, issued a strong statement condemning the Lords' approach. "Peers have a responsibility to ensure this debate focuses on the people whose lives and deaths are shaped by the current law," she said.
"Terminally ill people and their families have been crystal clear: they want their voices respected, not pushed aside by attempts to bury this Bill under procedural games."
She emphasised that the bill has twice won backing from the elected Commons and enjoys overwhelming public support. Ms Wootton called on peers to "honour that, keep dying people at the centre of this debate, and allow the Bill the fair and focused scrutiny it deserves."
The organisation warns that with almost a thousand amendments tabled, the risk of deliberate time-wasting is clear - creating what they describe as a "profoundly unfair" situation for dying people seeking legislative change.
