Lucy Aldridge is the Policy Co-Ordinator at the BGS.
In the last two months, the assisted dying bills under consideration in both the UK and Scottish Parliaments have fallen, meaning assisted dying will not be legalised in England, Wales or Scotland for the time being. Throughout the parliamentary processes, we have published a series of blogs updating members on the progress of the bills and highlighting BGS activity. In this final blog, we reflect on why the bills fell, what this means for the future, and how the BGS helped shape the debate.
What happened in England and Wales?
After the House of Commons narrowly voted to pass the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill almost a year ago, the bill moved to the House of Lords for further scrutiny. It progressed through first and second reading, during which peers debated the purpose and key provisions of the bill. The bill then entered committee stage, where peers scrutinised it line-by-line and debated and voted on proposed amendments. Any peer could table amendments and by Lords convention, each amendment had to be debated before the bill could progress to the next stage. A record 1289 amendments were tabled resulting in 14 days of debate over almost six months. Many amendments focused on safeguards, eligibility criteria and the practical implications for health and care services. As the bill needed to complete all remaining stages before the end of the 2024-2026 parliamentary session, which has now ended, time ultimately ran out and the bill fell before it could become law.
What happened in Scotland?
The Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill progressed through stages one and two of the Scottish Parliamentary process, during which MSPs considered the general principles of the bill and scrutinised its details. However, in March, the bill was defeated at the final stage by 69 votes to 57, meaning it will not become law. Opponents raised concerns about eligibility, safeguards, coercion and practical delivery.
What has the BGS been doing?
As reflected in our position statement, the BGS is currently opposed to the legalisation of assisted dying. This is because palliative and end of life care needs are not currently being met, particularly for older people. We believe these gaps in care should be addressed before any change in the law is considered. We are also concerned that effective safeguards cannot be developed to fully protect older people from harm.
The BGS actively engaged with the parliamentary process of the UK assisted dying bills. Although our request to give oral evidence to the House of Commons committee scrutinising the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill was unsuccessful, we submitted written evidence. As a result of our evidence, an amendment was tabled and approved to change the bill’s definition of terminal illness, helping to safeguard older people with frailty. We also circulated a briefing on frailty to the committee, which was referenced during the parliamentary debate.
Ahead of the final House of Commons vote, we published a statement outlining our concerns with the bill and shared it with all MPs. The statement highlighted the lack of adequate safeguards for older people and the bill’s failure to recognise the complex needs of older people at the end of life. Following the vote allowing the bill to proceed to the House of Lords, we published a further response.
As the bill progressed to the House of Lords, we wrote to all peers outlining our concerns. We were subsequently invited to provide oral evidence to the House of Lords committee examining the bill. Professor Martin Vernon, Chair of the BGS Ethics and Law Special Interest Group, gave evidence in a session focused on safeguards and the potential impact of assisted dying legalisation on older people.
Overall, the BGS was referenced more than 11 times during parliamentary debates on assisted dying, helping to highlight the needs of older people living with complex conditions, multimorbidity and frailty. We also attracted media attention throughout the process, including two interviews with Sky News. Last week, we published a statement responding to the bill falling.
In Scotland, ahead of the final vote in the Scottish Parliament, we published a statement outlining similar concerns about the Scottish bill which was shared with all MSPs. The statement highlighted concerns that the bill did not contain sufficient safeguards to protect older people, nor did it protect healthcare professionals who did not wish to participate in the process. As outlined in our response statement, we welcomed the Scottish Parliament’s decision to reject the bill.
What does this mean for the future of assisted dying?
In England and Wales, supporters of assisted dying have already indicated that they intend to bring forward new legislation in a future parliamentary session, meaning parliamentary debate on the issue is likely to continue. There has also been speculation that the Parliament Act 1911 could be used to override opposition in the House of Lords. The new parliamentary session begins on 13 May 2026, so it remains to be seen what happens next.
In Scotland, while the bill has been defeated, debate on assisted dying is unlikely to end. Although the sponsor of the bill, Liam McArthur MSP, has indicated that he does not intend to bring forward another bill himself, supporters are likely to continue campaigning for legislative change. As this was a decisive parliamentary vote, further progress is unlikely to happen quickly.
The BGS recognises that public opinion on the issue of assisted dying is changing, and it is therefore likely that legislative change may be considered again in the UK. If this occurs, we are ready to work alongside parliamentarians to ensure future legislation is as safe as possible and the rights of older people are taken into account.
