Some surprising opposition to England’s ‘assisted dying’ bill

On Friday, the UK House of Commons will vote on a bill by a Labour MP to introduce assisted suicide in England and Wales. Some interesting opposition to it has emerged.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer has said a whip would not apply and Labour party members could “vote their conscience”, but some important members of his Cabinet and also other Labour MPs have expressed concerns.

The most prominent opponent is the former Prime Minister Gordon Brown who said that the early loss of his daughter Jennifer, who lived only eleven days, taught him that the focus should be on the improvement of palliative care.

“An assisted dying law, however well intended, would alter society’s attitude towards elderly, seriously ill and disabled people, even if only subliminally, and I also fear the caring professions would lose something irreplaceable – their position as exclusively caregivers”, he wrote in an opinion piece for the Guardian.

The bill pertains only England and Wales, while Scotland is considering its own legislation. Brown is Scottish.

At least five cabinet ministers will vote against the proposed bill, including the Deputy Prime Minister Angela Ryner, who has opposed similar legislation in the past.

Wes Streeting, the Health Secretary, has raised concerns that the bill could pressure terminally ill patients to end their lives to save NHS resources, potentially leading to a “chilling” scenario where financial considerations influence patient choices.

Shabana Mahmood, the Justice Secretary, has also indicated her opposition. “I feel that once you cross that line, you’ve crossed it forever. If it just becomes the norm that at a certain age or with certain diseases, you are now a bit of a burden… that’s a really dangerous position to be in”, she said.

Education Secretary, Bridget Phillipson, suggested there were not enough safeguards in the Bill.

Jonathan Reynolds, the Business Secretary, has also stated his opposition to the proposed legislation. “Constituents will know in the past I have always voted against proposals to change the law in this way. This is mainly because I have profound concerns about how vulnerable people could be protected should this happen”, Reynolds wrote on Facebook.

As of today, eight members of the UK Cabinet have publicly declared their intention to vote in favour of the assisted suicide bill.

Another leading Labour figure to come out against the bill is the major of London, Sadiq Khan.

The Conservative Party’s leadership has also permitted a free vote on the bill, enabling MPs to decide based on their individual convictions. This approach reflects the deeply personal nature of the issue and acknowledges the diverse opinions within the party.

Three former Conservative Prime Ministers – Boris Johnson, Liz Truss and Theresa May –  have stated they will vote against the proposal.

The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales has actively campaigned against the bill. In 2024, Cardinal Vincent Nichols issued a pastoral letter urging Catholics to oppose the legislation, warning that it could shift medical duty from care to the facilitation of death.

New report shows anti-Christian persecution is getting worse

Persecution of Christians around the world has increased further over the past two years from already high levels, according to a new report from Aid to the Church in Need (ACN).

The problem has worsened not only in individual countries but across continents and is one of the most under-reported forms of persecution in the world today despite being so vast in scope.

The “Persecuted and Forgotten? Report 2024” provides an extensive overview of the persecution of Christians globally, analysing conditions in 18 countries from August 2022 to June 2024.

More than 60pc of the countries surveyed have witnessed deteriorating conditions for Christians, with significant threats identified in parts of Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and Latin America.

The report notes that the epicentre of Islamist militant aggression has moved from the Middle East to Africa. Countries like Burkina Faso, M
ozambique, and Nigeria have faced severe attacks on Christians, including mass killings, abductions, and forced displacement.

“Over a hundred thousand Christians were among the many who fled for their lives 10 years ago when ISIS seized vast swathes of Iraq’s Nineveh Plains. For years since they have lived like refugees in their own country, helped only by their fellow believers around the world – including substantial help from Aid to the Church in Need”, says the Chaldean Archbishop of Erbil in Iraq, Bashar Warda, in the foreword to the report.

He adds: “Christians in other countries are today facing jihadist extremism, whether in Burkina Faso or Mozambique – and equally bitter is the oppression of believers by authoritarian regimes like China or Nicaragua”.

