Dr Lucy Thomas raises some interesting points in her defence of the House of Lords’ behaviour on assisted dying (Letters, 26 November). But it is a stretch to suggest that the 1,000 amendments that peers have tabled to the bill represent effective independent scrutiny.
What possible justification can there be for requiring every dying person – including a 90-year-old in their final weeks with advanced metastasised cancer – to provide a negative pregnancy test before their request is approved (amendment 458)? I am sure there are many peers who want to scrutinise the bill in a sensible way, but they are being thwarted by a handful who seem intent on stopping law change at any cost.
