BBC Sounds, Music, Radio, podcasts.

Hello there, I'm Alicia McCarthy, and this is today in Parliament from BBC Radio 4 for Friday the 9th of January,

where there are cause for judges to make the decision when terminally ill patients ask to end their lives.

Where do we expect difficult issues of this level of seriousness and complexity

to be tested and adjudicated upon?

Generally the answer is in the courts, of course.

Also on this programme, a Commons committee investigates some stark figures.

We know that black people are four times more likely to be homeless than their white

counterparts, but what we don't know is how we actually tackle this.

And an MP calls for earlier diagnosis and treatment for some of the most lethal cancers.

My father had seven months from symptomatic to passing away, But my wife, it was all over within three

months. But first, a leading barrister has told the Lords that it should be for courts to decide

if someone is eligible for an assisted death. The call came as peers continued their detailed

scrutiny of the terminally ill adults' end-of-life bill,

which would allow adults in England and Wales with less than six months to live,

the right to ask for help to end their life.

Under the original version of the legislation, the decision would have been made by a high court judge.

The bill's backers in the Commons later changed that to a three-member panel,

made up of a legal figure, a social worker and a psychiatrist. But the crossbench or independent

peer, Lord Carlyle, argued that a bigger and broader range of judges could be used to make the

decisions. There would, I would suggest, be an ample supply of skilled and diverse, expert judiciary

who would provide confidence-inspiring judgement in this important and difficult new area of the law.

...