The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Where Are We Now?

Background

The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill represents one of the most significant and contentious pieces of proposed legislation in recent parliamentary history. If the Bill had passed as drafted, it would have allowed terminally ill people, with a life expectancy of six months or less, to seek medical help to end their life.

It was a private member’s bill introduced by Labour backbencher Kim Leadbeater. The Government had maintained a position of neutrality throughout its passage, allowing individual MPs to have a ‘free vote’ based on their personal views. Unlike with Government bills, private members’ bills are not subject to a strict programme order outlining specific time limits for debate at each stage after the second reading, so the timing of the Bill’s progression had been less predictable. On 20 June 2025, MPs in the House of Commons voted in favour of the Bill at the third reading. Afterwards, its progress through the House of Lords had been slower and more complex than many anticipated. The Bill did not complete all stages in the House of Lords by Friday 24 April 2026 – the final scheduled day of committee stage – and so the Bill will not pass in the current parliamentary session.

The scale of amendments debated at the House of Lords committee stage

The Bill had undergone an exceptionally detailed and extensive scrutiny process in the House of Lords.

Due to the volume of proposed amendments (which accumulated to over 1,200 – reportedly the largest number ever tabled to a private member’s bill), the House of Lords had scheduled 14 Fridays to examine the Bill, starting from 14 November 2025 and continuing onto 24 April 2026. After 13 of those 14 allocated days, the House of Lords had only debated about half of the total number of proposed amendments.

Supporters of the Bill attributed the slow pace of progress directly to the volume of proposed amendments, arguing that opponents deliberately used the Lords' procedural rules – which allow timetables for debates to be less strict and every tabled proposed amendment to be debated – to frustrate the Bill's passage.

Others, however, argue that the scale of proposed amendments reflected genuine and unresolved concerns about the Bill's safeguards, and that the debates in the Lords had exposed further problems with the legislation.

Debate of the Bill will not conclude in this session

With the last day of committee stage having taken place on Friday 24 April 2026 and a new parliamentary session beginning soon, the Bill has not been able to complete the remaining stages before the end of the current session of Parliament.

It is understood that over 100 Labour MPs wrote to the Prime Minister requesting that he make more parliamentary time available, however the Government had retained its neutral position, stating that it is “neutral on the matter of assisted dying and the passage of the bill”.

What does the future hold?

This does not necessarily mean that consideration of assisted dying is off the political agenda. The following avenues remain open:

The idea of establishing a Royal Commission or independent public inquiry to examine the question of assisted dying before any further legislation is brought forward has previously been raised in House of Lords’ debates. Those who support this proposal suggest it would represent a means of conducting thorough, independent scrutiny of the relevant policy questions – distinct from, and prior to, any future legislative attempt. However, it should be noted that a Royal Commission is a deliberative body whose purpose is to examine and report, not to make law. Therefore, any decision as to whether, and how, Parliament should legislate would ultimately remain with Parliament itself.

The Bill has fallen at the end of the session however the debate it has ignited about the right of terminally ill people to choose the timing and manner of their death will continue. The coming months will reveal whether Parliament finds a fresh vehicle for this debate, and whether the political will exists in Government or on the back benches to bring it back in a form that can command the confidence of both Houses.

Our team will continue to monitor the progression of the Bill and developments in this area. If you would like to discuss any issues arising, please contact Dan Morris.