Why we need a robust political theology in response to assisted dying

The Assisted Dying Bill has completed its committee stage which means that it should soon have its third and final reading in the House of Commons before moving to the House of Lords.  There have been various reports on the bill’s committee stage in both the secular and Christian media.  This has tended to focus on the following:

1. That the committee membership has been heavily weighted towards supporters of the bill.
2. That there has been little time for serious scrutiny of the bill
3. That amendments proposed including removing the need for a High Court judge’s sign off have weakened rather than strengthened protections in the bill.

There has also been a lot of speculation that these three factors might be causing some MPS to have second thoughts about voting for the bill.  Meanwhile, it has been reported that Kim Leadbeater has agreed to a longer implementation period of four years instead of two.  Some have expressed the hope that this means there will be a change of government by then and the law will quietly be dropped.

I remain pessimistic that there will be enough MPs changing their mind to block the Bill and I’m also not convinced that the government or a future one would drop it.  A longer implementation phase will not change the fact that we have crossed the Rubicon and euthanasia has become law.

Even if efforts to introduce Euthanasia are thwarted at this time, we cannot ignore two crucial and concerning points.  First, that it has come incredibly close. Secondly that the public debate has lacked a full engagement with the ethics of assisted dying and why it is wrong.  Instead, opponents have relied on questions about safeguards and processes.  For those reasons I believe that we need to recognise that without a dramatic turnaround that at some point, euthanasia will come into law here in the UK.

This is why we need a robust political theology in this area.  We need to be engaging properly and fully in the debate, not just in Parliament but in wider society. We need to offer a Biblical answer to euthanasia and that means we need to be able to offer a Biblical answer to the challenges of suffering and death.  Firstly, our hope has to be that we can change the public’s mind and provide the foundations to either resist this bill coming into force or if necessary to reverse it.

There is another reason why we need to have a robust political theology here.  The possibility of assisted dying will affect pastoral care too. It will affect how Christians think about death and dying.  It will also mean that this is a question that will come up on the doorstep during evangelism and in pastoral counselling.  We will find ourselves offering care to those grieving after a loved one made a decision to terminate their life.  We will also need to help Christian medics think through the ethical decisions they have to make.  Sometimes their decisions will affect their careers and might prove costly.

Given the seriousness of this issue, we also need to be careful that we don’t get distracted by other hot topics with less impact on ethics in public life or the lives of Christians.