Baptist Perspectives
Over the last 50 years there have been no discussions or resolutions at The Baptist Assembly or at Baptist Union Council regarding assisted dying. Neither has there been any formal sounding of churches or ministers on the matter. However, the subject of assisted dying is clearly not new in the public square and over the last decade leaders within BUGB and BMS have affirmed statements made both ecumenically and alongside wider faith groups resisting any changes in the law. Some examples of these statements can be found below:
During the parliamentary debate surrounding the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill in 2024–25, the vast majority of correspondence received by BUGB came from UK Baptists who considered assisted dying deeply problematic – comparatively few shared views that demonstrated sympathy with a change in the law.
Some perspectives that have been shared through the Baptist Times over the years can be found here:
Clearly this is a profoundly important subject that evokes deeply held convictions on both sides of the debate. It is a subject often addressed by people of faith because of the moral, ethical and spiritual dimensions that are relevant to the debate.
The cumulative arguments given by those deeply concerned about any change in law, leave many concluding they cannot support such changes.
From a Christian perspective, those against assisted dying often highlight the following:
-
The Sanctity of Life – Christians believe that all humans are made in the image of God (Genesis 1:26) – all human life therefore, irrespective of age, sex, race, religion, social status, health, or their potential to achieve, is sacred and worthy of protection until its natural end. Some argue to support this bill would be to denigrate this wonderful and unique gift of life.
-
Defence of the Vulnerable – it is an undeniable biblical directive for those who follow God to uphold, protect and defend the vulnerable (Psalms 82:3-4, Isaiah 1:17, Matthew 25:36-40 – amongst others). Some say to support this bill would be to abscond our responsibility to those suffering, both those who are dying and those who love them.
-
God’s Response to those Suffering – those who have faith in God take tremendous comfort in knowing and sensing his presence with them in times of suffering and anguish (Matthew 11: 28-30, Psalm 23, Lamentations 3:22-26, 31-33). It is God’s will that we are present and caring toward others in their suffering, just as he has been present and caring for us (2 Corinthians 1:3-4). Some argue to support this bill would be to neglect the beauty and significance of divine encounter, and the profound dignity in caring for someone as they face death.
Often Christians will align themselves with complementary arguments made in the wider public square against assisted dying too.
-
The Slippery Slope – some would say it’s all very well putting certain safeguards in place in the first instance – but you just need to look at countries that have adopted similar laws in the past to see that such laws can open the door to expanded criteria and the normalisation of ending one's own life. For instance, Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) was introduced in Canada in 2016. In 2021 the law was widened so that a person's natural death no longer needed to be reasonably foreseeable in order for them to be eligible. A further expansion, which would make people whose sole underlying medical condition is mental illness potentially eligible for MAID, has twice been delayed and is currently due to take effect in March 2027 unless further legislation is passed.
The worry is that if we open the door to assisted dying, safeguards and eligibility criteria may be loosened or expanded in the future.
-
Wider Societal Impact – those who argue for a change in the law often lean heavily on arguments of individual liberty and choice, but there will be consequences for wider society too – many wholly undesirable. Some argue opening the door to assisted dying will have the effect of creating lives that society come to consider ‘not worth living’, and normalise ableist assumptions about the inherent value and quality of life of a person with a disability, or even the elderly. Others point to the emotional consequences for medical practitioners who enable people to end their lives, and what about relatives and friends who are not at peace with their loved one’s decision?
-
Palliative Care – while many palliative care nurses and physicians are amongst the most caring and selfless medical practitioners around, few people would claim the care sector, and the palliative care sector in particular, is where it needs to be. More funding is needed, as are reforms, to ensure palliative care in the UK is world-class. Many who might be sympathetic to the principle of assisted dying might still resist this bill on the grounds that a choice between taking your own life, or risking inadequate end of life care, is not a choice at all.
-
Economic Considerations – it is a sad reality that economics plays a part in this debate too. If money is spent on assisted dying (with all its complex safeguards), does that mean money will not be available for other areas of the NHS that are in much need of investment? Is it not likely that Palliative Care for instance will receive less investment, if there is an alternative cheaper pathway to ending suffering? What about those who want to save the money they’re haemorrhaging on exorbitant care costs? If they want to leave something for their children/grandchildren might they feel a sense of duty to cut their lives short?
-
Self-coercion – while there are safeguards in place to minimise the possibility that someone might try to coerce patients or loved one to end their own lives, there remains an unavoidable possibility that some may feel a pressure to end their lives (even if it’s entirely self-afflicted) because they feel a ‘burden’.
These are just a few of the arguments made against legalising assisted dying. There are many others, and we’d encourage you to look through the signposted resources to explore these further.
Of course, some Christians are less resistant to such a change in law. After all, it is impossible not to be moved by the personal stories of those who are dying in pain (or in fear of pain), and those who have witnessed their loved ones go through what they would consider to be extended, excessive and futile suffering before death. In the light of this, some faith leaders have argued a change in the law might just be the right approach.
George Carey, former Archbishop of Canterbury, has said in the past that while life is sacred, there is 'nothing sacred about suffering in itself' – and no one should be 'obliged to endure it'.
A Baptist response from the Isle of Man
Baptists have also been part of the debate in the Isle of Man. In 2025,
Baptists were among the churches expressing sadness and deep concern following the passage of an Assisted Dying Bill through Tynwald, the Manx Parliament. Churches Alive in Mann raised particular concerns about the protection of people who are vulnerable and the value placed on human life.
For context, the Manx legislation is separate from the law in England and Wales, where recent attempts to legalise assisted dying have not resulted in a change in the law.
In April 2026, the UK Lord Chancellor advised that the Manx Bill could not at that stage be recommended for Royal Assent without further safeguards concerning independent monitoring, coercion and mental capacity being included within the legislation itself. In response, further amendments were brought before Tynwald and approved in June 2026, strengthening the safeguards contained on the face of the Bill. The amended legislation has now been resubmitted and is awaiting Royal Assent. I
If enacted, the legislation would apply only on the Isle of Man, and eligibility would include a requirement to have been ordinarily resident there for at least five years.
Engaging thoughtfully and prayerfully
Assisted dying raises profound questions of conscience and evokes deeply held convictions. Those engaging with the debate will be wrestling with complex and often emotive arguments, seeking to have integrity in their own moral judgement while listening fairly to the experiences and convictions of others.
We would encourage Baptists to continue to think and pray about these questions, and to engage thoughtfully in conversations about assisted dying – within our churches, with friends and family, and in the wider public square.
We are aware that campaigns on different sides of the debate can sometimes represent the more extreme ends of the discussion. Might we gently encourage Baptists instead to acknowledge the complexity and nuance of this debate, to listen carefully to those whose conclusions differ from our own, and to speak personally and honestly about the convictions and concerns that lead us to our own position.
Many people are not approaching this subject from a purely theoretical or political standpoint – they may have had experiences of personal suffering or of watching loved ones die. Whatever side of the fence we might land on, none of us should underestimate the pastoral responsibility we have to express our views with compassion, sensitivity and grace.
There is currently no legislation before the UK Parliament seeking to legalise assisted dying in England and Wales. However, should the issue return to Parliament in the future, these same principles should shape any engagement with our MPs: considered and personal correspondence which recognises the complexity of the debate and explains the convictions and experiences that lead us to our position. We might also assure our MPs of our prayers as they wrestle with their own personal convictions alongside their responsibility to represent the views and interests of their constituents.