[Euthanasia in UK #2] Debate on the Euthanasia Bill stalled in the UK House of Lords: Minority “delay tactics” could lead to over 20 years of deliberation

[Euthanasia in UK: Deliberation on euthanasia bill stalled in UK House of Lords]

The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill , currently being considered in the House of Lords, is currently in serious difficulty .

Behind this lies what could essentially be called "delay tactics," such as the submission of a large number of amendments by the opposition minority of House of Lords (Peers), and it has been pointed out that at this rate, the deliberation could take more than 20 years .

This bill seeks to allow "competent adults" with "up to six months to live" to make final decisions about their lives with the assistance of a doctor.

- In opinion polls, about 80% of people are in favor.

- Pro-euthanasia groups such as Dignity in Dying have campaigned for many years

- Passed the House of Representatives in the summer of 2025 without significant opposition

Looking back at the process so far, things have gone extremely smoothly.

However, because the House of Lords is an unelected House of Lords, the influence of minorities who hold traditional values and religious beliefs is strong .

Although it is called "careful deliberation" in name, it is actually perceived as a "prolongation."

According to the BBC (November 14, 2025), a record number of amendments, over 900 to 1,000, were submitted to the House of Lords. The contents were as follows:

"Those who have previously left the UK are not eligible"

・"Additional requirements to reconfirm family composition"

There are many points of contention that are far from the core of the bill, such as the above, which are fragmenting the discussion .

Only seven items were discussed during the most recent Friday's deliberations, which, by simple calculation, would require more than 20 years of deliberation .

Local news media strongly criticized the remarks as an " insult to democracy by an unelected peer ." Respectable British human rights organizations (unlike those in Japan) have also pointed out the dangers of " talking out."

Members of Congress have expressed concerns.

・Rep. Kit Marshaus → "Decision-making power should rest with elected politicians"

Andrew Lonsley: "It's shameful to kill a bill that has already been passed by the House of Commons in the name of debate."

Opponents justify the amendments by citing the "risk of coercion and pressure," but supporters seem to strongly view many of them as merely "nominal."

"Religious and traditional values" vs. "majority opinion of the people"

The composition shows two objects colliding.

Incidentally, a similar structure is occurring in Japan.

The reason why the discussion of euthanasia is not progressing in Japan is that the influence of religious groups in particular is not as visible as it actually is . I would like to emphasize that although Japan is a country far from the UK, we actually share the same fundamental issues .

Furthermore, the stalled euthanasia bill in the UK House of Lords is not just a matter of one bill;

・Structural limitations of the bicameral system

- The veto influence of unelected nobles (senators)

・Discrepancy with the voices of the majority of the public

It highlights these points.

The pro-euthanasia group My Death, My Decision is calling for faster deliberations and for decisions to be made based on public opinion .

If this bill is passed in the future, it will have a major impact on the trend towards legalizing euthanasia in Europe, and by extension, on Asia as well.

This is a trend that Japan should keep a close eye on.

A famous speech by Congressman Kit Marshaus in the House of Representatives

*Video provided by Mufumufu Channel

*Notes

British Euthanasia

Like Japan, the UK has a bicameral system, and the Upper House (House of Lords) is equivalent to the House of Councillors...or so it seems.

However, unlike other countries, the UK's House of Lords are not elected by elections , as is the case with the House of Councillors in Japan . Instead, they have a system that makes you wonder, "Huh?", as shown in the image.

The worst part is that 26 clerics have a "privileged" seat in parliament . This "strange and archaic" system is only still in place in Iran .

Japan is like that, but the British Parliament is like that too. Aren't you surprised?