In Burkina Faso, jihadist groups control 40pc of the territory, targeting Christian women with sexual violence. Similar patterns were noted in Mozambique and Nigeria, where Boko Haram and Fulani militants orchestrated massacres during Christian holidays.

Totalitarian regimes such as China, Iran, and North Korea have intensified crackdowns on religious practices. China enforces “sinicisation”, compelling Christian leaders to align with Communist ideology, while Iran has escalated arrests and harassment of Christian converts. In North Korea, Christians face brutal punishments, including imprisonment and torture.

The report highlights Nicaragua as an alarming example of rising authoritarianism attacking religious freedom in Latin America. The Ortega-Murillo leftist regime has targeted the Catholic Church with severe measures, including the expulsion of clergy; the closure of Church-run institutions, such as schools and charities; the confiscation of Church property and the restrictions on religious activities, including public celebrations like processions during Holy Week.

The government has increased surveillance of Catholic parishes, harassing and intimidating clergy and laypeople. It has also closed the Vatican’s embassy and suspended diplomatic ties with the Holy See.

In India and Pakistan, the report reports heightened attacks under the guise of anti-conversion laws and blasphemy accusations. Hindu nationalism in India has led to over 700 attacks on Christians in 2023 alone, with churches destroyed and believers forcibly displaced. In Pakistan, abductions and forced conversions of Christian women remain prevalent.

Archbishop Warda emphasises the urgency of global intervention to prevent further attacks on Christians.

“Our prayer is that those reading this report, whether governments or others with influence, will do more than just pay lip service to reports of Christian persecution; they must match their words with action – clear and decisive policy commitment – to help those whose only crime is the Faith they profess”, he says.

Here is a link to an interview with Michael Kelly from ACN about the report.

How marriage protects against depression

A major new study shows that unmarried individuals are much more likely to experience depression than those who are married. The study looks at seven different countries, including Ireland.

The research revealed that unmarried individuals - including those who are single, divorced, separated, or widowed - exhibit significantly higher risks of depressive symptoms compared to those who are married. Specifically, the analysis found that unmarried status is associated with an overall 86pc higher risk of depressive symptoms. This increased risk appears particularly pronounced among divorced or separated individuals (99pc). It is instead 79pc higher in single and 64pc in widowed individuals, when compared to married people. 

The study involved over 100,000 participants. The other countries examined along with Ireland were the United States, the United Kingdom, Mexico, South Korea, China and Indonesia.

In Ireland, the risk of depression was notably higher for divorced or separated individuals, who faced a 160pc increased risk, and for widowed individuals, who had a 115pc increased risk, compared to their married counterparts. In other word, for every 100 married individuals experiencing depressive symptoms, in Ireland there would be approximately 260 divorced or separated individuals and 215 widowed individuals experiencing similar symptoms.

The research suggests that marriage provides protective mental health benefits, possibly through mechanisms such as emotional and social support, economic stability, and the positive influence spouses can have on each other’s well-being.

Importantly, the study also highlights that the association between marital status and depression is influenced by demographic and cultural variables. The authors suggest that the more pronounced link in Western countries, including Ireland, reflect cultural differences in social expectations and support systems surrounding marriage. “Eastern cultures tend to tolerate higher levels of emotional distress before it becomes problematic, which may partially explain the lower risk of depressive symptoms in unmarried participants from these countries”, they say. The authors admit that further research is needed to understand the observed cultural differences.

Gender and education level influence in the relationship between marital status and depression. The study found that unmarried men are 25pc more likely to experience depressive symptoms than unmarried women. This risk was even higher among single men (48pc) while the research did not observe a significant difference between men and women among divorced/separated or widowed.

“Females tend to have larger and stronger social support networks than males, particularly among never-married individuals”, the authors note.

