Efforts to introduce assisted dying in England and Wales have run out of time after the bill stalled in the House of Lords – with supporters accusing peers of holding up the legislation.
Speaking at a news conference on Friday, Kim Leadbetter, who had launched the private members bill and championed its progress through Parliament since 2024, said: “This isn’t what democracy looks like.”
Leadbetter added she was confident the issue would return given the widespread support amongst MPs, possibly as soon as the next Parliamentary session beginning 13th May.
The House of Commons first voted on The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill in November 2024, when it passed with a majority of 55. A further reading passed in November of last year with a smaller majority of 23 before the bill headed to the House of Lords for further scrutiny.
Some 1200 amendments have been tabled by the Lords and time has run out in this Parliamentary session for the bill to move forward. Commenting on the lack of progress, Tamasin Perkins, partner at Charles Russell Speechlys, said the outcome “underlines just how difficult it is to legislate in this area and how many serious legal and practical questions remain unresolved”.
She added: “Assisted dying is an emotive issue on which people feel strongly on all sides. That is why the scrutiny this Bill has received matters. Whatever view is taken on assisted dying in principle, the real challenge has always been whether the safeguards are robust enough in practice, particularly in cases involving subtle coercion, family pressure, financial abuse or questions around capacity.
“If there is a commitment to take the Bill forward, there is a strong argument that it should return as a government bill, with full consultation, careful drafting and proper parliamentary time.
“Using the Parliament Acts for an issue of this ethical sensitivity would risk appearing heavy-handed and could set a troubling precedent. In an area as serious as this, taking more time to get the law right is part of the protection the process is there to provide.”
According to Sandra Paul, partner in the Criminal Litigation team at Kingsley Napley, there are wider criminal and civil issues that need to be resolved before the bill is passed.
She explained: “There are many people suffering from life altering illnesses, not simply those with 6 months to live, who sadly grapple with the pros and cons of assisted dying given their health situation. Some consider going to Dignitas, or refusing medication as their way out and often discuss their situation with loved ones or carers.
“It is not an offence for a person to take their own life. However, is it a criminal offence in this country to help someone to exercise that choice. In fact the law applies to anyone who does an act capable of encouraging or assisting the suicide of another person, regardless of whether death occurs. Those deemed to have assisted could face a prison sentence of up to 14 years.
“Prosecutions are rare and public interest arguments are often taken into account, but people should be aware of the limitations of the scope of the proposed Bill (especially if it is to be reintroduced) and the fundamental lack of protections that exist in English law in this area. The criminal offence of assisting suicide is broad. Someone simply assisting with the administration surrounding their loved one’s desire to end their life or helping them travel to a clinic abroad for an assisted death may find themselves in scope.
“According to recent CPS data there have been six successful prosecutions for assisted suicide since 2009 and 13 cases are ongoing. According to Dignitas figures 43 British individuals used their facilities for assisted dying last year. The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, if passed, may have provided guardrails for a limited number of families but we are now back to the situation whereby everyone remains exposed to the legal risks that assisted dying involves.”
Ryan Mowat, head of the Dispute Resolution team and a specialist in estate disputes at Kingsley Napley, added: “In addition to criminal implications, there can also be civil consequences for those who are suspected of assisting a death, particularly in estate disputes.
“The forfeiture rule, under section 1 of the Forfeiture Act 1982, operates to prevent a person from acquiring a financial benefit as a consequence of an unlawful killing and assisting suicide can come within the definition. Crucially, a criminal prosecution is not necessary for the forfeiture rule to apply and this can stymie entitlement to an estate, trust, pension, or property unless relief from forfeiture is granted.
“In some cases, this can be a way for families to obtain a form of justice, by preventing someone who they believe has caused the death of their loved one from benefiting from their estate, but in others it compounds the difficulty faced by someone whose family member has died by suicide.
“We are seeing an increasing number of enquiries in this area.
“Whether or not legislative reform in relation to assisted dying progresses, the current legislation surrounding assisted suicide is stark and often poorly understood. It is essential to recognise both how easily the criminal offence can be engaged and how wide the civil consequences can be for anyone suspected of assisting someone to take their own life.”
