Lord Ponsonby ofShulbrede ended a debate on Euthanasia in the House of Lords on 1st December, 1936 with these words: ‘If the vote is against me, no doubt the discussion will continue in the country and at some future date will be taken up again’. The subject was in fact re-opened recently by the Dean of St Paul’s, who said, ‘Surveying the arguments for and against, I have come to the conclusion that the proposal of this Society (The Voluntary Euthanasia Legalisation Society) is quite in accordance with the Christian conception of human right and duty.’ The Archbishop of Canterbury has dissociated himself from this opinion. And in the House of Lords debate on the subject last November, the Archbishop of York has expressed the strongest opposition

Euthanasia today signifies the termination of life by painless means for the purpose of ending severe suffering. It is enough to say that easy dying is not quite the same thing as a good death or dying well.

Dr Killick Millard, a retired Medical Officer of Health and secretary of the Voluntary Euthanasia Legalisation Society, has said that ‘patients qualifying for mercy killing—we prefer to call it merciful release—would mainly be cases of incurable and inoperable cancer.’