Lord Falconer of Thoroton hardly ever rebelled against their party in this parliament
I apologise to the House for taking so long to get on to the point about six months versus six weeks. I very carefully considered whether one should say that, once you have a diagnosis of six months to live, you should be able to have the discussions but only be able to take the drugs within six weeks. I am strongly against that.
If I may finish, the reason I am against it is that once the diagnosis is given by the doctors, there is a process that will take a considerable time, and that once the court has approved the process and said that somebody should do it, it should be for them to decide when they do it. It would be an unsatisfactory and, I suspect, an unenforceable process to have to go back and get a doctor to...
I thought that I had answered the question but I will answer it again. A doctor has concluded that he or she reasonably believes that you have six months or less to live; another doctor has confirmed the diagnosis; and the courts have concluded that it is an appropriate case for an assisted death. Thereafter, my view—I should be clear about this—is that you should be entitled to...
Became a Lord in 1997
Please note that numbers do not measure quality. Also, representatives may do other things not currently covered by this site.
More about this
Please feel free to use the data on this page, but if you do you must cite TheyWorkForYou.com in the body of your articles as the source of any analysis or data you get off this site.
This data was produced by TheyWorkForYou from a variety of sources. Voting information from Public Whip.