Additionally, those with higher educational attainment showed a greater likelihood of depression when unmarried compared to those with lower educational levels. This could reflect variations in social expectations and pressures, where individuals with higher education may feel a stronger sense of isolation or failure if they remain unmarried.

In conclusion, this study reinforces the link between marital status and depression, expanding previous understandings by including a more diverse global sample. Marriage, as highlighted by this research, provides significant mental health benefits, reducing the risk of depressive symptoms. It offers emotional support, economic stability, and shared responsibilities, fostering resilience against stress. These are all good reasons why marriage should be promoted and strengthen in public policy and legislation.

Some good and bad pro-life news from the US elections

 

In this week’s US election, citizens voted not only in the presidential and two congressional elections but also in numerous referendums, including several on pro-life issues. In three states, attempts to make abortion laws more liberal were rejected, while seven states passed pro-choice ballot measures.

The most significant pro-life victory occurred in Florida, where an effort to extend the legal abortion limit from 6 to 24 weeks of gestation did not reach the required quota of 60pc of the vote.

Pro-life advocates, led by Governor Ron DeSantis, successfully blocked Amendment 4, a proposed constitutional amendment aimed at establishing a “right” to abortion. The amendment would also have allowed abortions after 24 weeks for “health reasons”, which are always vague, like in Britain.

If passed, Amendment 4 would have nullified Florida’s current six-week abortion limit and potentially override parental consent requirements, threatening parental rights.

Despite over $40 million in support from out-of-state pro-abortion organisations, the amendment fell three short of the 60pc threshold needed to pass constitutional amendments in the state.

Pro-life advocates celebrated significant wins also in Nebraska and South Dakota, as voters rejected proposed constitutional amendments aimed at expanding abortion access.

Nebraska had two papers on the ballot. The current law prohibits abortions after the first trimester (12 weeks), except for medical emergencies or cases related to rape or incest.

An attempt to lift the 12-week limit was rejected by voters, while they approved by 55pc a competing ballot measure to enshrine the current limit not only in legislation but also in the state constitution.

In South Dakota abortion is banned except to save the life of the mother. A constitutional right to abortion was opposed by 58.6pc of voters.

These results are extremely important for the prolife movements. In 2022, the Supreme Court found that there is no right to abortion in the US Constitution, and left every state to regulate this issue in its constitutions or in legislation. In the meantime, the pro-life side has lost one vote after another, until the various referendums this week.

Another important pro-life victory was achieved in West Virginia, where voters approved a constitutional amendment to prohibit assisted suicide and euthanasia. They were already illegal but now the ban is now in the state constitution.

Unfortunately, radical pro-choice amendments passed in seven states.

Colorado voted to create a ‘right’ to abortion in the state constitution and allowing the use of public funds for it. Its law was already one of the most extreme as it does not restrict abortion after a specific point in a pregnancy. Babies can be killed up to birth. In 2020, voters rejected an initiative that would have banned abortions after 22 weeks.

A similarly radical amendment passed with a large support (61.5pc) in the state of New York, where abortion is already allowed up to birth.

In Maryland, Montana and Nevada, where abortion is already legal up to viability (24 weeks), voters added a new article to the Constitution’s Declaration of Rights establishing a “right to reproductive freedom”.

Missouri voters also made abortion ‘a fundamental right’ to its Constitution by a small margin (51.7pc). The pro-choice campaign spent almost $29 million compared to a mere $1.3 million of pro-life side.

In Arizona, where abortion is legal for any reasons up to 15 weeks of gestation, 61pc of voters supported an amendment to the state constitution establishing that the state may not interfere with ‘the fundamental right’ to abortion before the point of foetal viability.

These result show how radical the pro-choice movement has become in the US. They always push the limits and, even when the law has no gestational limits to abortion, they push it to make a ‘fundamental constitutional right’.

These recent pro-life victories are encouraging but the disappointing results in many states show that fight for the right to life is far from over.